Brief Thoughts On A Weekend Filled With Great Sports

Posted on June 8, 2012 by Matt

Hey bet you didn’t realize how awesome this upcoming sports weekend is. Fear not! We have you covered ranked on every event, starting with the worst:

The Belmont Stakes: We had a chance at a Triple Crown but in case you didn’t hear yet, I’ll Have Another was forced into retirement this afternoon with a bum leg. By all accounts this was one of the shadiest runs by a horse ever so this really isn’t a loss for sports fans.

Stanley Cup Finals, Game Five: The Kings are undefeated on the road during the playoffs and we don’t expect that to change. Los Angeles will bring home the greatest trophy in all of sports for the first time in franchise history. We really feel bad for hockey. A great start to the playoffs was sabotaged by a lack of superstars in the later rounds as well as the NBA’s success.

NCAA Baseball Super Regionals: We’re a bit biased, admittedly, being graduates from TCU and all. There’s a great rematch though between TCU and number two overall seed UCLA. It stems from their battle two years ago in the semifinal of the College World Series. While lacking any “star” the Frogs have a deep pitching staff to go with a suddenly sizzling lineup whose bats woke up after an opening loss to Ole Miss in the first game of the College Station regional. Since then the Frogs have rattled off 50 runs in five games.

Prometheus Opening: Indulge your inner sci-fi nerd.

French Open Final Featuring Djokovic/Nadal: This match is a BIG DEAL based on everything that’s happened in the last 12 months and speaks to what a great weekend it is that it’s only number three on this list. Last year Federer upset the Djokster in the semis so we were robbed of a clay court meeting between him and Nadal which sucked because Djokovic so thoroughly dominated the rest of the calendar. This will be the most fascinating meeting of their recent rivalry, given that it is by far Nadal’s best surface. If ever Nadal was going to end Djokovic’s astonishing run, it will happen in the French. Also: if the epic Australian Open final was any indication, this is going to be a very special match. A must-watch for any true sports fan.

Euro 2012 Opening Weekend: This by rights should be number one on the list. It’s by far the best international soccer competition, World Cup included. The talent in Europe is at an all-time high right now and there will be no shortage of great games, most especially from the the group of death that features four teams in the top ten of the world rankings (Denmark, Portugal, Germany, and Netherlands). There are three must-watch games this weekend (Netherlands vs Denmark, German vs Portugal, and Spain vs Italy). The tournament is made more fascinating by the fact that should Spain win, they’ll go down as the best dynasty in any sport, having won consecutive European tournaments and the World Cup in a span of five years. The two favorites to knock them are off Germany and Netherlands. Your sleepers are France, Croatia, and Russia. Several of the teams feature recognizable stars as well if that’s what you’re looking for (England with Rooney, Sweden with Ibrahimovic, and Portugal with the best player in the world right now Cristiano Ronaldo). Our pick is the Netherlands to spoil Spain’s dream run.

NBA Eastern Conference Finals, Game Seven: It has to be pretty big circumstances to unseat a major soccer event like the Euros, but that’s exactly what’s at stake in this game seven. The future of the NBA for the next five years very well may be decided, what with the rumors of a potential Heat breakup if they don’t advance. We’re looking to LeBron to repeat his game six masterpiece and for the Heat to move on to face an exciting OKC team that has no care in the world who they face. It also has potential ramifications on the Boston side as well. Could a devastating loss spell the end of the big three era sending either KG or Ray Allen into retirement? Would Doc Rivers walk away from the team in order to spend more time with his family? There are lots of “what if” questions that will be resolved based on the result of this game. It will affect the sports world in a big way during the next 12 months and is the can’t-miss sporting event of the weekend.

What The Champions League And NHL Playoffs Teach Us About Sports

Posted on May 22, 2012 by Matt

It’s impossible to refrain any longer. The people have demanded it. After the past couple of weeks’ results, it’s finally time we address the striking manner in which the NHL and the UEFA Champions League resemble one another. That’s right readers, brace yourselves. I’m totally about to spend an unnecessary amount of words and time comparing hockey and soccer to see what it teaches us! I know, I know. I don’t understand why ESPN hasn’t brought me on yet either.

Before proceeding, it’s quite necessary to give you all a bit of background, because if you’re anything like the rest of America, you have yet to catch a single second of the NHL playoffs and missed the Champions League all together. And who could blame you? Hockey and soccer aren’t exactly separating themselves from the pack in the Nielsen ratings.

For the last half of the decade in the 2000s, the sports of hockey and soccer were largely dominated by what can only be described as offensive-oriented styles of play. For hockey, this was exactly the intention as the league made a conscious effort to change the game in the wake of the infamous lockout that crippled the sport’s popularity. The NHL increased the size of the offensive zone, outlawed tactics that prevented scoring (grabs, interference, etc), among other measures. Basically they were trying to prevent anything and everything the New Jersey Devils stood for in the neutral zone trap era. It largely worked.

In soccer, the sport became that way because of the success of two teams. The first was the Spanish club Barcelona which successfully executed the best “home-grown” talent initiative in the history of sports. They produced world-class players like Iniesta, Xavi, and the incomparable Lionel Messi on their way to numerous championships and trophies. The second team was not surprisingly the Spanish national team which largely looked to capitalize off the success (read: copy) of the domestic club Barcelona, using many of its same players. What characterizes Barca and Spain is that they utilize a possession-heavy style of play. That is to say, they have control of the ball for the majority of the time during their matches. Rather than make one quick attempt at a goal when they gain possession, these teams are content to pass and control the ball for long periods at a time until the defense finally gives them a window to score.

For anyone who romanticizes sports and “the way games were meant to be played,” the last couple of years have been a godsend in these two sports. The games finally seemed to “open up” and let the athletes showcase their extraordinary talents with a puck or with a ball. To witness Lionel Messi in open space is to catch a glimpse of the sort of religous experience David Foster Wallace so famously described when he witnessed Roger Federer back at Wimbledon all those years ago.

Not surprisingly though, teams that lose don’t tend to like to continue losing. When a club wants to change its fate in a sport there are two ways to accomplish it. The first is to try and replicate the success of the team that dominates you and beat them at their own game. This is amazingly difficult as there is simply no way to field a team in soccer that could replicate the chemistry and talent built from the years that the top players at Barcelona have played and trained together. In the long-term, it’s totally possible, but as we all know, top sports franchises don’t tend to have that kind of patience. This is commonly referred to as George Steinbrenner syndrome.

The second method is possible to achieve in the short-term though. The magical cure? Create a style of play that completely counters that of the rival. Furthermore, pursue and sign those players that make that style of play possible. Translated in present day terms for hockey and soccer, adopt a completely defensive-oriented style of play that chokes the life out of opponents.

This is going on as we speak and it’s fascinating to a sports dork like me because it brings about yet another chapter in the most important debate in the history of sports: what’s more important, style or winning? The answer isn’t as simple as you’d think, most especially in soccer where some of the most famous teams in the history of the sport never won anything.

So how did it happen?

In hockey, it’s been more of a slow evolution across the sport to counter the offensive genius of guys like Ovechkin and Crosby rather than having one person we can point to and blame. Former Red Wings and Canadiens coach Scotty Bowman recently described the transformation in a recent article for The Globe and Mail. The essence of his discussion is that this style of play has its roots in the late 70s Maple Leafs teams that were attempting to put a halt to one of the greatest dynasties in the history of hockey in Bowman’s Canadiens teams.

The strategy goes something like this. In hockey the team on offense typically keeps one player (the two defensemen) in each area where the blue line meets the boards on the opposite sides of the ice, known as “points.” Historically the defensive team kept their forwards out to press against these defenders which created a lot of space for the puck to be passed around in the zone. To counter this spacing, the Maple Leafs reacted by pulling those two forwards back and essentially creating a wall around the net, known in the NHL as “covering the house.” In giving up their forwards at the points, the defense concedes the ability to score quick counter-attack points by starting fast breaks though. However, they have the tactical advantage as they’re basically playing hockey 5 on 3 near the net, preventing any offense, and can block almost any shot before it reaches their goaltender. The result, as you’ve probably surmised by now, is a complete lack of scoring.

Soccer is a bit more curious in that we can largely place the blame on one man who seems to have been placed on earth entirely for the purpose of solving the Barcelona problem. His interests also likely include telling children that Santa Clause doesn’t exist and stealing candy from babies. That man is Jose Mourinho, the current manager of Barcelona’s chief rival Real Madrid and who first conceived the strategy to defeat Barca back in 2010 while he manged Inter, a popular club in Italy.

His strategy is simple, really, and it’s probably not fair to credit him entirely for constructing the model that finally ended Barcelona’s reign atop the soccer world as almost every club attempted the same tactics. The idea is that the team is willing to place 10 of its 11 players back on defense to prevent Barcelona from entering the box. The idea is to let them pass the ball all they want, so long as it doesn’t get near the goalie. Like with the “covering the house” strategy, they give up most of their chances at creating a quick counter-attack, but in turn they’re able to block almost every shot attempt. There are two other key ingredients which any supporter would hate to hear but are nonetheless true–get really, really lucky and score the only chance you get. More often than not, this formation will only yield a single scoring chance a game for the side that chooses to adopt the defensive philosophy.

The strategy was made even more famous just this past week by the English club Chelsea which back doored its way into the most unlikely of Champions League titles by perfectly executing this ultra-defensive style. Not only did they manage to defeat Barcelona in the semis, but they also slipped past Bayern Munich in the final, the team that most closely resembles Barcelona with its possession-heavy style of play. It was the most improbable of runs, made all the more dramatic with their win in penalty kicks. As thrilling as it was though, the soccer itself was ugly and lacked for drama. Most fans widely accepted that the match would, in all likelihood, end in a 1-0 result. This nearly occurred, except that Chelsea’s Didier Drogba scored a late equalizer on Chelsea’s only corner of the whole match. Again, one great chance and they made it count.

And thus we come in a roundabout way back to the great philosophical question of sports. Is it more important to have style or to win?

It is no secret that the history of sports is filled with players, teams, managers, and even leagues reacting and countering specific styles of play. Think of how the NCAA banned the dunk, MLB lowered the height of the mound, and the NFL adopted rules to encourage and protect great quarterbacking. Remember the way the fast break goes in and out of style, the way pitching wins championships until it doesn’t, and how you want to control the football with the run unless you have Tom Brady or Eli Manning. One action promotes a reaction and so on and so forth until we come to a point that we even forget how we got their in the first place.

Everyone widely loathes the Spurs championship teams in the Duncan era because they were so seemingly opposed to scoring. Their main foe at the time, the seven-seconds-or-less Phoenix Suns are far more beloved by the fans. But at the end of the day, San Antonio has the banners. Banners fly forever. People don’t forget style either though. There are several more examples of this: the 1982 Brazilian World Cup team lost to eventual champions Italy in the quarterfinals even though that Brazilian squad is considered maybe the best ever; the Oakland Athletics have yet to win a World Series utilizing the Moneyball principles while the Yankees continue to win the World Series even though we’ve now lionized Billy Beane; and die-hard basketball fans are far more inclined to remember teams with swagger like the 2007 Golden State Warriors than the eventual champs that year (again, those poor San Antonio Spurs).

Perhaps the approach that needs to be taken has nothing to do with picking a side but realizing that as fans of the game we tend to win either way. In the event that an offensive team dominates an era, we get to see how beautifully a game might be played by human beings. In the event that a sports era turns to the defensive side, we’re often blessed with dynasties and then, eventually, some brilliant player or coach who solves the riddle of the defensive problem in that sport and ushers in another golden era of scoring.

It’s the circle of life in sports, and I love it all. You should too.

On The Comeback That Never Was

Posted on February 14, 2012 by Matt

Frequent readers of the site (all three of them) know that I often talk openly about my sports dorkdom. Every person has a different way in which they experience their favorite sport(s). For me it just so happens to be by immersing myself into that world to the point of what can only be described as binging. Two years ago my obsession was the NBA. Last year it was European soccer. This year it’s the NHL. Naturally I was watching hockey last night like I seem to be every night these days.

I can’t really pinpoint a reason as to why I never fully commit to one sport and stick with it forever. Perhaps it says something about my character and a fear of 100% commitment. Perhaps it’s because I reach a certain ultra-high level of knowledge whereby I can no longer tolerate conversation with the average sports fan. Maybe there just isn’t enough expertise out there when you inhale content at the rate at which I seem to do. Who knows?

But last night I witnessed what should have been the greatest comeback I’ve ever seen in hockey. Only it never happened. Like a funnel cloud that never quite reaches the ground to develop into the full tornado, the losing team last night ended up falling two goals short in a highlight that I’m quite positive didn’t make the evening’s cut on SportsCenter.

So let’s set the stage here. With just over 13 minutes remaining in the third period yesterday, the San Jose Sharks scored one of the weakest goals ever. Already down 4-1, the Washington Capitals seemed to know that they had little chance to win the game and it showed. Obviously a team is at a disadvantage on a power play, but for some reason the lack of effort exhibited on that specific defensive rotation seemed to shine through to me.

Joe Thornton of the Sharks took a cross ice pass from his teammate after they entered the zone, the defender lazily slid over, Thornton just threw the puck at the net hoping for anything, and, because of what appeared to me to be a particularly lazy effort by defenseman Karl Alzner, Patrick Marleau snuck a goal past Braden Holtby. It seems to me that in those situations where the puck is loose in front of the net, the normal protocol calls for the defenseman to absolutely maul the offending opponent, sweeping him away from the net with no regard for human life or body parts. Didn’t happen here. Check it out for yourself.

Game over, or so it appeared. I have no idea why I kept watching.

There was a little back and forth for the next three minutes before Roman Hamrlik (what a name) of the Capitals netted an absolutely astonishing goal, the type that reminds us judgemental sports dorks at home just how talented these athletes actually are.

After intercepting a pass, Hamrlik passed the puck to one of his teammates, who passed it quickly to Marcus Johansson to avoid a collision. The only problem was Johansson was skating with his head down and got lit up by a Sharks player within milliseconds of receiving the pass. Hamrlik seemed to sense the impending car accident and changed his momentum to save the puck from escaping the zone, thus avoiding the offsides call. While he did this he skated through the right slot into space and seemed to come to a conscious “why the f—- not?” conclusion and backhanded the puck as hard as he could at the net.

The replay I’m going to show you here does it absolutely no justice. The box score says he netted it from 47 feet away from the the goal. Not only does he have the strength to backhand the shot into the back of the net from that angle, but he also had a window about the size of fist to squeeze it through while moving in the wrong direction. He sneaks it past two Sharks defenders and one teammate in addition to goalie Thomas Griess, who was helpless to stop the puck from sailing over his glove shoulder after a successfully executed screen. Unfortunately the camera angle from behind the net and the one from Hamrlik’s side of the ice aren’t on the internet to prove to you just how stunning an accomplishment the goal was. This clip will have to suffice in the meantime and you can take my word for it.

As beautiful as the goal was though, it seemed as if it would be just another meaningless goal on another meaningless night in America’s most meaningless major professional team sport. It seemed as if it would be of little consequence, which is somehow unfair. But with less than ten minutes left in regulation, a three goal deficit seemed impossible to overcome.

I don’t really remember the next couple of minutes too accurately. There was an icing, a puck that flew off the ice, a turnover, a freezing of the puck, and then, with almost six minutes remaining in the game, lightning struck. Capitals defenseman Jeff Schultz completed what can only be described as the most perfectly executed screened slap shot goal in the history of hockey. He took a sliding pass across the blue line from a teammate. (Former) Superstar Alexander Ovechkin charged to the front of the net while this happened and took his corresponding defenseman out of the future path of the shot. With the precision, timing, and accuracy of a true professional, Schultz easily converted from distance and things were suddenly very interesting.

The home crowd awoke from a state of drunken slumber, seeming to sense that something special might have been happening. There was a bit of electricity in the air. The Caps started skating faster, finishing their checks harder. The Sharks were starting to wear the nervous look of a team looking to avoid impending disaster. And again, let me reiterate this, they had absolutely no reason to worry. The Sharks were up two goals with 5:51 to play in a game they had completely dominated. There was no reason to believe they would not finish regulation with victory easily in hand. Yet, the Capitals were starting to convince themselves that they were going to win.

Any great comeback seems to always transpire with a mix of hard work combined with a run in with a serious amount of luck/improbability. A fortunate bounce, an inconceivable turnover, an unlikely hero—you’ve seen any one of these events play out on television. After that goal by Schultz, I convinced myself that one lucky break was all that separated me from this rather lackluster Monday night hockey game and a chance at witnessing history. I began scanning the screen hoping to catch the small incident that would trigger the series of events that would lead to the Capitals fourth goal. After that it was a given that they would tie the game and eventually win it, probably in overtime, probably on the stick of Ovechkin (or so I hoped).

Maybe it would be a puck that rebounded off the boards at some unforeseen angle after accidentally hitting the edge of a not so perfectly installed piece of glass. Maybe a Sharks defenseman, feeling a bit self conscious and bit too anxious, would hesitate one second too late in making a normal pass allowing a Capitals defender to intercept and rush towards the goalie. Or maybe Alexander Ovechkin would remind us all why he might be the most physically gifted athlete in all of hockey. I was sure it was going to happen.

Only it didn’t.

The Capitals made a valiant effort. They had a couple of inspired possessions where I was confident they would put one past. The closest they came was on a bizarre turnaround shot by some Capitals player I can’t even remember whereby he took the puck in the Sharks zone facing the opposite way and zipped his body 180 degrees while slinging the puck as hard as he could at the net. Save by Greiss. Score still at 5-3 where it would finish.

I don’t know why I chose to care so much about that game last night. I have seemingly no vested interest in either of the teams. Neither of them particularly captures my eye in the way a team like the Rangers or the Flyers do (I admit I’m a total sap for 24/7, in case you’re wondering). But for some overwhelmingly selfish reason I wanted that comeback last night. I wanted to witness something miraculous. I couldn’t wait to boast about it to everyone on this site today. There’s nothing more satisfying than being the only one of your friends to have watched a great game like the one I had convinced myself was going to play out in that third period.

I felt robbed. Was it a total waste of time though? In my never-ending quest in a search for meaning in somewhat improbable places, I’m going to tell you that it was not a waste of time at all. For twenty or thirty minutes last night I felt alive and inspired and filled with hope in a way you just don’t find in your average nine to five office job. It was great.

And I was once again reminded why watching sports is so great in the first place.

Comeback be damned.

(Editor’s note: it would not have been the greatest deficit ever overcome by a professional hockey team. It appears as though multiple teams have come back to win after trailing by five goals in the third period.)

Good Morning Generation

Posted on January 3, 2012 by Matt

Yesterday was an early contender for the best sports day of 2012. There was a fantastic amount of action to be consumed on television, whether it was the surprising amount of close bowl games, outdoor hockey, or even my new-found guiltiest pleasure in life—the free preview of NBA League Pass which lasts until January 8th. I even slipped in a couple of replays of English Premier League soccer for good measure.

As I sat there flipping furiously through the channels yesterday afternoon–somewhere in the time right before the Rose Bowl–it hit me. This is a sports revelation that is going to blow your mind. Read no further if you find yourself unwilling or unable to have your life philosophy completely altered. Ready?

Sports are a hundred thousand times more enjoyable to watch when you have absolutely zero rooting interest in the games.

Who knew?

It struck me some time in between watching a Philadelphia Flyer earn, and eventually miss, a penalty shot with 19 seconds left in the Winter Classic and watching Mark Richt completely bungle a very winnable overtime against Michigan State. I don’t know why I did it, but I tried to imagine putting myself in the shoes of a Rangers fan or a Flyers fan after that very questionable call and the sneaking suspicion that Gary Bettman had ordered it up David Stern-style. And the ensuing nineteen seconds were no doubt among the longest any of those fans has experienced. It couldn’t have possibly been enjoyable to experience that stress. And there I was, smiling on my couch without a single team going in any sport. It was glorious.

Then there was the matter of Georgia intercepting a Michigan State pass to start overtime. You know how this drill works. Your team scores and the ball game is over. You accomplish this by at least trying to get one first down to make life easier on your kicker. Except Mark Richt apparently trusts his quarterback less than the Denver Broncos trust Tim Tebow to throw the football. Georgia called for a run on first down, had their guy center the ball on second down, and then trotted out their kicker on third down to boot a 42-yarder for the win. This kicker was 19 for 31 on the year. He of course missed and Georgia would go on to lose the game in heart-breaking fashion in three overtimes when, and you’re never going to believe this, their kicker had his attempt blocked. I would have died if I was a Georgia fan. I would have immediately taken to facebook to slam Mark Richt and wonder about a season that should have been. For those who have forgotten by now, Georgia was supposed to be a national championship contender this year. Instead I laughed and flipped the channel.

Next up was the Rose Bowl where Wisconsin coach Bret Bielema extended his streak to two consecutive years of losing a Rose Bowl due to Andy Reid-like mental errors. For those who may have forgot, Bielema wasted several time outs last year in the second half against TCU that ultimately cost them, but his biggest blunder by far came when he called for a pass on a two point conversion attempt that would have tied the game. Wisconsin had been gaining at least six yards per attempt during the game against a smaller TCU defense that couldn’t handle the Badgers’ size. Bielema promptly called for a pass that was blocked by TCU linebacker Tank Carder to win the game. This year was no exception. Bielema wasted two timeouts before five minutes had transpired in the third quarter, one of which was especially bad in trying to get the officials to review a touchback. Well wouldn’t you know it, the Badgers could have used a couple of timeouts as they drove the field in the final minute of the game. They ultimately lost when Wisconsin QB Russell Wilson couldn’t spike the ball in time with :02 remaining. Once again, if I’m a Wisconsin fan I would have gone to bed all pissing and moaning about my head coach’s incompetence. Instead I laughed again and waited for the Fiesta Bowl.

And finally there was the Fiesta Bowl, which put the cap on a day of questionable coaching decisions. Let’s say your the head coach of a college football program. Let’s say you find yourself in the Fiesta Bowl. Let’s say you’re in overtime. And finally let’s say you have the greatest talent at quarterback in the last fifteen years on your squad. You let him go out there and win you the game, right? Wrong! If your Stanford coach David Shaw, you hand the ball off twice for no gain and then leave your all-universe QB hung out to dry on third down. How do you not have Andrew Luck throwing there, at least on second down? How do you not trust him to win you the game on a night in which he was 27/31? Ridiculous, all of it. But somehow it was enjoyable because again, I had no rooting interest. I dwelled on the game for approximately zero seconds and read a book until I went to sleep.

This all may sound groundbreaking, or it might not.

I think I’m onto something though.

Generation Y, where I actually think the Broncos are going to win and would like to apologize in advance for the ESPN firestorm that will ensue as a result.

Third Period Running Diary From Last Night’s Canucks Bruins Game Seven

Posted on June 16, 2011 by Matt

by Matt Corder

20:00 – Boston leads 3 – 0 after a less than impressive performance by Roberto Luongo. It’s gotten so bad that after every shot he instantly looks behind him to see if he let it in the net. In sharp contrast is Tim Thomas. Nothing is getting past this man tonight. He has stopped more advances to the net than whoever was opposite LeBron James. It’s really too bad for the Canucks, they dominated possession early, but the Bruins stuck to their M.O. and got the scrappy/hustle goals that have come to be the identity of this team. That and Tim Thomas is channeling his inner Patrick Roy right now.

19:59 – We were just told this is the same arena where the Americans lost in overtime to Canada in the Olympics last year. USA-USA-USA! Revenge is sweet.

18:27 – Tim Thomas gets away with murder with a stick to the face of a Canucks player. Gotta love this sport. One of the announcers remarks, “he’s fine there’s no blood.” Hockey!!!

17:12 – Tim Thomas…beast.

16:22 – Luongo save on an easy wrist shot! Cue Bruins fans’ sarcastic cheers back in Boston.

Quick tangent: One of the best parts of hockey is that the refs have a sense of the moment once the playoffs start. There’s no way they’re going to ruin any part of this game and you almost rather forget that they’re even present on the ice. The players will decide this outcome unless one of them commits first degree murder on the ice. As it should be.

14:27 – And on cue one of the Canucks players channels his inner Todd Bertuzzi and mars game seven with an absolute cheap shot on a Boston player. What a D-Bag. The refs rightly call the penalty. The sole reason I’m rooting for Boston over Vancouver in this matchup is that I still cannot forgive the Canucks franchise for ending the career of Steve Moore. USA baby. Screw Canada.

12:21 – Brad Marchand is everywhere for Boston in this series. I swear his name is involved in every goal or near miss that Boston has had. He’s a punk and he’s dirty…but you love to have him when he’s on your team.

11:54 – Thomas stones the Canucks best chance of the period, including a great rebound opportunity. Really starting to pray that he gets the shutout. Question: what are the odds Vancouver riots again after losing the cup? I say even.

11:04 – Luongo showing a little heart. Too little too late though.

10:24 – Thomas…again.

9:51 – Ditto.

Commercial break – does anyone else wonder as much as I do about why Bud Light and Miller Lite dominate Coors Light in the crucial beer commercial competition? Coors Light hasn’t had a good beer commercial in almost a decade.

9:48 – Vancouver’s fans try to give the team their last wind. They respond with a barrage of shots but none lands on net.

9:18 – Thomas of course ends the momentum with a wise freezing of the puck.

9:06 – Will we remember this series more for the lack of execution by Vancouver’s forwards? The poor play of Luongo? The all universe play of Thomas? It seems like it should be the latter but after all the whiffs by Vancouver this series, couldn’t you easily make the case for the former?

8:26 – Penalty on Boston. The Canucks have life.

6:51 – Seidenberg delivers a punishing blow to Burrows, who has done everything in this series to deserve it (the bite, the cheap shots, and weakest of all, the dives to try to draw a penalty). I’m calling it now. The Boston Bruins are the 2011 Stanley Cup champions.

6:26 – Penalty killed easily.

5:51 Thomas save again.

2:44 Brad Marchand, my vote for runner up MVP, comes through with an empty netter to seal the deal. I am so happy Canada is cup-less for the 18^th straight year. The curse of Patrick Roy lives!

Presentation of The Cup – Disgusted by the Canucks fans. As Bettman tries to congratulate Vancouver and their fans, they erupt in a series of boos and jeers that completely drown out his speech. I’m also 92% positive they threw objects at the Bruins players down on the ice. Unbelievably classless move. I think it’s time for Obama to invade our neighbor to the north. I’ll openly vote for him next year if this actually happens.

Chara skates over and holds the Cup higher than any man who’s ever come before him. Cannot believe how tall he is. The crowd goes completely silent.

It’s bizarre, but every single fan is still in the building to watch this presentation, despite their team losing. You can tell how much this meant to these Canadians and how highly they regard this trophy, as if the bones of Jesus Christ himself were being carried around inside the arena (sidenote: they’d show more reverence for the cup).

The Canucks fans semi-redeem themselves with a polite applause for Tim Thomas and home town boy Milan Lucic. Still doesn’t change my opinion of this franchise and this city. It’s really too bad because I’ve heard Vancouver is one of the prettiest cities in the world and that the people couldn’t be nicer. You can write me down as the only person in the world who doesn’t buy a word of that crap.

(I’ve learned that the fans weren’t actually booing the Bruins, they were booing Bettman, which is completely deserved and understandable. I’ve also learned they were chanting “Bett-man-sucks! Bett-man-sucks!” which is 100% forgiveable. If you get a chance go back and watch the moment. It’s extremely bizarre to see all the fans still in the building watching in awe at what they wish was theirs. It’s semi-heartbreaking until you remember they won the damn gold medal on this ice about a year ago. U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!)

And we have our first shots of riots on the streets of Vancouver.

My Game 7 Prediction

Posted on June 15, 2011 by Ross

By Ross Morgan:

There are two distinct periods during the year where the sports world is the upmost priority for me: the late spring with the NHL and NBA playoffs and the fall with college football. In terms of excitement, this year’s playoff season for the “indoor” sports has been remarkable. Of course, I’m partially biased due to the Mavs having won the title. (on a side note: Could you ask for a better run for a team that has never won a title? Sweeping the decade-long Western Conference powerhouse in your first-ever modern matchup, convincingly beating the up-and-comers, and beating the team that won a controversial finals match-up against you five years prior, with the team now being the most hated team in America, I gotta say this is the best route possible right?) The only other time that, to this extent, both the NBA and NHL heavily occupied my attention from April until June was 1999 when I was 13. My beloved Dallas Stars won their first and only cup that year in a great run against Western Conference playoff foes. Regrettably, as a young and ignorant sports fan from the Lubbock area, I was also excited by the Spurs run to the title. Please don’t worry, I often ask for God’s forgiveness for this gravest of sins. However, I’m convinced that the pantheists still have a curse on me.

So on Sunday night the Mavericks finally broke the curse in place for at least the last five years. Also exciting is the evidence that the wiccans, unitarians, buddhists, or any other religion that strange white people, who decide that listening to Sonic Youth, watching Doctor Who, and calling themselves hipsters just isn’t different enough, follow, have placed their evil curses on Lebron James. This, in turn, is a curse on all of us because all summer long we will have to hear Skip Bayless bitch about LBJ’s lack of “clutchness” and maturity.

I’m here to save the world, one article at a time. So let’s ignore the post-coital b-ball conversation and let’s talk some hockey!

My roommate and I were watching game 3 the other week at a bar known for attracting quality cougars (new theory: women are like wine and men are like beer. Wine gets better with time as long as it’s not left open, unattended for too long, and wasn’t cheap to begin with [this is important!], so do women. Men probably have a short shelf life. I’ve yet to see a girl in her early 20s chase men in their 50s unless it’s for money or the girl in her 20s is pathetically effed up. In terms of mating, perhaps [recall this is all theory], the ideal combination is a fine aged wine and a freshly brewed beer. Hit me up Cougars!), when he asked me, which team I’m pulling for. Between the Bruins and Canucks, it’s not a matter of which team you like better, but which you hate less. So I guess I’ll begrudgingly root for Vancouver tonight as I’ve done since game 4 (yes, I changed allegiances in the middle of the series, someone ask Simmons if that’s a crime). I’m not a fan of the Boston sports world. If the Bruins win, then in the last decade all of their professional teams will have captured a world championship. Is this not absurd? Root against them! I mean these people have the audacity to claim to be cursed whenever things don’t go perfectly for them. Who does that?

But, despite not wanting to see either team win the cup, I’ve loved these finals. When was the last time we saw the series’ momentum decided by a combination of goaltending and the physical play of each team. This feels like pre-lockout hockey! Gen Y, all we need is for either team to start running a neutral zone trap and we can all feel like kids again (or tweens acting thug, listening to DMX, and memorizing speeches by The Rock).

I was thinking of writing a nice recap of the series thus far when I realized that nobody wants to read that. So the executive summary and powerpoint bullets are: Boston either dominates offensively or loses by a thin margin in a close game. Conversely, Vancouver’s Luongo is either clutch enough for Skip Bayless or pathetic enough to get pulled within the first 5 minutes of game 6. It’s a very violent series. There’s been a correlation of exactly 1 between a team winning and playing at home. Therefore, there’s a direct correlation between both Boston dominating and playing at home and Luongo dominating and playing at home. So, can you guess what your average sportswriter is saying about the series? Also, guess who their predicting will win game 7 (taking place in Vancouver).

Sportswriters seem to be slaves to statistics. Thus, the allure of the home team winning every game of the series is too much for these writers. Very few writers will question whether home ice is causation as opposed to just a correlation, and subsequently the majority of writers are predicting the Canucks will be your Stanley Cup champions.

I’ll stick with the trend that Luongo is lights-out at home and horrible on the road. But, I won’t attribute it to being caused by some kind of home-ice advantage. This, in my mind, is especially true when you consider that home ice was deemed unimportant in these playoffs up until the finals.

So one could, like many are, say that Luongo’s play tonight will be the bellwether of the game. However, I think that Luongo’s play is affected by some sort of anxiety problem. I don’t think he responds well to pressure. His lack of performance during away games can be attributed to him feeling more pressure when he’s away from home and thus folding.

I believe Luongo’s performance can be predicted by estimating how much pressure he is feeling. Granted, it’s a home game for him, so the case can be made that he’ll be more at ease. But I don’t agree with this case. It is game 7 of the Stanley Cup finals! It’s a game 7 where, if Boston wins, 95% of pundits will say it’s the fault of Luongo. People are even calling him Lubrongo! In this world, being compared to Lebron James is the ultimate insult; He’s feeling the pressure!

So, I think this pressure will affect him as if he were playing at the garden (excuse me: TD Garden….barf). Mark my words, Luongo will suck tonight. Boston will win a cup. Boston will round up all four trophies in the span of a decade. We’ll have to endure hearing their fans refer to themselves as a nation. Bill Simmons will be so excited that he’ll ignore basketball for awhile and write a 700 page book on the history of the NHL where 200 pages feature him arguing back-and-forth with himself about Lemieux vs. Gretzky in an arbitrary pantheon of great players. Don’t worry, Canucks fans will still get drunk tonight and embarrass their city.

I hope I’m wrong.

What the NHL GMs should implement in this Weeks Meetings

Posted on March 14, 2011 by Ross

By: Ross Morgan

This week, the 30 general managers in the National Hockey League will be meeting in the retirement community known as Boca Raton, Fl to discuss different strategies to reduce the number of concussions suffered by players. Sporting News discusses the different strategies in this article. Of course, the two most supported ideas are dumb. One is to improve equipment (aka The Cop-Out). The second is to ban blindside hits completely.

Developing improved equipment is definitely something that needs to be done. I think you would be hard-pressed to find someone that would argue that as players, in all sports, have gotten bigger and more athletic, the equipment has evolved at the same pace. It obviously hasn’t and that in and of itself is a safety risk. However, placing the blame solely on equipment creates the idea that nothing needs to be done except for improving equipment. We really don’t want the GMs leaving the geriatric paradise with an equipment focused solution. It’s akin to environmentalists crying that we need to create an alternative for oil while doing nothing but sitting in an Ikea chair sipping cheap Shiraz from Whole Foods.

The outright ban of blindside hits is marginally better because it is at least doing something. There is even a logical motive as Rule 48 (banning blindside hits to the head) has been successful. But, I don’t like this idea much either. For one, I’m not sure how you can fully define what is and what is not a blindside hit. I’m not sure I want the refs making this subjective call in the crucial moments of crucial games. I’m a big believer that the more the sports leagues put more and more control over the outcomes of games into the hands of officials, the less attracted the public is to sport. Let’s not forget that in the end, professional sports are nothing more than entertainment, and it’s not entertaining to constantly watch officials call controversial penalties. But, the public doesn’t want to be entertained by bloodsport (I hope). Something needs to be done.

But, banning blindside hits isn’t a good idea at all primarily because it would enable offensive players to come up with schemes that make it impossible for defenders to attack them. Look at the strategy now of a player holding the puck along with boards with their back to the ice because it’s illegal to hit a player from behind. We don’t need to create more stringent rules that allow offensive strategies based on loop-holes in the regulations.

So my idea is different and radical and something that the NHL will never adopt.

If you’ve ever watched Olympic hockey, you’ve noticed that the game is a lot less violent. There aren’t as many hits and nowhere near as many penalties that you see in a NHL game. Some people explain this by the all-star concept (professional players not caring about winning the game). I don’t think this is true as most players representing their participating countries are not in the NHL. You would think they would play a more violent game, but they don’t.

My explanation for this is the size of the rink. NHL rinks size at 85 x 200 ft. I believe this is too small to still accommodate the speed and size of the modern super-athlete. Thus, the league should move to an Olympic sized 98 x 200 ft rink. Having the players further apart on the ice during plays would reduce hits and increase puck possession. Sure, it will decrease the rough, fast-moving and dynamic style of play that has drawn many Americans to enjoy the game. But, doing this will, I believe, return us to the style of hockey from yesterday that the purists enjoy. This return also will inherently promote player safety, as the style of play shifts back from being driven by physicality.

This idea is much better than creating a whole bunch of rules that will be enforced on the subjectivity of the referees. Try to enhance the skill-based portion of the game instead of over-regulating the dirty side of it.

The fans who only watch for the fights and the hits aren’t fans the league should want anyway… I bet most of them went to Ohio State.

(Sporting News)

The Stars Are Trading Brad Richards… Right?

Posted on February 16, 2011 by Ross

Sports fans, did you watch the absolute beat down handed to the Stars last night from the God-awful lowly Edmonton Oilers? It was disgusting and depressing.

You see, Edmonton is the worst team in the NHL. They only have 42 points; they’ve only won 17 games out of 57 played. They’re the TCU basketball of the NHL.

Last night they beat the Stars 4-1. This was the first game of a three-game road trip moving across Canada. I feel that the Star’s chances of turning the road trip into a success are about the same as Canadian William Shatner’s chances of turning his career around or Canadian Neil Youngs’ chances of releasing an album this decade that is listenable. Get ready for pain Stars fans.

But you’re already used to pain by now. Since the cup win, the franchise has gotten progressively worse and worse (except for a nice blip in 2008 where they made a run to the Western Conference finals… my first time to watch an exciting Stars playoff run while being of age to drink…). But this season, somehow, they have been good. For pretty much the whole season, they lead the Pacific division. They’ve consistently been the #2 or #3 seed in the Western Conference. Things were gearing up for a nice playoff run.

Fast forward to today. In the last ten games my beloved Stars are 2-7-1. I know you could call this a mid-season slump, and even say it’s a good thing that they experience it now. But, as a Ranger fan, I saw about 12 seasons where the Rangers start strong, and after the all-star break, fall apart. So this is a pattern I know all too well. And like the Rangers, this is/was a Tom Hicks franchise… so cue your twilight zone parallels. The Stars are now only 2 points above the playoff cut-off line. The Western Conference is tight, so chances are good that the season could be choked away by the end of this week. Also, like the Rangers in a not-so-distant past, the team is in custodianship. The league is essentially the owner/operator of the team. The Stars are the New Orleans Hornets of the NHL.

Unlike the Rangers though, unless someone like Modano, Hull or Hatcher pair up with a super-agent to buy the team, the Stars won’t have a white-knight like Nolan Ryan come in to save the day. This is important.

The trade deadline is less than two-weeks away. Brad Richards, who I think is the best player on the Stars, contract expires at the end of this season. Brad Richards is tied for the team lead with 24 goals, leads in assists (39) and leads in total points (63). So, the conclusion that the past success this season was due largely to Brad Richards’ outstanding play is a very easy one to make. Unfortunately, this sets up a difficult management decision. The decision is to either go for it this year or try to build up the franchise.

So the decision lies in either trading Brad Richards now or not trading him and allowing him to enter free-agency this summer. I think that if you analyze the risk-reward outcomes you’ll discover that keeping him around this season is not the most beneficial option. He will obviously command a very high contract in free agency. A team in conservatorship is likely to not be allowed to assume a contract like this. So I’m assuming that the Stars are going to lose Brad Richards no matter what. If you keep him around this season and allow his contract to expire, you end up getting nothing for him. If the Stars end up keeping Brad Richards this season and don’t make a deep run into the playoffs, they will then lose their best player with nothing in return. This marks the worst case scenario. So you have to determine the likelihood of a Richards lead Stars being successful, and I don’t think it’s worth the risk.

So I believe that the Stars need to trade Brad Richards as soon as possible (meaning the last minute before the trade-deadline ends).
I understand that trading him is giving the season up, but I like what future prospects the Stars could get as they try to turn the ownership around.

I think the very best trade would be to trade Richards to the Boston Bruins. The Bruins are trying to load up for a run this season (and upcoming seasons). Right now The Bruins have an asset worth trading, the Toronto Maple Leafs’ first round pick. According the ESPN’s NHL Rumor Central twitter account, the front office has expressed a willingness to pay up for Brad Richards. Toronto is the 12th seed in the East, so the pick is very worthwhile for a franchise that may need to rebuild. So surely the Stars are negotiating such a thing. When the two outcomes possible are getting nothing for your best player or getting as much as possible, you choose the more profitable action.

Here’s why I think they are going to trade him. On Friday, near the end of the Blue Jackets’ game, Brad Richards got hit in the neutral zone and suffered a mild injury. The reaction to this injury has been outsized. Not only will he sit out all of the games during the Stars’ Canadian road trip, he is not even traveling with the team. Of course this seems fishy. Marc Crawford had this quote:

“He suffered an injury on the last shift of the game on a hit in the neutral zone,” Crawford said. “He’s not feeling 100 percent today. Brad would like to join us but we think it is the best measure for him to stay behind and get him back to 100 percent before he rejoins the club. We’re going to be cautious here and not only what is best for Brad Richards but also for the Dallas Stars.”

Pay attention to that last line about doing what’s best for the Dallas Stars. With the deadline on 2/28, less than two weeks away, I have to assume that they’re protecting his trade value.

So the analysis must come down to whether the front-office thinks the team can make the playoffs or not. Unfortunately, they have to make this determination very quickly in a time when the team is playing its worst hockey of the season. So do you bet on improvement and take a huge risk in keeping a future free-agent who you have little chance of signing? Or take the windfall from trading him and look to the future? Keep in mind that he’s injured, so the team could be out of the playoff run by the time he returns.

So I have to suck it up, forget this season, and hope that he gets traded. Surely, the front-office has a deal in the works.

But who am I kidding, within five years the team will probably be the Oklahoma City Tornadoes.

Turn off the Celtics/Lakers

Posted on January 30, 2011 by Ross

This is a public service announcement courtesy of Generation Y Sports. All of you sports fans are probably watching ABC’s coverage of the NBA. Well, if you turn on the cable box, and search at the bottom of the channel line up, you’ll find a channel called VS (known for TCU football games and the NHL — I obviously love this channel [minus the TOcho show]). VS is showing the biggest sports event of the day. The NHL All-Star game!

I think the NHL is making a comeback. I would implore you to watch this event.

If that’s not enough, this year’s format is such an off-the-wall concept that it may never be done again.

Originally the All-Star game featured the best North American players vs the best players from “the World”. I remember watching this as a kid and I thought it was pretty fetch.

Next, the NHL did like every other league and made the game a contest between the two conferences. In the NHL’s case, this is East vs West.

Last year there was no All-Star game because of the olympics.

Now, Bettman has either reached mad genius status, or the league is just going nuts. The model for this game has never been done, and it will be crazy to see if it succeeds.

Basically, the league has set it up like a pick-up game we all would play when we were kids. They had a draft.

The captains of each side , Nicklas Lidstrom and Eric Staal, took turns picking players. Eligible picks sat in the stands wondering when and if they would be chosen. Wild! For instance, the TV constantly panned to Jonathan Toews during the draft as he was anxiously waiting to be picked (he was chosen by Lidstrom with his 16th pick).

Each team must have three goalies, six defensemen and 12 forwards, putting some limitations on the draft.

So, this all-star game is unique. It’s probably the most unique all-star game ever played. I would encourage everyone to watch it. We could be watching the future or a complete joke that will be ridiculed for years to come.

[Update: The players are being introduced by little kids. This is weird, but it's refreshing to have a sport that doesn't just blare a crappy Black Eyed Peas song while yelling names out]