Precious Roy

Where the hell does this idea come from that OVW ruins promising talent? All the OVW duds SUCKED BEFORE THEY WENT TO OVW! Tomko and Morgan and Jones aren't indicative of anything because they were only signed due to size and showed no promise before OVW. You can't get gold out of shit, ya know? If Burchill really has it and is more than just a freakish spot machine then he'll make it. If he tops out at indy spots then he won't. In the long run OVW will have little to do with his eventual success or failure. If anyone will neuter his style and make him a generic big it will be the WWE's agents.

And incidently, Schilling got 7.5 per 9 compared to Santana's 5.6........

Well, I found the run support stats, 4.8 per 9 for Clemens, 4 per 9 for Johnson, which were incidently two of the lower totals for top pitchers, the only guys w/ less or negligible support being Sheets at 3.5, Odalis Perez at 3.3, Clement at 4, Oliver Perez at 4.1 and Al Leiter at 4.0. Compared to Clemens 4.8 Oswalt got 6. Go figure....

Meh, Artest is a space cadet, but in a loveable kind of way. He's got a certain innocence to him. He says he's going to retire as soon as he wins a Championship, and he encourages everyone to go illegally download his future rap album because he isn't in it to make money, he's just into producing because he enjoys it and wants to help some young MCs get some shine. The R&B album, by Allure, he wants people to buy though, because they're just some singer chicks from Queensbridge and don't have NBA money to fall back on. Also, Bird says if Artest had come to him and asked for the time off that he would have given it to him if he couldn't have convinced him otherwise, but that after speaking with him realized that it was nothing more than an idea Ron was bouncing around. The truth is, Artest never actually asked for the time off, nobody officially denied him the time off, and there's no reason to believe it was anything more than an idea in his head, he simply discussed the possibility with some of his teammates, who informed Carlisle that Artest was talking about it. When you get the story from the actual partys involved it seems like a simple misunderstanding. The whole thing has been blown out of proportion IMO.

That's just it... I pay a good amount of attention to sports media, and I've seen no example at all what you're talking about All I remember seeing was more of the same ol' Roger (see also: incident at son's ball game), hence why I thought it was a big joke Are you kidding me, you really saw none of it? There was an in-depth article in Sports Illustrated about his wife, kids and his life in Texas right after he signed with the Astros, constant Sportscenter segments and ESPN mentions about his family life and desire to be a stay at home dad, a far greater focus on his friendship with Pettite than there ever was when they played for New York (I'm a Yankees fan in NY and I heard more about this after they left the team), even the little league incident was explained away days after the story and rebuffed by several "eye witnesses," the media went out of their way to cover for Roger there. There's also been constant focus on his elderly parents and his desire to retire in time for them to see him enshrined in Cooperstown. Not to mention the constant love and defense he gets from commentators and from MLB, like at the last two all-star games. NONE of this existed in the media until 2003 when 300 was in sight, and they've definitely tried to humanize him and make him a likeable figure simply because he's a legend for the ages. I'm not making this stuff up, this is what you hear when Clemens is discussed, where in the past it was all about him throwing inside and being cantankerous. On the other hand, Unit got no real love from the press this past season, except when it had to do with a possible trade.

Where can I find run-support stats? Clemens only lost 4 games and his team struggled for 1/2 the season. 14 losses is a lot, even on a bad team, for a Cy Young winner. I'd like to see what sort of run support the two of them had. I think Johnson probably deserved to win too, but it was a lot closer than the Santana-Schilling race IMO, and obviously SOME of those voters, the same ones who voted for Santana, had a logical thought process behind voting for Clemens.

It's not a joke. Have you followed the media's coverage of Clemens since his "retirement year" in New York? He's been recast as a hardworking everyman dad, where in the past he was painted as a headhunting goon. The K names is just the cherry on top, sportswriters cream for that shit. And the "what is loveable about Clemens?" question had ALREADY been asked in this thread by you and I gave the same answer, prompting Max to riff on the K names. Then Anglesault asked the same question, so I gave the shortform answer by stealing Max's bit. That's what is lovable to writers and fans about Clemens, he takes time off to be with his family. He loves his kids. He's no longer a "headhunter" he's a "throwback to the good old days." You may not like it, but it's the truth.

Really? I watch a couple times a week and I haven't seen Ryan in AGES, yet Mariotti is on EVERY time

They didn't pick the best pitcher in the National League Yeah, but Johnson and Clemens were a lot closer in stats and actual performance. Santana had maybe the best second half EVER and if you watched him pitch and you watched Schilling pitch it was CLEAR that Santana was without question the better player. 13-0 with an ERA under 2 in the second half, a LOT more K's than Schilling, and he only won like 1or 2 less games. I understand the Johnson/Clemens debate, but there's no debate in the AL.

Losing Max and Bill Wolf plus the tinkering with the little format changes to try and seperate Tony from Max has really hurt the show. I'm not going to go into the long list of little changes they've made, some of them have been mentioned (background music, not obeying scoring, changing the lead-ins and commerical bumps from the host, making Tony host & announcer, etc. etc.) but basically all of this has conspired to hurt the show. Also, they need an overhaul of the panelists, definitely need some new blood. Mariotti ONCE a week is enough, not everyday though. Plaschke (sp) SUCKS with his ugly mug, lispy voice and utter stupidity. Losing Bob Ryan hurt. A lot. Not having Woody on as much hurts. A lot. I still maintain that Kellerman was the heart and soul of the show though, it's really suffered since he left. And I like I, Max, I think the new format works well.

Vince threatens to sue? HAHAHAHAHAH. Let him, he's got no legal leg to stand on. That's like WCW suing over that DX Invasion stunt. TNA, if they got it on tape, should air that footage just as a fuck you to McMahon. That would be glorious. And what the fuck is Vince doing using Universal Studios to tape a commercial anyway?

I didn't get to see UX, but Daniels-Kazarian and Killings-Raven were WAY too short and came off totally rushed. Daniels and Kazarian especially looked out of synch and Daniels seemed to be overly nervous or drugged out or something. Most of the show came off as somewhat amusing, lighthearted wrestlecrap. I thought the BD hosts did pretty well in being happy shills, other than Cox, and Don West was on his game. Production was great. Decent overall introduction to the product I guess.

Well, if Nash is going to be a little bitch Styles could easily shoot on him in the ring. Shit, half this forum could work their way into another torn quad for "Big Sexy"

Savage is a fucking pussy. If this isn't an elaborate work I've lost ALL respect for him, and coming from someone who would mark for him no matter what scumbag shit he pulled behind the scenes that's saying a lot. It seems too convenient though, calling out Hogan ON AN LP and then running away from the chance to beat him down? And Hogan just happened to be backstage at Savage's first show? I'm thinking Hogan-Savage is going down in TNA, if I'm wrong I'm wrong, but that's my gut instinct, this whole thing is too absurd to not be a work.....

Yeah, but a good percentage of them are pricks, and that was the whole point of the show, focusing on that percentage of guys who bend and break the rules, though obviously they amped it up a notch for dramatic purposes. They could have had a show about the mormon O-line guy, christian Safety and goody two shoes special team guy who all have wives and 2.5 kids, but what's dramatic or interesting about that. Every sports fan knows there are good guys in sports, guys who live normal lives like you and me when they're not in the spotlight, but we're more interested in exploring the psyche of the 'bad guys" or the guys who make mistakes, because it makes them more human, easier to relate to, more interesting in terms of psychological and cultural study ESPN reflects sports culture, you can argue that it focus on the bad behaviour over the good, but it didn't create or cause that behaviour, and I hardly think it celebrates it.

It's not as simple as saying that they get a scholarship and that's all they're due. Lots of kids get scholarships, I had a partial scholarship at school, and I was still allowed to do whatever I wanted in terms of an off-campus job. College athletes don't get that freedom, and even a full scholarship only covers tuition and maybe housing and campus food plans and shit like that, it doesn't cover all the other expenses that living on your own can present. On campus jobs are usually a part of scholarships for athletes, the type of jobs that give 10-20 hours a week at 6-7 dollars an hour. A lot of athletes don't show for those jobs or take advantage of them, but that's one thing. I think college athletes can obviously get by like any other college students, they can get their education and housing paid for and get modest stipends for food and other expenses and that should be enough to get by for most kids. But then you get into the issue of the massive ammount of cash that major colleges bring in as a result of college sports, TV deals, advertising, merchandising, and that changes everything. The players are exploited, but they also know what they're getting into, because it's that very system of exploitation that brings them to the dance so to speak. It's all about greed, on every side. The real money goes into the pockets of everyone but the players, much of it goes into the colleges, of course, but it also lines the pockets of administration that does nothing more than organize and facilitate these giant pyramid schemes, and the corporate interests involved benefit greatly. Really, if there is ever going to be any real reform of college sports it needs to start at the top. There needs to be a total break down and shake down of the system. Paying athletes is not a solution to any problem, it's a gag order, a facilitation. You want to clean up college sports you start at the top and work your way down, but that will never happen because it's a dirty business that makes a lot of money for a lot of people, and the athletes involved are hardly the innocent victims some people make them out to be.

Kasey, Karly, Kancer, Kunta, Kinte..... Anyone catch that commercial where they combine Unit and Clemens? Good shit.

I dug it. Dug it a lot. It was over the top, over dramatized, but yeah, it definitely hit too close to home for the NFL suits, for sure.....

Yeah, I forgot Shaq when talking about Z, but that's an obvious one, I'm still getting used to him being out East Simply talking best overall player I'll take LeBron over anyone else in the East, easily over Jermaine O'Neal, close but not that close over Pierce, take that's for what it's worth.... ps - Drew Gooden just put up monster numbers against Phoenix, he's going to have a nice year on that team

Artest is from Queensbridge, what do people expect? Too bad Bird will never trade him to Isiah

1. LeBron is the best player in the East 2. They have McInnis for a whole season, plus Snow and Lucious Harris. When LeBron didn't have to play the point last season they put up a + .500 record. He's much more valuable to them playing the 3. 3. Big Z is the best true center in the East. 4. Drew Gooden isn't Carlos Boozer, but he's better than you think. 5. Paul Silas is a hell of a motivator. I TOTALLY spaced on Orlando though. Duh! They'll be right in the middle of the NY, Philly, Boston, Toronto, Washington crowd.

But Clemens is a family man with a hot wife and cute kids whose name's all begin with K. The media eats that shit up.

Dude, you are INSANE if you think the Giants would trade Eli Manning. Kurt Warner is as short-term as short-term gets Chargers, in retrospect, made a mistake of sorts drafting Philip Rivers, but Brees had been very mediocre, and who knew it would light a fire under his ass? The guy is getting MVP TALK right now! I think that's mad premature, but you can't deny that he's harnassed his talent and become the player the Chargers hoped he would be when they drafted him. Rivers over Roethelsberger is a whole other issue and you'd think with the kind of scouting and personality testing that goes on in the NFL people could have pegged Ben as a winner, but to be fair, we don't know what Rivers can do yet. Based on San Diego's track record it wouldn't surpise me if he's the next Ryan Leaf, but you don't know til he gets the job. I think San Diego would be smart to chalk up Rivers as a mistake before they have to pay for it, stick with Brees, they won't get equal pick value for Rivers but they should get a nice first rounder and some middle rounds picks for him.

Those cards look just as good as Victory Road, lol. Are all of these matches unclipped and first run?

I agree that AJ got fucked over by Jarrett, but it's water under the bridge. AJ is already their biggest draw as far as I'm concerned, and he's one of the only guys who can draw on the undercard. Better to strike when the iron is hot with Monty, establish him, then go back to AJ at top down the road. The creation of viable new stars is essential to their long-term survival, and whether you like Brown personally or not (I'm not really a big fan myself, though I like his intensity) they have a chance to do that here.