^
Oh, that wacky Charlie Sheen. Seems the man who is down to his last Two and a Half Brain Cells has told Sports Illustrated that he took steroids when he was filming "Major League" for his role as Wild Thing Vaughn.
He said the drugs, which he used "for like six or eight weeks," added 6 mph to his fastball.
Now what are we supposed to do with this information?
Use it as proof that if six weeks of steroids could give Sheen an 85 mph fastball, six years (or more) of steroids must have been pretty effective for Roger Clemens and other big-league pitchers?
Dismiss his claim as the ramblings of a narcissistic loon?
Give Sheen a call to determine if he is willing to go back on 'roids and become the Cardinals' closer?
^
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Today's High 5 - Blago Edition
^
5. Monday wasn't a total loss for Rod Blagojevich. His beloved Cubbies scored a crucial victory over the Rockies and now are a mere 14 games under .500.
4. When the jury convicted him on 17 of 20 corruption charges, Blago said he was stunned. A totally predictable reaction. He's the kind of guy who thinks he can fool all of the people all of the time. And why not? Each of the six times the corrupt buffoon ran for office, a majority of his Illinois constituents voted for him. It's understandable that he doubted 12 jurors could see through his b.s.
3. Blago's successor, Pat Quinn, had better hustle. He has fewer than four years to do something crooked enough to become the third straight Illinois governor to serve time. I'm confident he can do it!!
2. If I'm Patti Blagojevich, I'm thinking: "I ate a tarantula for that?"
1. Lots of people believe they live in politically corrupt places. For example, friends in New Jersey and Arizona and here in my new state of North Carolina actually think they're No. 1. Please. elected officials in Illinois take oaths promising to meet graft minimums.
^
5. Monday wasn't a total loss for Rod Blagojevich. His beloved Cubbies scored a crucial victory over the Rockies and now are a mere 14 games under .500.
4. When the jury convicted him on 17 of 20 corruption charges, Blago said he was stunned. A totally predictable reaction. He's the kind of guy who thinks he can fool all of the people all of the time. And why not? Each of the six times the corrupt buffoon ran for office, a majority of his Illinois constituents voted for him. It's understandable that he doubted 12 jurors could see through his b.s.
3. Blago's successor, Pat Quinn, had better hustle. He has fewer than four years to do something crooked enough to become the third straight Illinois governor to serve time. I'm confident he can do it!!
2. If I'm Patti Blagojevich, I'm thinking: "I ate a tarantula for that?"
1. Lots of people believe they live in politically corrupt places. For example, friends in New Jersey and Arizona and here in my new state of North Carolina actually think they're No. 1. Please. elected officials in Illinois take oaths promising to meet graft minimums.
^
Monday, June 27, 2011
History that never will be repeated
^
Every once in a while, a historical nugget catches my eye. Just such a thing happened Monday, when I saw a little blurb in the paper noting that it was the 62nd anniversary of a 23-inning game between the Brooklyn Dodgers and Boston Braves.
The most unique thing wasn't the length of the game, which was suspended due to darkness with the score tied at 2. It was this stat line for Dodgers starter Whit Wyatt:
16 IP, 15 H, 2 R, 2 BB, 5 K
That's right: Rookie manager Leo Durocher let Wyatt pitch the first 16 innings for the Dodgers.
Sixteen innings!
These days, managers are routinely criticized for letting guys pitch half that many innings in games for fear of injury.
Wyatt took the mound again five days later and lasted only 1 2/3 innings, but pitched a complete game victory five days after that. He did end up missing the last two months with an injury that season but rebounded to win 56 games from 1940-42.
In 1941, his best season, he went 22-10 with 23 complete games and 7 shutouts. He capped his season by throwing 2 complete games against the Yankees in the World Series, winning Game 2 and losing Game 5. (That Series was best known for Mickey Owen's famed dropped third strike, which cost the Dodgers a win in Game 4.)
Wyatt pitched through 1945 before retiring at 38. He probably would have lasted a couple more seasons but his arm must've still been tired from that 16-inning stint six years earlier.
If a manager today let a pitcher throw 16 innings on June 27, he'd be fired before June 28.
Durocher wasn't fired. He went on to manage in four more decades, win 2,009 games and get inducted into the Hall of Fame.
^
Every once in a while, a historical nugget catches my eye. Just such a thing happened Monday, when I saw a little blurb in the paper noting that it was the 62nd anniversary of a 23-inning game between the Brooklyn Dodgers and Boston Braves.
The most unique thing wasn't the length of the game, which was suspended due to darkness with the score tied at 2. It was this stat line for Dodgers starter Whit Wyatt:
16 IP, 15 H, 2 R, 2 BB, 5 K
That's right: Rookie manager Leo Durocher let Wyatt pitch the first 16 innings for the Dodgers.
Sixteen innings!
These days, managers are routinely criticized for letting guys pitch half that many innings in games for fear of injury.
Wyatt took the mound again five days later and lasted only 1 2/3 innings, but pitched a complete game victory five days after that. He did end up missing the last two months with an injury that season but rebounded to win 56 games from 1940-42.
In 1941, his best season, he went 22-10 with 23 complete games and 7 shutouts. He capped his season by throwing 2 complete games against the Yankees in the World Series, winning Game 2 and losing Game 5. (That Series was best known for Mickey Owen's famed dropped third strike, which cost the Dodgers a win in Game 4.)
Wyatt pitched through 1945 before retiring at 38. He probably would have lasted a couple more seasons but his arm must've still been tired from that 16-inning stint six years earlier.
If a manager today let a pitcher throw 16 innings on June 27, he'd be fired before June 28.
Durocher wasn't fired. He went on to manage in four more decades, win 2,009 games and get inducted into the Hall of Fame.
^
Friday, June 24, 2011
Did Riggleman really do that?
^
Not sure if Jim Riggleman is a Turkey of the Year candidate for walking away from his Nationals managing job just as the team was getting halfway decent ... or if he deserves plaudits for standing up for what he believes, regardless of the consequences.
Riggleman thought the Nationals should have picked up the option year on his contract. He thought he deserved that much, and he's right. The team thought otherwise. So he quit.
No matter what you think of quitters, you have to agree that it takes cajones to walk away when things are pretty good. I mean, anybody can quit when things are rotten, as Jim Leyland and Lou Piniella have. Repeatedly.
I always liked Jim. When he was the Cubs' manager from 1995 to 1999, he was the ultimate straight-shooter. I can't imagine any manager handling the wild Sosa-McGwire season of '98 better than he did. Tony La Russa didn't handle it better, that's for sure.
Of course, La Russa had a great track record before that and has a great one since (despite being McLiar's enabler-in-chief). The same can't be said of Riggleman.
Still, Riggleman knows that everything in baseball is recycled. Even in the unlikely event that he never manages again, he'll be some team's third-base coach or bench coach as long as he wants to stay in the game.
Turkey? Nah. It's hard to resist a guy willing to tell his boss, "Take this job and shove it."
^
Not sure if Jim Riggleman is a Turkey of the Year candidate for walking away from his Nationals managing job just as the team was getting halfway decent ... or if he deserves plaudits for standing up for what he believes, regardless of the consequences.
Riggleman thought the Nationals should have picked up the option year on his contract. He thought he deserved that much, and he's right. The team thought otherwise. So he quit.
No matter what you think of quitters, you have to agree that it takes cajones to walk away when things are pretty good. I mean, anybody can quit when things are rotten, as Jim Leyland and Lou Piniella have. Repeatedly.
I always liked Jim. When he was the Cubs' manager from 1995 to 1999, he was the ultimate straight-shooter. I can't imagine any manager handling the wild Sosa-McGwire season of '98 better than he did. Tony La Russa didn't handle it better, that's for sure.
Of course, La Russa had a great track record before that and has a great one since (despite being McLiar's enabler-in-chief). The same can't be said of Riggleman.
Still, Riggleman knows that everything in baseball is recycled. Even in the unlikely event that he never manages again, he'll be some team's third-base coach or bench coach as long as he wants to stay in the game.
Turkey? Nah. It's hard to resist a guy willing to tell his boss, "Take this job and shove it."
^
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Hey Albert Gump: Stupid is as stupid does
^
Getting mad at a reporter who dared ask if he was concerned that his broken wrist might affect his next contract, gazillion-dollar-free-agent-to-be Albert Pujols called it a "stupid question" and immediately ended the press gathering.
It wasn't a stupid question. It was THE question that had to be asked, THE question that is on the mind of baseball fans everywhere -- both those in St. Louis who hope he stays with the Cardinals and those in other cities want the generation's best hitter to play for their teams.
The question wasn't even asked Monday (the day Pujols found out he would miss at least six weeks) but Tuesday. The always respectful St. Louis media gave Albert plenty of time to let the news sink in before asking the question on everybody's mind.
The only stupid thing was Pujols' immature reaction.
^
Getting mad at a reporter who dared ask if he was concerned that his broken wrist might affect his next contract, gazillion-dollar-free-agent-to-be Albert Pujols called it a "stupid question" and immediately ended the press gathering.
It wasn't a stupid question. It was THE question that had to be asked, THE question that is on the mind of baseball fans everywhere -- both those in St. Louis who hope he stays with the Cardinals and those in other cities want the generation's best hitter to play for their teams.
The question wasn't even asked Monday (the day Pujols found out he would miss at least six weeks) but Tuesday. The always respectful St. Louis media gave Albert plenty of time to let the news sink in before asking the question on everybody's mind.
The only stupid thing was Pujols' immature reaction.
^
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Online, schmonline ... I'll still take my daily newspaper
^
Yeah, I know we're in the age of instant news ... all anybody could ever want (and far too much more) ... online ... for free.
And you know what? I still don't know how anybody who really cares about his/her community -- and by that I mean city, county, state, country and world -- can go without reading that relic from a bygone era: the daily newspaper. I know: I'm so 1990s!
I tried giving it up, believe me.
I went without a newspaper for a spell and tried catching up on all the news online. Hated it.
There was no rhythm to the search. I'd see a headline, click on it and read a little. Then I'd see another headline and click some more. An hour later, my eyes were tired, my neck was sore and I felt as if I had read hardly anything noteworthy. As for the ads ... well, I never even considered clicking on one.
So I started having my local daily newspaper, the Charlotte Observer, delivered Friday through Sunday. Filling in the gaps with a couple of weeklies as well as online news, this was passable but ultimately unsatisfying. I had all this stuff to read on weekends but scant little to read during the week. I felt I was missing too much.
Taking advantage of a deal offered by an airline frequent flyer program, I traded in a few points for three months of a 7-day-a-week Observer subscription. It didn't take long for me to realize how much I had missed having a newspaper every day.
So when my subscription came up for renewal this week, I picked up the phone, called the Observer, made the best deal I possibly could -- $116 for the year -- and signed up.
It will be 31.9 cents per day very well spent.
I don't read every story, but I read a lot of them. I like how a newspaper organizes stories and lays out the narrative for readers. I like having the baseball box scores on one page. I like having coupons to clip on Sundays and supermarket ads to peruse on Wednesdays (my wife being the main breadwinner, the least I can do is the shopping!). I like the funnies. I like having weekend fun options summarized every Friday.
I like the opinion pages. I like having a daily editorial or two to read. I like letters from fellow readers, opinion pieces from my fellow citizens of the area and national columns from talented, interesting writers I probably wouldn't have stumbled upon online.
Oh, and I like that, despite what so many people say, newspapers still matter. If they didn't why would politicians and athletes always be whining about what's printed in them? I shudder to think where we'd be as a society without our newspapers keep tabs on our elected officials and regulatory agencies.
When my daughter was a high school athlete, she and I would get a real charge out of seeing her name in the Chicago Tribune and/or Sun-Times. We clipped those stories and saved them; we never saved the online equivalent. To this day, Moms and Dads everywhere put newspaper clips on their fridges and send them (the clips, not the fridges) to the grandparents.
Yes, it's "yesterday's news today." Yes, when I want to know what's going on today, I have to look online. Even this lifelong newspaper junkie admits that.
Nevertheless, I like having important news stories and columns presented in a logical, readable form. The national deficit isn't going away tomorrow -- and neither, unfortunately, is Newt Gingrich -- so if I don't read George Will or Paul Krugman for a day or two, it doesn't really matter. I ultimately am getting diverging opinions on important subjects and can choose to agree or disagree.
And I can do it all at my leisure -- sitting comfortably on the glider in our screen porch, on my La-Z-Boy in our rec room or while chilling on our sofa.
If that makes me as obsolete as the newspaper itself, I can live with that.
Now leave me alone. I gotta see what those goofy Zits teenagers are up to today.
^
Yeah, I know we're in the age of instant news ... all anybody could ever want (and far too much more) ... online ... for free.
And you know what? I still don't know how anybody who really cares about his/her community -- and by that I mean city, county, state, country and world -- can go without reading that relic from a bygone era: the daily newspaper. I know: I'm so 1990s!
I tried giving it up, believe me.
I went without a newspaper for a spell and tried catching up on all the news online. Hated it.
There was no rhythm to the search. I'd see a headline, click on it and read a little. Then I'd see another headline and click some more. An hour later, my eyes were tired, my neck was sore and I felt as if I had read hardly anything noteworthy. As for the ads ... well, I never even considered clicking on one.
So I started having my local daily newspaper, the Charlotte Observer, delivered Friday through Sunday. Filling in the gaps with a couple of weeklies as well as online news, this was passable but ultimately unsatisfying. I had all this stuff to read on weekends but scant little to read during the week. I felt I was missing too much.
Taking advantage of a deal offered by an airline frequent flyer program, I traded in a few points for three months of a 7-day-a-week Observer subscription. It didn't take long for me to realize how much I had missed having a newspaper every day.
So when my subscription came up for renewal this week, I picked up the phone, called the Observer, made the best deal I possibly could -- $116 for the year -- and signed up.
It will be 31.9 cents per day very well spent.
I don't read every story, but I read a lot of them. I like how a newspaper organizes stories and lays out the narrative for readers. I like having the baseball box scores on one page. I like having coupons to clip on Sundays and supermarket ads to peruse on Wednesdays (my wife being the main breadwinner, the least I can do is the shopping!). I like the funnies. I like having weekend fun options summarized every Friday.
I like the opinion pages. I like having a daily editorial or two to read. I like letters from fellow readers, opinion pieces from my fellow citizens of the area and national columns from talented, interesting writers I probably wouldn't have stumbled upon online.
Oh, and I like that, despite what so many people say, newspapers still matter. If they didn't why would politicians and athletes always be whining about what's printed in them? I shudder to think where we'd be as a society without our newspapers keep tabs on our elected officials and regulatory agencies.
When my daughter was a high school athlete, she and I would get a real charge out of seeing her name in the Chicago Tribune and/or Sun-Times. We clipped those stories and saved them; we never saved the online equivalent. To this day, Moms and Dads everywhere put newspaper clips on their fridges and send them (the clips, not the fridges) to the grandparents.
Yes, it's "yesterday's news today." Yes, when I want to know what's going on today, I have to look online. Even this lifelong newspaper junkie admits that.
Nevertheless, I like having important news stories and columns presented in a logical, readable form. The national deficit isn't going away tomorrow -- and neither, unfortunately, is Newt Gingrich -- so if I don't read George Will or Paul Krugman for a day or two, it doesn't really matter. I ultimately am getting diverging opinions on important subjects and can choose to agree or disagree.
And I can do it all at my leisure -- sitting comfortably on the glider in our screen porch, on my La-Z-Boy in our rec room or while chilling on our sofa.
If that makes me as obsolete as the newspaper itself, I can live with that.
Now leave me alone. I gotta see what those goofy Zits teenagers are up to today.
^
Monday, June 20, 2011
Hoping 2012 U.S. Open comes down to Tiger-Rory playoff
^
The Bald Truth
I miss Tiger. Really.
Sure, I was in awe of Rory McIlroy, both his incredible swing and his can-do demeanor. And I'll admit I was rooting for him to keep going more and more under par.
But as was the case when Tiger Woods was winning tournaments by double-digit totals, I grew a little bored as I watched McIlroy's runaway U.S. Open victory. I'll take a nail-biter of a tournament that goes down to the final putt over a record-setting rout every time.
I mean, how many times should one have to listen to Johnny Miller chuckle at the absurdity of McIlroy's near-perfect shotmaking?
McIlroy certainly looks like golf's next big thing. Wouldn't it be delicious if the sport's last big thing got healthy, got his game back and took all this adulation being heaped on McIlroy personally?
Wouldn't it be great if Tiger Woods acted like his buddy and role model, Michael Jordan, who used such challenges to motivate himself and amaze us all?
I covered the PGA Championship at Medinah in 1999, when a baby-faced Sergio Garcia almost stole the show from Woods. At the time, we all assumed we'd be treated to Sergio vs. Tiger for the next two decades. Unfortunately, Sergio lost his copy of the script.
Now that Tiger is the hunter instead of the hunted, will he be able to play his part? Can he be the Arnie to McIlroy's Jack?
Wouldn't that be something?
The Quote
"He lapped the field, and for such a young age, how mature he is." -- Jason Day
The U.S. Open runner-up is 23, an old man compared to the 22-year-old champion.
The Balder Truth
My favorite thing about McIlroy -- and there are lots of favorite things with this kid -- is how quickly he plays.
He doesn't stand there for five minutes trying to figure out how a 2 mph breeze will affect his next shot. He doesn't examine every putt from 14 different angles. He doesn't agonize for 30 seconds after every miss or pump his fist 20 times after every make. He doesn't confer with his caddie for 10 minutes and change clubs three times before addressing the ball.
He walks up to his Pro V1, hits it and gets ready for the next shot.
All of us would be wise to copy McIlroy's picture-perfect swing. All of us also are wise enough to know we can't.
One thing we can copy is his desire to play the game quickly.
The more time under 4 hours a round can take, the more time there is for the 19th hole.
Who's No. 1?
If it's too early to say for sure that it's McIlroy, we don't really know who No. 1 is. But we know who it isn't.
Luke Donald has to be one of the great pretenders in recent sports history.
THE BALDEST TRUTH
Americans aren't winning golf's majors. They aren't contending at Wimbledon, either.
Which means ... what? ... we're supposed to be ashamed to be Americans or something?
Our elected leaders do plenty to make us ashamed. What happens in our sporting venues is immaterial.
It's only sports, you know?
^
The Bald Truth
I miss Tiger. Really.
Sure, I was in awe of Rory McIlroy, both his incredible swing and his can-do demeanor. And I'll admit I was rooting for him to keep going more and more under par.
But as was the case when Tiger Woods was winning tournaments by double-digit totals, I grew a little bored as I watched McIlroy's runaway U.S. Open victory. I'll take a nail-biter of a tournament that goes down to the final putt over a record-setting rout every time.
I mean, how many times should one have to listen to Johnny Miller chuckle at the absurdity of McIlroy's near-perfect shotmaking?
McIlroy certainly looks like golf's next big thing. Wouldn't it be delicious if the sport's last big thing got healthy, got his game back and took all this adulation being heaped on McIlroy personally?
Wouldn't it be great if Tiger Woods acted like his buddy and role model, Michael Jordan, who used such challenges to motivate himself and amaze us all?
I covered the PGA Championship at Medinah in 1999, when a baby-faced Sergio Garcia almost stole the show from Woods. At the time, we all assumed we'd be treated to Sergio vs. Tiger for the next two decades. Unfortunately, Sergio lost his copy of the script.
Now that Tiger is the hunter instead of the hunted, will he be able to play his part? Can he be the Arnie to McIlroy's Jack?
Wouldn't that be something?
The Quote
"He lapped the field, and for such a young age, how mature he is." -- Jason Day
The U.S. Open runner-up is 23, an old man compared to the 22-year-old champion.
The Balder Truth
My favorite thing about McIlroy -- and there are lots of favorite things with this kid -- is how quickly he plays.
He doesn't stand there for five minutes trying to figure out how a 2 mph breeze will affect his next shot. He doesn't examine every putt from 14 different angles. He doesn't agonize for 30 seconds after every miss or pump his fist 20 times after every make. He doesn't confer with his caddie for 10 minutes and change clubs three times before addressing the ball.
He walks up to his Pro V1, hits it and gets ready for the next shot.
All of us would be wise to copy McIlroy's picture-perfect swing. All of us also are wise enough to know we can't.
One thing we can copy is his desire to play the game quickly.
The more time under 4 hours a round can take, the more time there is for the 19th hole.
Who's No. 1?
If it's too early to say for sure that it's McIlroy, we don't really know who No. 1 is. But we know who it isn't.
Luke Donald has to be one of the great pretenders in recent sports history.
THE BALDEST TRUTH
Americans aren't winning golf's majors. They aren't contending at Wimbledon, either.
Which means ... what? ... we're supposed to be ashamed to be Americans or something?
Our elected leaders do plenty to make us ashamed. What happens in our sporting venues is immaterial.
It's only sports, you know?
^
Saturday, June 18, 2011
Simcha: Almost too doggone cute!!!
^
^
^
Simmie and Oscar, her boyfriend next door. Quite the cute couple, no?
Enjoying the squeaky toy she got as a gift from Oscar (and his family).
Chilling on a chair in the backyard.
Didn't especially enjoy her first bath.
Much more comfy with the water at a safe distance -- our community lake.
What a cliche ... Simcha loves a good stick!
A true Sun Goddess.
Simmie loves her "Kong" toy.
And we love Simmie!!
^
Thursday, June 16, 2011
The true shame of Weiner
^
Mixed emotions about Anthony Weiner's resignation.
On the one hand, his arrogance and indecency certainly merited extreme negative consequences.
On the other, if one thinks about the many sex-related things elected officials have done while still being allowed to serve out their terms -- from Bill Clinton's unique use of cigars in the Oval Office to Mark Sanford hiking the Appalachian Trail to Larry Craig's bathroom toe-tapping escapades, etc. -- Weiner's sexting seems fairly minor.
Would the constant distractions have prevented Weiner from serving his constituents? If so, then he had to go. But just as time let the jokes die down and let Clinton finish his term with a flourish, so too might Weiner have been able to salvage his career -- and be an effective leader -- had he stayed the course.
(Then again, with a name like Weiner and with his particular transgressions, it's a very real possibility that no matter what he does from here on out, he'll never be taken seriously again.)
Over the years, whenever I saw Weiner chatting with Jon Stewart or making arguments from the congressional podium, I thought: "You know, this guy is not afraid to say what he thinks and act upon what he says. We need more like him." It's the same feeling I had about John McCain back when he really was a maverick (as opposed to the shell-of-a-mav he turned out to be in 2008).
So even though Weiner's wound was self-inflicted, it was a shame to see his political career die that way.
---
Oh, and apologists can save their breath with their "Why was he driven out of office just because he did some sexting? Don't we have more corrupt officials to go after?"
It was the same "defense" that Clinton's apologists used, and it was just as wrong then.
Clinton lied while under oath. That was the crime. Weiner lied repeatedly to his constituents and peers about his behavior. That was his true failing, at least in my book.
As I used to tell my kids: Nobody expects you to be perfect; when you do something wrong, the lying to try to cover it up is what we really can't stand.
^
Mixed emotions about Anthony Weiner's resignation.
On the one hand, his arrogance and indecency certainly merited extreme negative consequences.
On the other, if one thinks about the many sex-related things elected officials have done while still being allowed to serve out their terms -- from Bill Clinton's unique use of cigars in the Oval Office to Mark Sanford hiking the Appalachian Trail to Larry Craig's bathroom toe-tapping escapades, etc. -- Weiner's sexting seems fairly minor.
Would the constant distractions have prevented Weiner from serving his constituents? If so, then he had to go. But just as time let the jokes die down and let Clinton finish his term with a flourish, so too might Weiner have been able to salvage his career -- and be an effective leader -- had he stayed the course.
(Then again, with a name like Weiner and with his particular transgressions, it's a very real possibility that no matter what he does from here on out, he'll never be taken seriously again.)
Over the years, whenever I saw Weiner chatting with Jon Stewart or making arguments from the congressional podium, I thought: "You know, this guy is not afraid to say what he thinks and act upon what he says. We need more like him." It's the same feeling I had about John McCain back when he really was a maverick (as opposed to the shell-of-a-mav he turned out to be in 2008).
So even though Weiner's wound was self-inflicted, it was a shame to see his political career die that way.
---
Oh, and apologists can save their breath with their "Why was he driven out of office just because he did some sexting? Don't we have more corrupt officials to go after?"
It was the same "defense" that Clinton's apologists used, and it was just as wrong then.
Clinton lied while under oath. That was the crime. Weiner lied repeatedly to his constituents and peers about his behavior. That was his true failing, at least in my book.
As I used to tell my kids: Nobody expects you to be perfect; when you do something wrong, the lying to try to cover it up is what we really can't stand.
^
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
LeBron's not humble? Duh! A pleasant surprise: Cuban is
^
Here's what LeBron said about all the haters shortly after he spit the bit and his Heat lost to the Mavs in the Finals:
"All the people that were rooting for me to fail … tomorrow they hafta wake up and have the same life that (they had) before they woke up today. They got the same personal problems they had today. And I’m gonna continue to live the way I wanna live and continue to do the things I want to do."
Arrogant? Sure. Bitter? Absolutely. Accurate? Mostly.
Almost certainly, LeBron has a better life than the vast majority of his haters. He's rich and powerful and loved by plenty of people. His comment might piss folks off, but I'm guessing that many of them would happily trade their lives for his.
Moreover, his comment is a pretty accurate assessment of how most pro athletes -- as well as big-time entertainers, moguls and other "haves" -- view the have-nots out here in Peon Land.
Pay hundreds of dollars to watch me play. Buy the sneakers and Nutella I'm selling. Worship me. And if you don't like something I do, screw ya ... I don't need ya, anyway.
It doesn't mean athletes are "good guys" or "bad guys." It's just the way it is.
It's not easy being humble when peons have been kissing your keister for most of your life.
---
And on a more positive note, how about Mark Cuban insisting he will pick up the tab for the Mavs' victory parade?
Dallas, like almost every city, is practically broke and has far more important bills to pay. Yet if Cuban didn't offer, the city certainly would have sprung for the celebration -- as pretty much every other city of a championship team has done forever.
Maybe this will start a trend: Billionaires not insisting upon handouts from their communities for things they can pay for using the loose change they find between their sofa cushions.
Maybe ... but I'm not holding my breath.
^
Here's what LeBron said about all the haters shortly after he spit the bit and his Heat lost to the Mavs in the Finals:
"All the people that were rooting for me to fail … tomorrow they hafta wake up and have the same life that (they had) before they woke up today. They got the same personal problems they had today. And I’m gonna continue to live the way I wanna live and continue to do the things I want to do."
Arrogant? Sure. Bitter? Absolutely. Accurate? Mostly.
Almost certainly, LeBron has a better life than the vast majority of his haters. He's rich and powerful and loved by plenty of people. His comment might piss folks off, but I'm guessing that many of them would happily trade their lives for his.
Moreover, his comment is a pretty accurate assessment of how most pro athletes -- as well as big-time entertainers, moguls and other "haves" -- view the have-nots out here in Peon Land.
Pay hundreds of dollars to watch me play. Buy the sneakers and Nutella I'm selling. Worship me. And if you don't like something I do, screw ya ... I don't need ya, anyway.
It doesn't mean athletes are "good guys" or "bad guys." It's just the way it is.
It's not easy being humble when peons have been kissing your keister for most of your life.
---
And on a more positive note, how about Mark Cuban insisting he will pick up the tab for the Mavs' victory parade?
Dallas, like almost every city, is practically broke and has far more important bills to pay. Yet if Cuban didn't offer, the city certainly would have sprung for the celebration -- as pretty much every other city of a championship team has done forever.
Maybe this will start a trend: Billionaires not insisting upon handouts from their communities for things they can pay for using the loose change they find between their sofa cushions.
Maybe ... but I'm not holding my breath.
^
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.JPG)
