STL Fantasy Football Draft Results...Ouch

Yep, it's official: I hate my fantasy team. The season can now begin.

For those who missed it, we have created a Sports Talk Live fantasy football league at FoxSports.com. The idea is to pit some of the STL talent and production staff against each other, with results and trash talk played out every Monday on the show. The ownership group includes myself, Mike Bianchi of the Orlando Sentinel, Chevy Tailgate Saturday analyst Brady Ackerman, former Cy Young winner Frank Viola, Todd Wright of ESPN Radio, Sports Talk Live producer Jamie Shapiro and director Mark Cassoni, and Sun Sports digital editor Mike Wargo. Without any hope of gathering that group for a draft (even via conference call), we each ranked our players and allowed the website to Auto-Pick our teams. All of this brings me back to my thesis, which is: I hate my team.

Jamie, as commissioner of our league, allowed the website to randomly select our draft order. I ended up with the sixth pick out of eight owners, which prompted an immediate protest from the front office of Moody Freaking Talent (the name of my franchise). Sadly, there was nothing I could do about it, so sixth is where I stood.

As I wrote in this space previously, I know squat about fantasy football, so I followed the advice of the writers at FoxSports.com's fantasy football page. My rankings were heavy with running backs up top - I was told that running backs win leagues - and slotted the QB's pretty low, with the exception of Manning, Culpepper, and McNabb. I ranked wideouts in the middle with the QB's, and placed tight ends, defenses, and kickers toward the bottom. Here's where I thought I was exceedingly clever - FoxSports.com allows owners in Auto-Pick leagues to choose how the computer fills your roster. You can take the highest ranked player available at every pick, which might leave you with holes to fill after the draft, or you can instruct the site to fill your starting lineup first, then fill your bench.

The third option, the one that I chose, was a combination of the first two. Fill every position with the highest ranked player who qualifies at that spot, even if that means filling starting spots and bench spots simultaneously. I figured, with an Auto-Pick format, that would give me the most depth and flexibility from week to week.

Remember that part where I told you that I top-loaded my rankings with running backs? Well, it worked, because every running back in the league is on my roster.

My two starters are Edgerrin James and Jamal Lewis. So far, so good. My flex position for week one is Stephen Jackson of the Rams. Still liking it. However, my bench - and I am not making this up - is filled with nothing but running backs.

Three of them are rookies: Cadillac Williams, Ronnie Brown, and Cedric Benson. Travis Henry, Brian Westbrook, and Duce Staley round out my reserves. That's eight running backs on a roster of fifteen spots. I'd like to talk to the guys who wrote the code for that "Auto-Pick" feature. Needless to say, I have already sent e-mails to three fellow owners, trying to move some of these RB's in exchange for, say, a backup QB, tight end, or wide receiver, of which I currently have none.

My wideouts are Chad Johnson of the Bengals (happy happy) and Isaac Bruce of the Rams (would have been happier if this was 1999). My kicker is Ryan Longwell of the Packers (for a kicker, I love his last name). My defensive unit is Atlanta, which makes me strangely excited. My tight end is Eric Johnson of the Niners, ranked as the 9th best at his position at FoxSports.com. I've never heard of him, but I read his bio on the website and discovered that he's from Yale, so my Ivy League loyalty prevents me from dumping him.

But here's where I really get worried: my quarterback (correction, my ONLY quarterback) is Ben Roethlisberger. Ouch.

Immediately, I began to scour the rosters of other teams in our league, to find out who had extra QB's (again, I've got loads of RB talent to trade). Bianchi, who proudly finished dead last in the Orlando Sentinel's fantasy league last year, managed to get five on his roster: Kerry Collins, Aaron Brooks, Joey Harrington, David Carr, and Byron Leftwich. He's got the numbers; what he doesn't have is any QB that I would actually trade for. Seeing as how he also landed LaDanian Tomlinson, Clinton Portis, Antonio Gates, and New England's defense, I'm thinking he may not be my preferred trading partner.

Jamie Shapiro, the producer of Sports Talk Live, also ended up with five QB's on his roster: Culpepper, Trent Green, Favre, Brees, and Jake Delhomme. His running backs are Domanick Davis and Kevan Barlow, two men who cannot spell their first names correctly AND cannot hold a candle to my embarassment of riches at the RB position. I'm all over that. Surely he can part ways with Favre, Brees, or Delhomme in exchange for Staley, Henry, or Westbrook. Negotiations are ongoing.

There were some odd results from the Auto-Pick feature. Brady Ackerman ended up with three defenses: Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and Washington. Wonder which one he'll try to trade. Frankie V has six wideouts. Mike Wargo, who held the eighth and final pick of the draft, somehow ended up with Priest Holmes, Willis McGahee, McNabb, Ahman Green, Hines Ward, Santana Moss, and Bubba Franks. However, he also landed Fragile Freddy Taylor, which may be the kiss of death. Mark Cassoni, the hockey fan, took Colts kicker Mike Vanderjagt in the eighth round, ahead of players like Brees, Henry, and Alge Crumpler. Perhaps he thought he was ranking goalies instead - you know, "kick-save" does sound a lot like "kicker." Point being, I hate my team.

Okay, "hate" is a strong word. I have grave concerns about my team, specifically its depth at everything except running back. I like my defense, and I like my kicker. I'm a wee bit wary about depending on a Yalie at the tight end position, but I can pick somebody up. Big Ben scares the hell out of me, as does Isaac Bruce. Did I mention that I have no backups at any of those positions?

For my fellow owners: James, Lewis, Jackson, Henry, Westbrook, and Staley are proven commodities. The rookies - Williams, Brown, and Benson - will get their carries. It's time to make a deal. Help a brother out.

Your suggestions are welcome, by the way. Keep me out of the cellar. Watch Sports Talk Live, every Monday at 7pm, for updates.

It's Fan-Tastic

Pop quiz: who won the NBA championship last spring?

You had to stop and think, didn't you?

Got an e-mail the other day with training camp dates for the Orlando Magic. First preseason game is October 11th, against Atlanta, while the Miami Heat start their preseason schedule three days later, against Memphis.

You WERE wondering, right? Is it me, or has this been perhaps the quietest off-season in league history? Has the NBA even occurred to you over the last couple of months?

Bill Simmons, the relentlessly brilliant columnist for ESPN.com, often refers to himself as one of the 17 remaining NBA fans in America. Count me as one of those lucky seventeen. I share Simmons' passion for the game, as well as his unspoken resignation that professional basketball is teetering perilously close to becoming a fringe sport.

If there's one thing I have learned in my two years back home in Florida, it is this: football, college or pro, is king. Nothing generates more interest or e-mail than a juicy pigskin story. As for the other major sports, baseball still captivates much of our audience, despite the breathtaking incompetence of its leadership and the surreal detachment of its player pool. The NHL is interesting in the same way that a train wreck is interesting. Professional golf still has Tiger to jack up the ratings. Through the dog days of summer, Lance Armstrong captured headlines, as did Venus Williams. The burly undercurrent of soccer and skateboarding motivates those under the age of eighteen. And through all of this, the hardcores among us search for news from the Association.

Where art thou, NBA?

I woke up this morning to discover, much to my dismay, that I was married, with two children, a mortgage, and a minivan. And I love my minivan. Somewhere, in the darkest recesses of my memory, there resides an image of the NBA as a driving force in sports.

It starts with Marv Albert standing on an apple crate next to Doug Collins, and Ahmad Rashad hoarding his stogies on the sideline, as the venerable Bob Costas prepped us for the national matchup on that Sunday morning. Michael Jordan was prominently involved. There was a day when professional basketball was a viable national sports property, and I can see it as clearly as I see my kids' shoes piled next to my front door. In all cases, I ask: what happened?

Some of the leading men are still around. Marv still calls games, and Ahmad still steals money as the host of "Inside Stuff." Shaquille O'Neal has gone from phenom of the century to wise sage, drawing players toward him like a bug light. Gary Payton still draws a paycheck despite, as Simmons once put it, the fork sticking out of his chest. But Jordan, Scottie Pippen, Hakeem Olajuwon, Charles Barkley, John Stockton, Karl Malone, David Robinson, Tim Hardaway, Patrick Ewing, Detlef Schrempf, Mitch Richmond, Kevin Johnson, and Reggie Miller, among others, are done.

When Reggie walked off the court this past spring, many an astute columnist lamented the end of an era, and I happen to agree. Miller was the last productive link to the cadre of talent I listed above, the post-Bird-and-Magic era when the NBA became, in the words of its most supportive network, "Must See TV." And note that I say "productive link" - I am well aware that Payton, Mutombo, the Davis boys, and Kevin Willis are all still in the league, but unlike those players, Reggie was actually relevant until the moment he quit.

I always loved Reggie. Them were fightin' words here in Orlando in the spring of 1995, when the Magic faced the Pacers in the Eastern Conference Finals. Reggie reveled in his role as villain, a persona that never quite fit him. Fact is, Reggie Miller was a great guy, the kind of dude you'd love to go have a beverage with, if you happened to be a Pacer fan. In a previous life, way back when the idea of a mortgage and minivan seemed foreign, I prowled the tunnels of the Orlando Arena as a Magic radio reporter, seeking interviews to make myself useful in the eyes of David Steele and Dennis Neumann, and Reggie was one of my favorite targets. He was one of those rare athletes that answered questions directly, and convinced the media that he actually gave a damn. As an added benefit, he was a cold-blooded killer.

Nobody showed up for big games like Reggie. I spent many hours of my youth watching him go through his pregame routine, shooting those splay-legged jumpers, honing that singular bent-arm technique that no coach would ever endorse, watching him work himself into a frenzy. In his last seasons as a pro, Miller developed a little ritual in which he would accept a cold drink from Pacers PR director David Benner, who would stand impassively as Miller berated him with a merciless stream of trash-talk, nose to nose. It was just so cool to watch. Reggie was creating his own in-game universe, and Benner was doing a part of his job that he clearly adored, and basketball was king. I hope I can adequately describe that scene to my kids someday, when they happen across a "SportsCentury" episode on Miller. Reggie was an assassin. His job was to shoot until his biceps melted, and he freaking dared you to stop him. We need more of that in sports today.

How did the NBA lose that? I could spend hours on the topic, but I'll give you this - I still love basketball, Reggie or no Reggie. The game wins, even if the players lose. Basketball is beautiful. It's a great game. The basics of the sport serve as a cautionary tale: move with purpose even when you're not the number one option, think three steps ahead, and get in the other guy's grill, and you'll play forever. Even if NBC has moved on to pro rodeo.

So anyway, I'm looking forward to the 2005 season. Dale Davis now plays for the Pistons. Shareef Abdur-Rahim is in Sacramento, I think. Eddie Jones was last seen heading to Memphis, where he'll swap draft stories with Jerry West. Shaq has convinced Jason Williams and Antoine Walker to come to Miami. Dikembe Mutombo has re-signed with Houston. Waiting in the wings are Marvin Williams, Chris Paul, Raymond Felton, Ike Diogu, Joey Graham, Danny Granger, and a host of other young bucks ready to make their mark. I still love this game, Reggie or no Reggie.

Shoot until your biceps melt, boys. There may not be as many of us watching as there used to be, but I will be there. If you keep your heads up and try just a little bit, you might even pull a few kids off their skateboards.

The Last Word

Straight from the Associated Press, in a story that crossed the wires at 3:16pm eastern time on Tuesday, August 23rd:

"The NCAA will allow Florida State to use its Seminoles nickname in postseason play, removing the school from a list of colleges with Native American nicknames that were restricted by an NCAA decision earlier this month.

The NCAA said it was recognizing the relationship Florida State has long enjoyed with the Seminole Tribe of Florida, which assists the university with its pageantry and celebration of its culture and supports the school's use of its name.

'The staff review committee noted the unique relationship between the university and the Seminole Tribe of Florida as a significant factor,' the NCAA said Tuesday. 'The decision of a namesake sovereign tribe, regarding when and how its name and imagery can be used, must be respected even when others may not agree.'

The NCAA said it would handle reviews from other schools on a case-by-case basis. The Illinois Fighting Illini, Utah Utes and North Dakota Fighting Sioux are among other prominent school nicknames that remain affected by the edict."

One statement from the home office in Kansas City, and there you go. No lawsuits, no protests. Ironically, this may come as a disappointment to some Florida State fans, who spent the last few weeks filling the message boards with stunningly creative methods of protesting the NCAA's initial ruling. I saw one post that suggested clothing the football team in all-black uniforms during the Miami game (to force ABC's announce team to explain to a national audience why they were doing so). I even heard one rumor suggesting that the Florida State grounds crew paint an enormous NCAA logo on the field at Doak Campbell Stadium, just so Chief Osceola would have a target for his flaming spear during his pregame ritual. One can only imagine the response from a fully-lubricated Tallahassee crowd.

In the end, however, cooler heads prevailed. As I have attempted to explain in this blog, and in private e-mails to readers, my number one complaint about the NCAA's ban on Native American nicknames had nothing to do with the history of any tribe, or any demeaning characterization that might be perceived by a logo on a helmet. For me, there was a bigger issue, and the NCAA's own statement summed it up:

"The decision of a namesake sovereign tribe, regarding when and how its name and imagery can be used, must be respected even when others may not agree."

Or, as I put it in my blog entry, dated August 11th: "...who the hell is the NCAA's executive committee to speak on behalf of any group, much less Native American tribes, without any due diligence or consultation from the groups in question? Taking the opinions of other Native American tribes is critical, obviously, but not as critical as incorporating the stances of those tribes directly affected by the ban. And as the NCAA's own vice president told us on live television, the executive committee failed to do so."

The dictionary defines "sovereign" as "self-governing; independent." The Seminole Tribe of Florida qualifies as both. I have been informed by a reader that there are, in fact, three Seminole tribes in Florida, only one of which maintains a well-publicized relationship with Florida State University. Curious, I looked up the other two.

The "Oklewaha Band of Seminole Indians," sometimes spelled "Ocklewaha" or "Ocklawaha," has attempted to receive official recognition several times, under different names - most recently as the Yamassee Seminole Tribe. According to various sources, the band has failed to successfully petition the state and federal government to date. The details are sketchy; there is even one newsgroup site that questions the band's legitimacy. I couldn't find any information regarding their numbers or location.

The "Independent Traditional Seminole Nation of Florida" is another non-federally recognized line that is frequently confused with the "Seminole Tribe of Florida" in news reports. The terms "tribe" and "nation" cannot be used interchangeably, but many writers and reporters have done just that in following the FSU story. According to a 1999 book by Winona Laduke called "All Our Relations: Native Struggles for Land and Life," there were about 300 Independent Traditional Seminoles
living in Florida's Everglades, maintaining their "language, culture, housing, ceremony, and way of life against the forces of colonialism, assimilation, globalization and all that eats cultures."

Again, I believe that sovereignty is the key question in the FSU mascot debate. As has been pointed out to me many times, The Seminole Tribe of Florida - a highly organized and relatively wealthy group that operates six casinos in Florida - is clearly not the only Seminole band in America. The opinions of other bands with the name "Seminole" must be considered in resolving the FSU question, no matter how cozy the relationship between the Seminole Tribe and the University. The Seminoles of Oklahoma have weighed in on this topic; the 18-2 council vote against support of the ban has become part of the growing legend of this story. We have heard little or nothing from the other two Florida bands mentioned above. My point, then and now: this question was never the realm of the NCAA in the first place.

As I pointed out in the blog: "The NCAA's executive committee -- NOT the NCAA itself, a voluntary congress of schools, but a committee -- has decided that the terms Sioux, Choctaw, Seminole, Illini, and Ute, among others, are offensive when displayed on athlete's jerseys. However, nobody from the NCAA has ever bothered to ask a living Sioux, Choctaw, Seminole, Illini, or Ute, among others, for their views on the matter...This, to me, is an egregious misuse of authority, and borderline racist in itself."

Among the many message board posts that emerged from that entry was one that directly attacked that line of argument, claiming that the many resolutions signed by various tribes nationally asking the NCAA to reconsider Native American nicknames was the "smoking gun" that proved me wrong. As I have written in this space, the opinions of any and all Native American tribes matter. But when the NCAA announced that it would "handle reviews from other schools on a case-by-case basis," it sounded to me like an admission of a mistake: someone in Kansas City finally decided to check with the Sioux, Choctaws, Seminoles, Illini, and Utes for their thoughts on the matter. Well done, if a little late.

The NCAA's executive committee, the body directly responsible for handing down this ruling in the first place, is made up of nineteen members. Two of them are female. All of them are school presidents, chancellors, athletic directors, or faculty representatives. And to the best of my knowledge - and the best knowledge of NCAA Vice President Charlotte Westerhaus, who appeared on Sports Talk Live and said as much - not a single one of them ever bothered to speak to any member of any tribe directly affected by the ban. Hence the phrase "egregious misuse of authority."

Note that I say "directly affected by the ban." Nobody in his right mind could argue that calling a team the "Redmen" or the "Savages" is proper. But calling a team the Sioux, or the Seminoles - that's another matter. A complicated one, to be sure, one that cannot be covered by a blanket resolution from nineteen predominantly white, predominantly male, predominantly middle-aged administrators.

So that's my point. The NCAA's executive committee passed a ruling affecting Native American symbols without consulting with the proper Native Americans. Instead, they asked schools to "self-report," information which they apparently disregarded. Is this story one of race, and perception, and history? Certainly. We're far from perfect in this country when it comes to cross-cultural relations, and our history regarding Native Americans is abhorrent. But as it pertains to what the NCAA actually does - regulate intercollegiate competition - this story is about sovereignty. And regardless of how you or anyone else feels about Native American mascots, the NCAA never had the right in the first place.

Small Ball

The wistful, vaguely patriotic theme music for ESPN's "50 States in 50 Days" promotion is a song called "Open Road," by Bryan Adams, who is Canadian. That, friends, is funny.

Randy Moss smoked pot? Really? Man, I never saw THAT coming. In a related story, the sun rose this morning.

That Kellogg's advertisement running during the Little League World Series, the one where Tony the Tiger leads a team of kids through infield drills while they chant a knockoff version of "We Are The Titans?" It's creepy. Somebody had to say it.

On that note - Sid Cash, the manager of the Maitland Little League team that has captured the hearts of Central Florida, used to coach in the North Orlando Kiwanis Little League, where I played for several years. In fact, I played against his son and his nephew, both of whom, like me, are now well into their 30's. When I watch his team today, Mr. Cash looks exactly the same as I remember him from when I was twelve years old. The twelve-year-olds, however, look like infants. I'm stopping this paragraph before it turns into a George Will column.

But while on the topic of Little League: if I were in charge, no kid would ever be allowed to throw a breaking ball. Ever. Fastball, changeup, maybe a cut fastball (two seams as opposed to four), that's it. If a kid leads with his elbow and snaps one off, the batter draws an automatic walk. I don't care how advanced your kid is physically, or how good his personal trainer is. No twelve-year-old should ever throw a curve. And whatever happened to a good change-up, anyway?

In my league, an immediate ejection for any manager who teaches a kid to lean into a pitch to draw a free pass. Ditto if he instructs a runner on second base to flash the catcher's signals to the batter. Give the kids extra batting practice, teach them to keep their butts down on ground balls and hit the cutoff man, and pay for the ice cream after the game. After that, hush up and let them play. Okay, so this did turn into a George Will column.

Last point, and you read it here first: there will come a day, maybe as soon as next year, when Little League is compelled to move their fences back from the uniform 205-foot distance. The kids are too big, and the bats are too hot. Make it 215, and raise the fences by two feet, and we're back in business.

Pure Fantasy

Good column this week in Sports Illustrated from Steve Rushin, who admits to "a shameful secret": he doesn't love the NFL. Rushin considers himself "the last American male who has never bet on a game, joined the office pool, belonged to a fantasy league, played the Madden video game or owned a TV larger than my garage door." When I read that, I felt like asking Steve if he was left on the doorstep of a convent, with half of a gold amulet around his neck. Fear not, my brother. I have found you.

Of course, my lax attitude towards the No Fun League is clearly not my fault. I grew up in Orlando, Florida in the early-to-mid-70's. If I wanted to follow an NFL team, my choices were the Buccaneers, only one of the worst expansion teams since the cast of "Joanie Loves Chachi," or the Dolphins, whose hometown of Miami was, in my adolescent Central Florida eyes, slightly less attractive than Beirut. Point being, I watched the Braves on cable, and never gave the NFL a second thought.

Now, as the host of "Sports Talk Live" on Sun Sports and a duly ordained Fox employee, I am forced to care. It's been a struggle. The only gambling I've ever done on NFL games has been plunking down a dollar on a square during a Super Bowl party. Office pools are quickly deleted from my Inbox. As the parent of two young children, I am philosophically opposed to video games, and while I do own a flat-screen LCD television, it's only because it was light enough for me to install alone in our corner cabinet. Plus, "The West Wing" is fantastic in 16:9 ratio.

However, I am now in a fantasy league. Again I say: it's not my fault.

Jamie Shapiro, the senior studio producer here at Sun Sports, came up with the idea. He has invited several "Sports Talk Live" regulars to take part in an NFL fantasy league on Foxsports.com, partially as a stunt for next week's STL show covering the topic, partially as a means to embarrass the on-air guys. Jamie and I are owners in the league, along with Orlando Sentinel columnist Mike Bianchi, who holds the distinction of finishing dead last in the newspaper's fantasy league last year. Other league invitees include Sun Sports' Paul Kennedy, former big leaguer Frank Viola (Orlando resident, STL regular, and self-described fantasy football geek), and ESPN Radio's Todd Wright, a Tampa resident and frequent statmonger on our show. Other invitations are floating out there, but that's the core group. The idea is to update the standings each week on our show, giving the panel plenty of ammo with which to pelt one another. I am in big trouble.

There are two sports I know well enough to actually compete in a fantasy league: the NBA and professional golf. For over a decade, I have taken part in a pro hoops league with several members of the Orlando Magic front office, whose hats I have handed back to them twice in the last five years. I won the league last year behind the stellar play of Paul Pierce, Amare Stoudamire, and Dwyane Wade - the last of whom I drafted in the second round amongst many snickers from my fellow owners. Little did they know that I saw every playoff game Wade played in 2004, having covered the Heat as Sun Sports' sideline reporter. He was the best player on the floor as a rookie, and I gambled that he would only improve as a sophomore. Bingo.

I also drafted Tracy McGrady in the first round last year, but traded him mid-season for Ray Allen and Shareef Abdur-Rahim - again, to the chuckles of my competitors. Aside from the obvious attraction of Jesus Shuttlesworth in a contract year, I was following my golden rule of fantasy basketball: only keep players I can actually stand to watch. After seeing T-Mac pull up for a three on the break for the 32nd straight game, his butt was on the block. Got Ray-Ray, got Reef, got another trophy.

My first fantasy hoop title, back in the 2001 season, was earned via a breathtaking draft night, during which I secured McGrady, Ben Wallace, and Jermaine O'Neal - all when they were still on the cusp of greatness - and followed that by acquiring Peja Stojakovic and Donyell Marshall in trades, giving up only a pre-MVP Steve Nash and an already-bloated Vin Baker in return. Damn, more I think about it, that WAS a great year.

Over those same years, I also took part in a golf pool with many current and former employees at ESPN, my old stomping grounds. I have a partner in that league, ESPN anchor Dave Revsine, who is the yin to my yang. He does the heavy research (his specialty), while I provide the instinct. See my previous column on Artists and Mechanics to gain a better understanding of why the Revsine/Watson team has won that pool once and finished in the top fifteen every other year. The rules of that league are interesting: at the beginning of the year (prior to the Mercedes Championships in Hawaii), entrants pick one player at every PGA Tour event up to and including the US Open. We call that the "first half." Other events in that span are the Champions Tour majors and selected European Tour events. Whatever your guy makes at his specified event, you make, and our "money list" determines the leaderboard. Just before the US Open, we pick players for the second half, up to the Tour Championship. That's it.

Only, that's not it. You can only use a player once per year. Read that again. Tiger and Vijay, among others, are good for three or four wins per season, so you gotta use them wisely - and even though you start by turning in picks only for the first half of the season, you must be smart enough to save some of the studs for the second half, especially in majors. This year, for example, I convinced Revver that Eldrick would win the Masters, a conversation that vaulted us into the top five. You also cannot use defending champions, can get penalized if Michelle Wie beats your player in a PGA Tour event (the "Wie Clause"), and have a chance to move up or down in the standings by taking optional picks at events like the US Amateur and the President's Cup. It's much less complicated than it sounds, and it gives you a reason to watch the John Deere Classic. As long as you do your homework, you'll contend.

So here I am now, entering an NFL fantasy league for the first time. Since I have absolutely zero history with this stuff, I have pretty much gone chalk with my research. Our "Sports Talk Live" league will be auto-picked for us by the Foxsports.com site, so I basically threw up my hands and ranked my players according to their average draft position (ADP, in the website's lingo). We are doing one QB, two running backs, two wideouts, one flex player, one defense/special teams unit, one tight end, one kicker, and six bench players. Max on the injured list is two. I read the cheat-sheet columns from the experts at Fox, and top-loaded my rankings with running backs and wideouts. I placed Baltimore's defense higher than it should be. I ranked Tony Gonzalez and the kid in San Diego as my highest tight ends. Payton Manning is the only QB I care about, and LaDanian Tomlinson is my overall number one. It's by the book. Needless to say, I will either lap the field and win this thing by twelve shots, or finish so far in the back that Bianchi's bald head will appear as a speck in the distance. There is no middle ground.

Here is my plea: if anyone has any strategy to offer, send it in. Again, this is an auto-pick league, so there's not much strategy to be had, but I'm willing to listen. If I win, I'll share the title with those who provided the secrets. If I lose, I get to blame you. Not much downside, as I see it. You can click on the "Reply" button and share your expertise - and in return, I'd be happy to share my basketball knowledge as the guy who has twice schooled an NBA front office in an NBA league. This is a win-win, people.

It's my cry for help. I admit my ignorance. Friends and neighbors, it's up to you. Keep watching "Sports Talk Live," Mondays at 7 on Sun Sports, for updates on how I'm doing.

And if you're watching the US Amateur next week - do me a favor and pull hard for Rhys Davies, willya?

A Man In Full

Sixteen months ago, Phil Mickelson was the Best Player Without A Major. Sixteen months later, he's halfway to a career Grand Slam. Fortunes can change on dime.

By the time he turned 33 years old, Jack Nicklaus had already won 11 professional majors - and would make it an even dozen during his 33rd summer, when he added the 1973 PGA Championship to his trophy case. That 12th major, by the way, came less than a month after Jack's fifth child was born.

From Michael Nicklaus's birthday - July 24th, 1973 - until right now, the Golden Bear won seven Grand Slam titles. Seven majors, while providing for five children. That, my friends, is clutch.

Phil Mickelson now has two majors on his resume' at the age of 35, the first of which came when he was 33. Mickelson, like Jack, barely knew the Tour as a single man. He and his wife, Amy, have known each other since college days back in Arizona, and now have three children, none older than six. While Tiger Woods has the playing record that most closely approximates Jack's at the same age, it is Mickelson who more closely resembles the young Bear in both girth and personal life.

I got to thinking about all of this as I watched Mickelson celebrate on the 18th green at Baltusrol on Monday with his wife and children. The two girls, Amanda and Sophia, are old hands at this, having lept into Daddy's arms sixteen months ago in Augusta. The spotlight means nothing to them. But Evan, the boy, had to be coaxed out on Monday morning, still a little shy around all those strangers. In the end, like it is in my house, the youngest one refused to allow the older ones to have all the fun.

When Tiger Woods got married, there were predictable editorials in print and TV media wondering if his "drive" would suffer. How could he maintain his record pace, they wondered, if he was burdened by honey-do lists and shopping trips at home? The possibility of fatherhood for Tiger further stirred up the critics. How does he maintain his edge if he's changing diapers? Never mind that Jack Nicklaus, of all people, was singing the praises of both marriage and fatherhood when asked.

I hope Tiger was watching Monday's finish closely. I hope he saw the look on Mickelson's face in the seconds that followed his winning birdie putt. First came the relief of finishing, then the joy of winning, and then - something else.

I saw it once before, about three years ago, when Lance Armstrong stood on the podium after yet another Tour de France win, holding his son Luke in that now-famous baby yellow jersey. Even while being interviewed on live television, Armstrong couldn't take his eyes off that kid. I know that look. It says, "I cannot believe how beautiful you are."

Lefty had it on Monday, and I hope Tiger saw it. It is the look of a man in full. You can be a father and husband, and be a champion. Jack did it, and Phil is doing it (and on that note, if Nicklaus could win seven majors with five kids, I see nothing to indicate that Lefty can't win seven with three kids).

Too often, we are focused on what's next, when we should be paying attention to what's now. Kudos to Mickelson for his second major - but I admire him more for how he looks at his kids. Tiger, don't be afraid. Fatherhood may not make you a better player, but it will make you a better man.

Quick Thoughts on Baltusrol, Second Round

1. No offense to Jim Huber, Dick Enberg, Jimmy Roberts, or any other sports announcer currently drawing a paycheck, but - does any big sporting event really need an "essayist?"

2. Again, I hate to harp on Huber, who I happen to think is very good, but he committed the cardinal sin of sports announcing during his post-round interview with Phil Mickelson - failing to actually ask a question.

You've seen this a million times. "Phil, you made a statement with your round today." Pause. Crickets chirping. Phil actually laughed as the two men stared at each other. You know what Lefty was thinking: "Yes, Jim, and you just made one too."

Imagine if Huber was interviewing Mickelson after a 75 instead of a 65, or imagine if he was interviewing Tiger during one of the Striped One's finicky moods. Woods would have given Huber a withering smirk, blurted something sarcastic, and then instructed Stevie to throw Huber into a water hazard.

Rule One, from the opening chapter of the Sportscaster's Handbook: ALWAYS ask a question.

3. In case you saw the leaderboard on Friday and were wondering: Yang Yong-Eun is a 33-year-old Korean who lives and plays in Japan. He was third on the Japanese Tour money list last year, with two wins. I have officially exhausted my Yang Yong-Eun knowledge.

4. Charles Barkley should be invited as a guest commentator for every event TNT televises. For that matter, I'd like to see him on Sun Sports, FSN Florida, Court TV, the Weather Channel, and Noggin.

Forget it - just give the man his own network. Seriously, is there anybody funnier on sports television? Or more terrifying to a network executive? There is absolutely no telling what might come out of his mouth.

5. Two words for Mickelson: Trucker Hat. Nobody looks good in a visor. Now, if we can just get the word out to the rest of the tour...

Native American, Continued

The previous blog entry regarding the NCAA's ban on Native American nicknames in postseason play generated enormous response - from readers, from viewers of our "Sports Talk Live" episode on the topic, and from the world at large. Of all that I have read on the subject, however, the following e-mail was, to me, the most striking.

The author holds both a Ph.D. and a J.D., and teaches law at a small college in California. We have never met, and I do not know how he came across my blog. I hope he won't mind that I published his letter to me, but just in case, I will keep his identity private. In the interest of fairness, I also included my response. This is terribly long, but I hope you will enjoy the debate as much as I did.

First, the e-mail, sent to me on August 10th:

"As someone who has studied issues of Native American culture and politics for years, I would agree with you that the FSU "Seminole" issue is a bit more complex than that of other mascots. Nevertheless, even your more nuanced summary doesn't really do justice to that complexity. The Seminole Tribe of Florida has indeed sanctioned the use of the Seminole mascot, but you don't point out:

First, about 75 percent of the Seminole live in Oklahoma, and the Seminole govts there are vigorously opposed to the use of the name. 75 percent is a lot of Seminole people, and the NCAA has to take that seriously. Apparently you disagree, but you don't explain why. Instead, you assert without explanation that one Seminole tribal government of Florida has the only opinion that matters on the issue (and not the other two - see point two below), and that the opinion of the majority of Seminoles "doesn't matter." I'm sorry; I just don't see how or why that should be
true.

Second, there actually are three Seminole tribes in Florida, and only one tribal govt-the one which uses the name "Seminole Tribe of Florida" - has formally signed on to the use of the mascot. I don't know the formal position of the other two Seminole govts, but it's wrong to misrepresent the opinion of one tribal govt as representing all Florida Seminoles.

Third, prior to getting the Seminole tribal endorsement, Florida State announced the establishment of scholarships covering 80% of tuition costs for "Seminole Scholars" recruited from reservations, and also announced plans to establish ties to a Seminole charter school and a branch campus in Immokalee, Fla. Florida State also has proposed the creation of a museum of Seminole heritage and culture on the Florida
State campus. The minority of Seminoles who agreed to the use of the mascot benefit from a quid pro quo that doesn't do much for the other Seminoles. And if those things are so valuable, why have they only come up when FSU is trying to save its mascot?

Finally, though a lot of FSU fans insist that their use of the Seminole mascot is not offensive, FSU fandom is full of references to "scalping," "the chop," being "on the warpath," and so forth, and these caricatures undeniably demean and trivialize Native American culture.

And when I say "undeniably," I mean that literally; there is simply no basis for denying it. These caricatures are specifically offensive because it was the caricature of Indians as savage and warlike - a carefully constructed image of Indians as barbarians incapable of living side-by-side with the settler society - that was used as the official reason from removing them from Florida (and elsewhere) and penning them up on reservations. People created these mascot images in the late 19th and early 20th century not as a way of celebrating local links to Indian
cultures or local animals, but to extol the physical prowess of their team. The earliest team names were from large carnivores: tigers, lions, leopards, etc. The animal doesn't feel demeaned, of course, and the metaphor works because it doesn't intend to imply that the team is like wild animals in all aspects of their life, only that they play with vigor and intensity similar to that we associate with peak predators. The step from wild animals to Indian mascots was unfortunately small, given the prejudice and stereotypes about Indians at the time.

Now, there's nothing wrong with calling a person brave and celebrating physical prowess in combat. Similarly, there's nothing inherently wrong with a caricature of an ugly person who is stingy or a caricature of a goofy child eating a watermelon, but when the images are applied to Jews or blacks, it becomes offensive, because those Shylock and Sambo caricatures were popularized specifically as part of the dominant society's efforts trivialize and exclude certain other groups. The same
is true here. The Seminole of the 19th century probably exhibited no more or less bravery and military skill than you'd find in most other cultures then or now. But whites explicitly justified their prejudices against the Seminole and other tribes by reducing their culture to only physical aggressiveness and ruthless fighting.

Let's be honest about the history of this imagery as we debate the meaning of the mascot. White society and the American government actually and intentionally said the Seminole were little more than fierce wild animals because this stereotype served the conscious plan to justify "removal," what we would now call the "ethnic cleansing" of the Southeast. For the heirs of those who did the ethnic cleansing to turn around and use that image as a source of amusement really isn't that funny, and can't really be justified as a celebration of the people who were the target of that removal."

Terrific stuff. Naturally, I couldn't wait to answer it - which I did, in a private e-mail back to my reader, also dated August 10th:

"Thank you for your thoughtful and well-reasoned note. This topic, which I covered in my blog and Sun Sports covered last Monday on our weekly talk show, "Sports Talk Live," has generated a predictable blizzard of response. As you might expect in football-crazy Florida, many of the responses have been blanket indictments of the NCAA - which I will get to in a moment. First, I wanted to address your points, step by step, because I find them extremely compelling and thought-provoking.

True, the Seminole Tribe of Florida is by no means the only group of Seminoles living in the United States. However, they are the only tribe of any lineage to enter into a bilateral agreement with Florida State University over the use of Seminole symbology. Should the NCAA, and FSU, take the Oklahoma Seminoles seriously? Of course. But are the Oklahoma Seminoles the sole arbiters of that name? Do their greater numbers give them greater authority? If 75 percent of the Seminole live in Oklahoma, does that imply that the opinion of the Florida Seminoles - who have drafted numerous resolutions stressing that they not only approve of FSU's athletic identity, but in fact are directly involved in creating it, via ceremony and consultation on the symbology - is somehow less relevant? Perhaps it is incorrect for me to state that the Florida Seminoles' opinion is "the only one that matters." I will grant that point. However, it is also incorrect to imply that their opinion is in any way less weighty than that of a tribe that lives by the same name in another state. There is also an argument to be made that Florida State University, being a school in Florida, might place a greater emphasis on the views of Seminoles IN Florida, but I can't speak for the Tribe, and I also grant that the line of argument is not the strongest in this case.

Further, there are legal issues that have only been touched upon to this point - do the Seminoles of Oklahoma own the rights to that name? Do the Seminoles of Florida? And if the Seminoles of Florida have entered into an agreement with FSU to "license" the name, does the NCAA ban constitute a violation of copyright law? Is the NCAA preventing an independent body from trading on their own name? Does the NCAA - a voluntary, non-governmental congress of schools - have the legal right to make such a decision? We might consider such questions trivial in light of the greater social issues, but they remain unanswered.

That there are three tribes in Florida using the Seminole name is indeed news to me, and has not been widely reported as part of this story. Good point, well taken.

Your third point, regarding Florida State University's efforts to recruit Seminole students, create ties to charter schools and branch campuses, and create a museum dedicated to Seminole heritage and history, seems to me to fall directly in lock-step with FSU's argument that their "Seminole" identity is indeed a method of honoring the "unconquered" spirit of the tribe, and incorporate its members into the University community. In fact, that paragraph you wrote sounds like something one might find in an FSU press release. To suggest that Florida State University would devote the time, money, and resources to such plans solely in response to an NCAA resolution regarding postseason tournaments seems illogical to me, and a tad cynical, but I have no proof otherwise. Having grown up in Florida (and with an immediate family member on the faculty at Florida State), I am more likely to give the school the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the altruistic nature of their relationship with the tribe. Then again, I'm not naive, either.

The tomahawk chop, face paint on football fans, terms like "warpath" and "scalping" - indefensible. I do not deny their demeaning nature, and if you go back into the blog entry in question, you'll see that I stand firmly in the camp of removing, as the NCAA put it, "hostile and abusive" terminology from college athletics.

Your lesson on the history of mascots as symbols of aggressiveness, barbarism, and physical prowess is spot-on. However, unlike many other colleges and universities that sport Native American icons, Florida State University has made a concerted and organized effort to incorporate the Seminole way into its community, going so far as to ask the Seminole Tribe of Florida itself to design the costume of "Chief Osceola" and even select his horse. This relationship dates back to 1978, when the Seminole Tribe of Florida created and approved the icon that we still see today on the field in Tallahassee. Again, we go back to the argument regarding the Florida Seminoles versus other Seminole tribes, but my point is this: the Seminole Tribe of Florida has been complicit in perpetuating this very public display of Seminole symbology for nearly thirty years. If Chief Osceola is offensive, the Seminoles of Florida are, in part, doing the offending. Who are we, or the NCAA, to tell them otherwise? Hold that thought.

With all due respect, however, this entire line of argument is completely subjective. Your views as one who has "studied issues of Native American culture and politics for years" competes with my view as a sports journalist and native of Florida, which competes with the views of the Seminole Tribe of Oklahoma, which competes with those of FSU and their fans, which competes with the views of the NCAA. We could go round and round on this for years and never achieve resolution, because we are speaking in bromides. To me, the crux of the entire issue regarding the NCAA ban on Native American symbols in postseason play is a very simple point, one that I have yet to see answered satisfactorily, not even from your thoughtful and articulate note:

The NCAA is a voluntary, non-governmental congress of 1300 member institutions. According to Charlotte Westerhaus, the NCAA's VP for Diversity and Inclusion (who was a guest on our show on Monday), the thirty schools in the US that carried potentially "hostile or abusive" Native American symbology were originally contacted in 2001 and asked to "self-report" (i.e., justify) their use of such symbols. Four years later, twelve of those thirty schools took steps deemed appropriate in the eyes of the NCAA to merit their removal from that original list. The remaining 18 were notified that unless they changed their athletic identities, they would not be allowed to display their team names or icons during NCAA postseason play, and would not be allowed to host NCAA postseason events.

Here's what bothers me the most: according to Ms. Westerhaus, at no time during those four years - and, as far as I know, at no time in history - has the NCAA ever directly contacted the tribes or nations in question. In other words, the NCAA's executive committee, made up of no more than 20 school presidents and administrators, has arbitrarily and capriciously handed down a ruling that affects the use of certain indigenous peoples' names - without ever consulting the people in question.

The NCAA's executive committee -- NOT the NCAA itself, a voluntary congress of schools, but a committee -- has decided that the terms Sioux, Choctaw, Seminole, Illini, and Ute, among others, are offensive when displayed on athlete's jerseys. However, nobody from the NCAA has ever bothered to ask a living Sioux, Choctaw, Seminole, Illini, or Ute, among others, for their views on the matter.

This, to me, is an egregious misuse of authority, and borderline racist in itself. Paul Kennedy, my co-host on "Sports Talk Live" on Monday night, termed it a "power grab." It's so far beyond the bounds of reason that I struggle to come up with an explanatory analogy. As Max Osceola, a Tribal Council member of the Seminole Tribe of Florida, stated in an interview with the Orlando Sentinel:

"History repeats itself. Once again, non-Indians are telling Indians what's good for them."

Frankly, I agree that the use of Native American symbology in athletics has serious limitations, but as I attempted to argue in the blog, there is an even more important question to be asked: who the hell is the NCAA's executive committee to speak on behalf of any group, much less Native American tribes, without any due diligence or consultation from the groups in question? Taking the opinions of other Native American tribes is critical, obviously, but not as critical as incorporating the stances of those tribes directly affected by the ban. And as the NCAA's own vice president told us on live television, the executive committee failed to do so. On a broad scale, you're dead right on virtually every point you make. On a practical scale, the only people in America who are truly qualified to make these decisions have been completely excluded from the process. Middle-aged white men in lofty offices have rendered judgment on those they deem unable to defend themselves, and have lessened those "poor souls" in the process. It smacks of a crusade. Truly, history repeats itself. Have we learned nothing?

I lack a law degree, but this is the best I could do with my critical reading skills from the English department at Cornell. Again, I thank you for your note, and beg forgiveness for the length of this answer. I look forward to hearing your opinion again as this story plays itself out. If this topic is covered in any of your classes, I'd love to know what opinions take shape.

Very truly yours,

Whit Watson"

As of Thursday night, August 11th, still no answer. I'm intrigued. Maybe he's passing this note on to his law school classes, to have them take it apart; maybe he's decided that I am beyond help. The good news is, the discussion has been advanced, rationally and thoughtfully. To me, that makes this blog worth the effort.

WWCOD? (What Would Chief Osceola Do?)

So I'm watching ESPNEWS on Friday night, listening with one ear as an anonymous anchorperson is reading a story about the NCAA banning "hostile or abusive" Native American nicknames from appearing in postseason tournaments. Seeing as how we at Sun Sports devote a great deal of our time and energy to a group called the Seminoles, the story captures my attention. The anchor concludes his story by revealing that Florida State University president T.K. Wetherell is pursuing legal action against the NCAA, calling this ruling "both outrageous and insulting."

Out of nowhere, I found myself saying the following out loud: "Damn right, T.K."

This was a stunning upset in my house. When asked, I define myself as a social liberal and a fiscal conservative - like most average Americans, I suppose. Everybody should be free to do whatever the hell they want to do, but I hate paying taxes. You know the drill. My visceral reaction to this story really surprised me. So, in order to judge this fairly, I read up on the story online, making sure that I paid equal attention to every statement from both sides.

Since the NCAA does not conduct a true national championship in Division I football (a topic for another blog), this ruling means nothing to the bowl games that are so important to schools like FSU. In addition to "hostile or abusive" nicknames being removed from uniforms, Native American mascots will be banned from performing at NCAA tournament events, and starting in 2008, the cheerleaders and marching bands will also be compelled to wear uniforms that are free and clear of any and all "hostile and abusive" Native American icons.

The reaction, to quote directly from the Associated Press story: "Vernon Bellecourt, president of the National Coalition on Racism in Sports and Media and a member of the Anishinabe-Ojibwe Nation in Minnesota, approved of the ban but had hoped the NCAA would take even stronger action. 'We're not so happy about the fact that they didn't make the decision to ban the use of Indian team names and mascots,' he said."

I gave the story its due diligence. I listened to both sides. I read the statement from the Seminole Tribe of Oklahoma, which takes a far dimmer view of Florida State's relationship with the Seminole Tribe of Florida. After many deep breaths and careful consideration, calling upon my reservoir of 15-plus years of experience in sports journalism, I came to a thoughtful conclusion: Damn right, President Wetherell.

This is insane. It's not insane to view certain Native American nicknames as offensive - it's difficult to rationalize names like Savages (SE Oklahoma State), Redmen (Carthage College), or Indians (numerous schools). What's insane is that the NCAA, which is not an official United States government organization in any way, shape, or form, would have the audacity - the unmitigated gall - to make decisions on behalf of any other group without express consent or cooperation. According to their own website, the NCAA is "a voluntary organization through which the nation's colleges and universities govern their athletics programs." It is not an arbiter of taste, or ethics, or social justice. It is a body that conducts national sports tournaments. To save time, here is the NCAA's mission statement, again lifted from their own website:

http://www2.ncaa.org/about_ncaa/overview/mission.html

Please note the passage regarding "Respect for institutional autonomy and philosophical differences." Clearly, what we have here is a philosophical difference.

Not only does Florida State University have the complete consent and cooperation of the Seminole Tribe of Florida, the Seminoles themselves have a vested interest in this ruling. Our Sun Sports sources in Tallahassee have explained to me that the Seminole Tribe has remained cooperative in essentially "licensing" the Seminole name over the years because they fear the precedent set otherwise - if the NCAA can legislate Native American names out of college athletics, the reasoning goes, the next step is the U.S. Government's removal of many of the tax breaks and autonomy currently enjoyed by those same tribes. Plus, we can safely assume that the Seminole Tribe, which pays nearly $3.5 million dollars a year in federal payroll taxes, gets a nice PR bump from seeing their name on the backs of Florida State athletes.

One thing I have learned in those fifteen years - when in doubt, follow the money. If the Seminoles are not complaining about FSU's use of their name, they must be seeing a tangible benefit. I will admit, however, that I have no idea how the Illini, Chippewa, Utes, or Sioux feel about their names being applied to football teams, nor do I have any information as to how those tribes benefit from the association with college sports.

Point being, the NCAA has missed the point.

For my Seminole bretheren out there, some bad news: the NCAA is free to do whatever it wants to do. If schools like FSU wish to compete in NCAA postseason tournaments, they have to play by the NCAA's rules. It's worth mentioning that Texas Tech basketball coach Bob Knight has attacked the NCAA over the last few days for acting as a "monopoly," a sentiment that might have been viewed as paranoid were it not for the simultaneous news regarding Native American mascots. Fact is, the NCAA IS a monopoly. It is the organization that most accredited colleges and universities bow to in order to participate in lucrative athletic competition. There are no other options, other than the NAIA or complete independence, neither of which will fill luxury boxes at Doak Campbell Stadium. The NCAA is the only game in town, and their governors are free to make judgements on anything. My argument is this: they judged poorly.

In all that I have read and heard on this story, I have yet to hear any compelling evidence that suggests that the Seminoles nickname is in any way "hostile or abusive," at least, according to the Seminole Tribe of Florida itself, which is the only group whose opinion matters in this case. If they are on board, with all due respect, it doesn't matter what the Seminoles of Oklahoma think, nor the NCAA, nor the national media, nor anyone. I'm not against removing offensive Native American nicknames from sports in this country - but I am dead-set against the NCAA, which knows little or nothing about the long history of Florida State University and the Seminole Tribe of Florida, attempting to legislate morality, particularly when the repressed group in question wants nothing to do with them, and in fact has stated publicly that they're on board.

The NCAA is doing what it believes is right. On that, I give them the benefit of the doubt. But this is insane.

President T.K. Wetherell is scheduled to appear on "Sports Talk Live" on Monday at 7pm on Sun Sports. Assuming that he is able to make his appearance, I plan to give him every opportunity to explain all of this in greater detail. Further, we are making every effort to bring in a guest from the other side of this question, be that someone from the NCAA, the National Coalition on Racism in Sports, or another Native American tribe that takes an opposing stance. I want you all to hear both sides of this issue. But I'll be honest - it will take an extremely compelling argument to sway me off of my stance, which remains pretty simple:

Damn right, T.K. Let 'em know, brother.

Irony Can Be Pretty Ironic Sometimes

The much-discussed Internet Culture episode of Sports Talk Live featured a pretty sharp comment from Mike Bianchi (I know, I was as stunned as anyone) regarding the future of internet sports coverage. He opined that more and more "fan" sites would be swallowed up by larger media companies in the coming years, as those Big Box outlets realized the power of local coverage and internet communities.

Hear it on Sports Talk Live, see it happen the next day.

Later that same week, it was announced that Fox Media Interactive (FMI) had acquired Scout.com, the sports content provider with over 200 local, team-focused websites and 47 publications (through Scout Publishing). Jim Heckman, the 39-year-old founder of Scout.com, had this to say in a release, in between doing back flips and rocketing champagne corks across his Seattle office:

"Fox is a dream partner for our network of team sites and publications because of its dominance in team broadcast rights. When you consider Fox's massive online reach, proprietary video infrastructure and the power of the worldwide brand, I couldn't imagine a better combined product for sports fans. I think it will immediately revolutionize the online sports industry."

Translation: Fox, through the Fox Sports Net (FSN) regional cable networks (which include both FSN Florida and Sun Sports), already holds the local broadcast rights to 62 of the 82 U.S.-based teams in the NBA, NHL, and MLB. Put that access together with the 200 Scout.com sites - which include Gatorcountry.com and RenegadeReport.com - and well, that's a mountain of content, in both directions. And we haven't even touched all the college sports covered by the FSN regionals - like the Chevy Tailgate Saturday block of pregame, postgame, and highlight shows on Sun Sports, not to mention the "Breakfast with the Gators" and "Prime Time Noles" replays during football season. I've already heard from Ray Hines at Gatorcountry and Dave Peters at Renegade Report, and we all agree that this is good news.

Picture a RenegadeReport.com writer filing a story for "Chevy Tailgate Saturday" after practice in Tallahassee. Picture the spies from Gatorcountry.com coming on "Sports Talk Live" with updates from a prized recruit's living room. Picture streaming video of Sun Sports' live postgame shows showing up on both sites. Picture Sun Sports talent as columnists for Scout.com sites (which, in the case of Brady Ackerman and Gatorcountry, is already happening).

All of that is conjecture at this point, but it's all possible. Nothing is out of bounds. Damn, Mike, you hit it on the head.

Backstory: as many of you may remember, Fox attempted to compete with ESPN head to head a few years ago with the "National Sports Report," a studio show that aired on various FSN regionals. While the show was well-produced, the regionalization of the FSN brand proved to be a stiff challenge when up against ESPN, which can show the same shows at the same time to virtually every cable household in America. The FSN's, with their heavy schedule of NBA, NHL, and MLB games each night, had no way of uniformly scheduling the National Sports Report from week to week. And thus, the National Sports Report faded away, leaving us woefully short of our daily dose of Van Earl Wright.

God, I loved him back in the CNN Headline News days. Did you know he went to high school with my cousin in Atlanta? Did I just say any of that out loud?

Anyway, once it was apparent that Fox could not beat ESPN in the national sports studio show game, the minds in Los Angeles did a very smart thing - began to even MORE aggressively pursue local TV contracts with non-NFL pro teams. As I wrote above, 62 of the 82 U.S.-based teams in the NBA, hockey, and baseball are now seen on FSN regional networks. In the case of FSN Florida and Sun Sports, that includes the Panthers, Lightning, Magic, Heat, Marlins, and Devil Rays - every non-NFL pro team in the state of Florida.

As it turns out, ESPN's biggest strength - its overriding national reach - was also a weakness. As Fox likes to say, "All sports are local." ESPN may carry Major League Baseball three or four nights a week in season, but if you're in Pittsburgh, you might care less about an Angels-Yankees matchup on a Tuesday night. On the other hand, under another new deal announced this week, you Pittsburgians can now watch the Pirates for at least 120 nights a season on FSN Pittsburgh - the same way that South Florida sees the Marlins on FSN Florida. Plus, why sit through fourteen minutes of "SportsCenter" on why Joe Torre scratched his nose this morning when you can get in-depth coverage of the teams you care about on your local Fox regional?

Fox turned the regionals into its greatest sports asset by keeping it local. Turn a perceived weakness into a strength. Do what you do best, and attack the OTHER guy's weak spot. That's smart business. And it has been, for several years now.

As an aside, while I was working at ESPN, the minds in Bristol seriously considered starting their own set of regional networks to compete with the FSN's on the very same playing field. ESPN went so far as to create an "ESPN West," which was theoretically going to regionalize games in Southern California - remember, this was back when Disney owned both ESPN and the Angels. For the record, Disney still owns ESPN, but the Angels have been sold, and their games are currently seen on - wait for it - FSN West. So you can guess how the ESPN plan turned out. ESPN Regional does produce college football and basketball games for specific areas, but they don't have any 24-hour, distinct regional channels.

Anyway, with Fox so strong in regional television, and Scout so strong in regional internet, this marriage makes perfect sense. You get coverage of the teams you care about, on a daily (and sometimes minute-by-minute) basis, with the mighty resources of Fox and Scout combined. Jim Heckman says it will revolutionize the online sports industry. I'm not arguing with him.

What does it mean for us? Truth be told, we don't know yet. Stay tuned. What I do know is this - everyone in the Sun Sports/FSN Florida offices is pretty geeked about it, and I know that Ray (Gatorcountry) and Dave (RenegadeReport) are dreaming up new initiatives as we speak. Who wins in this deal? You do. More is more, especially during football season.

And it looks like Mikey was on to something.

Artists and Mechanics

Did I ever tell you about my theory of Artists and Mechanics? It's a beauty.

In short, I believe that the world is split into two groups: Artists and Mechanics. Some might call it right-brain and left-brain, but I think Artists and Mechanics is much more lyrical and descriptive. Artists tend to be big-picture types, unconcerned with mundane details. They're strong on the "why," but weaker on the "how." Process is irrelevant; experience is everything. An Artist would take you to a baseball game at Fenway Park and wax eloquent about the history of the Fens, the smell of the simmering sausages, and the deep-rooted passion of Red Sox Nation - but he has no idea what David Ortiz's batting average is, and will probably get off at the wrong T stop on the way home.

A Mechanic, on the other hand, thrives on process. The "how" supercedes the "why." Details bring joy. Learning how to accomplish a new task is a thrill. If we use golf as an example, a Mechanic would highlight passages from Jim McLean's "Eight Step Swing," and practice one specific move over and over again until muscle memory rendered it perfect, while an Artist would read "Golf in the Kingdom" twelve times and plan a trip to Ireland (doubly ironic, and typical of an Artist, because Shivas Irons was supposedly a Scot). Mechanics are methodical and repetitive, and terribly reliable.

Artists need Mechanics, and vice versa. One cannot survive without the other. I would submit that if you took a hard look at those friends in your life whom you consider to have truly healthy marriages, one spouse would be an Artist and the other a Mechanic. Artists need Mechanics to look up the directions to the Eiffel Tower. Mechanics need Artists to convince them to take the elevator to the top, and look around. In my life, my dad is a hard-core Mechanic, and my mom is a hopeless Artist. Closer to home, I am the Artist, and Mrs. Watson is a Mechanic, and thank God for her.

Run through your laundry list of your favorite athletes of all time, and you can easily peg each one as an Artist or a Mechanic. Lance Armstrong is perhaps the greatest Mechanic ever to strap on a pair of tight shorts. Ali was pure Artist. Michael Jordan looked for all the world like an Artist - and I'll admit he crossed over into that realm at times - but if you saw him practice, you knew he was a Mechanic at heart. Gretzky? Artist. Tiger Woods? Mechanic, by a mile. Joe Montana was an Artist, as was Steve Young, but Dan Marino, Troy Aikman, Payton Manning, and most other great NFL quarterbacks were Mechanics.

I don't claim to have come up with this completely on my own - I'm sure I read something somewhere that planted the seed of this theory - but I have worked hard to refine it, and I've never heard anyone else speak of it. There's a point to this.

Shaquille O'Neal is a Mechanic. Blessed with perhaps the most advanced set of physical gifts in the history of the NBA, he has, in the course of his thirteen professional seasons, mastered a grand total of three offensive moves:

1. Set up on left block, receive entry pass, turn over right shoulder to baseline, fallaway one-handed jumper.

2. Set up on left block, receive entry pass, turn over right shoulder to baseline, fake a fallaway one-handed jumper, step in for right-handed layup (because he has no left hand).

3. Set up on either block, receive entry pass, kick it back out, shove his butt into the midsection of the poor sap guarding him, bulldoze three feet closer to basket, receive another entry pass, dunk with two hands, make defender cry.

Understand that I am in no way knocking Shaq. He's a first-ballot Hall of Famer with those three moves, and potentially the most dominant center who will ever live. But as I said before, I believe that every Mechanic - even Shaq - needs an Artist. In Los Angeles, he had the Artist Known As Kobe, and it won him three rings. In Miami, he had Dwyane Wade (come on, anyone who spells his name like that MUST be an Artist), and he got one game away from the NBA Finals this year.

Here's why the rest of the league should be quivering tonight: the Heat just pulled off a deal to bring two more Artists and one more Mechanic to Miami.

Antoine Walker? Artist. Struggles with authority, takes whatever shot occurs to him at the moment, can play four positions when needed. The Heat got Twan at a bargain rate, nearing the twilight of his career, and may end up using him as a sixth man. Jason Williams, needless to say, is a preeminent Artist. He can make a bounce pass look like a Picasso painting. When he buys into what his coach is selling, as he did in Memphis under Hubie Brown (also an Artist), he can be a breathtakingly good point guard. Expect Pat Riley to move his office next to Williams' locker. James Posey, the other big name in the deal, is a Mechanic. Put him next to Miami native Udonis Haslem - maybe the hardest working Mechanic in the league today - and throw Artist Dwyane out there, and Miami is the whole picture.

Miami fans may be sad to see Eddie Jones go (6-7, shooting guard, Temple, Mechanic), but the Heat needed a lot more Artistry, and a little more Mechanical. They got both in the deal. And it all came about because Shaq, who once said he would never accept a below-market deal as Kevin Garnett once did in Minnesota, took less money to stay in Miami. Clearly, he saw the big picture.

Wait a minute. Maybe Shaq has a little Artist in him after all.

The Envelope Please...

Matthew, you have already won!

Matthew, last name withheld to protect the innocent, was the first reader to reply to an entry on this blog. He provided a thoughful, complimentary comment on the Internet Culture edition of Sports Talk Live from August 1st. He pointed out that the "old" media better get in step with the "new" media, and right quick, because that's where sports information is going in the 21st century. Reasoned, well-informed, and completely devoid of any clever wordplay on my name: THAT'S the kind of response that will get you noticed in my world, people.

For this, Matthew, I give you my sincere gratitude and undying respect. I'm still working on better prizes than that, but it's all I got right now.

Thanks also, Matt, for confirming that the "Reply" button actually works.

LOL :-)

So how did the big Internet Culture special on Sports Talk Live turn out? Depends on who you ask.

For those who missed it, the idea was to put representatives of the "new media" (internet) in a room with "old media" (radio, print, TV) and let them duke it out over topics like recruiting, message boards, rumor control, journalism versus rooting, the whole nine yards. The panel included Bianchi and Brady, plus Pat Dooley of the G-ville Sun, Steve Ellis from the Tallahassee Democrat, and three website administrators from sites that cover Florida, Florida State, and Miami: Marty Cohen (gatorbait.net), Jim Lamar (warchant.com), and Sean Delaney (miami-hurricanes.com).

Brilliant, right? Of course it was. My idea, after all.

One small problem, as Ray Hines of Gatorcountry.com pointed out: too many people, not enough time. We did one hour and could have done two, easy. The topic is simply too big to cover in sixty minutes. I felt like there were conversations left short. Still, I liked the big panel idea, because it brought the show "out of the box," to use a nebulous marketing-guy term that I really hate.

Many fans on some of the FSU sites were ripping the show afterwards, saying it was "pro-Gator." Everyone gather around the campfire one more time: Sun Sports is pro-everybody. A rising tide lifts all boats. If you'll check the first blog entry below, you'll see my position on this. In a perfect world, every team in the state goes 11-0 every year. It's good for business. But you can't make everyone happy.

I will grant you this: the panel was tipped toward UF alums. Then again, I can't control where these guys went to college, and they had to go somewhere. I've learned in the last 48 hours that Mike Bianchi, to many Florida State message board fans, is the Antichrist himself. Who knew that the Prince of Darkness was so short?

It's amazing what people hear, and remember. The same 60 minutes of content is interpreted one hundred different ways, usually to fit the preconceived notions of the viewer. People on fan sites looking for ways that Sun Sports is "anti-FSU" will derive four pages of subtle meaning from a 15-second Bobby Bowden sound bite. You hear what you want to hear, and you see what you want to see, and never let the truth get in the way of a good rant.

I would love to do this show again. If I can talk the people at Sun Sports into it, my plan is to post a message on every fan site in Florida, basically dropping the gauntlet. You think you can program a TV show? Do it. Tell me the guest list, tell me the topics you want covered regarding the internet, tell me exactly what you want to see, and you'll see it. That way, at the end of night, nobody can bitch. Okay, they WILL bitch, but I'd have a built-in defense.

The odds of me getting this idea past the decision-makers at Sun Sports? Slim and none, and Slim just left town. But I'll work on it.