CBS, you’re making me very angry.
Why? Well, for those of us who try and watch football games – and only have one CBS feed – watching NFL games can become a real pain. Due to what I imagine was rule that only some madman would think up, you cannot watch overtime games – unless you are in the local market.
And that stinks.
This isn’t the first time I’ve fallen prey to this rule. Last year, when I was watching the Giants play the Vikings in some regular season game the same thing happened – due to that very rule, FOX had to cut away to some other game and I was left waiting for The FOX Game Break (brought to you by McDonald’s) to see who won (As I recall, I’m pretty sure that the Giants won on a field goal).
See, after the Heidi game (When CBS infamously cut away from a Raiders/Jets game to show the movie Heidi – and viewers missed a huge comeback by the Raiders), I thought stuff like this wasn’t supposed to happen. But it does – it’s stipulated in the TV contracts for the NFL. Technically, CBS was supposed to say they were sorry and cut to the next game.
And that’d have been fine – if there was a game to cut to. Unlike the viewers who have DirecTV, my CBS feed (WIVB Buffalo) only had one game today so I got to see … Er, Shannon Sharpe, Dan Marino, James Brown and Boomer Esiason watching the Steelers game, with the occasional clip of game play. Of course they didn’t show the game-winning field goal or any of the overtime (I got to see the first attempted field goal towards the end of regulation, but missed the other two).
So this has got me thinking – what’s the point of a rule like this? Yes, I understand the rule as it stands toward Doubleheaders, but why couldn’t CBS show the game in its entirety for stations that only have one game? How different is it then having bonus coverage, like last week when I got to see the end for a total of four different games? What market are we violating? The Bills game had already ended – so there goes the home market theory. There was no other game to cut to – there goes the contractual obligations.
So why cut away? Didn’t we learn anything from the Heidi incident? Didn’t we learn anything from the days that the CBC would cut to news at 11pm, regardless of overtime? Didn’t we learn that people, such as myself, like to watch the whole game?
I suppose not. See you at the game-break-quick-score-update-highlight.
Monday, October 23, 2006
Friday, October 20, 2006
Opening thoughts on the 2006 World Series
I guess the last week of the season means nothing. Seriously, does it? The New York Mets and the New York Yankees – the two teams I assumed would meet in the World Series – have both been eliminated in the playoffs.
And teams that seemingly fell apart at the end of the season beat them both.
For the Tigers, it was a huge skid – they lost the AL Central title to a Twins team that ripped off something like 45-3 towards the end of the season (Okay, that’s an exaggeration, but still) to a red hot Twins team. A team that was on such a roll they lost to the A’s in four games. Right. The Tigers have been, well, rather powerful. They embarrassed the Yankees in the opening round and soundly defeated the A’s in ALCS. They deserve to be in the World Series – there’s no doubt about that – but still, this is the same team that blew a huge lead in the AL Central at the end of the season.
The other team – the St. Louis Cardinals – pulled the same stunt, on a much larger scale. They dropped something like 12 games in a row before the playoffs, almost losing their spot to the Houston Astros. And they had a worse record then the two teams they beat – the San Diego Padres and the New York Mets – to boot. Granted, they limped through the playoffs – they only won game seven on the ninth – but still. We now have the World Series for 2006 all set.
And both teams skidded into the playoffs.
I’m not even going to go into what the last week of the season means. Some guy at Baseball Prospectus can do that – he’s about a million times more qualified, actually – and hell, it’s an article I’d read. Right now… Well, I’m going to try and let the idea sink in…
The two teams that I least thought would make it – including one that I didn’t even think would make the playoffs in September – are in the World Series.
Jeez, what’ll happen next? Will the Texan’s whip out a string of victories and win the Super Bowl? Will the Columbus Blue Jackets win a Stanley Cup? Will the Knicks win the Finals? Hopefully not - I'd like to keep my sanity, if I could, please.
And teams that seemingly fell apart at the end of the season beat them both.
For the Tigers, it was a huge skid – they lost the AL Central title to a Twins team that ripped off something like 45-3 towards the end of the season (Okay, that’s an exaggeration, but still) to a red hot Twins team. A team that was on such a roll they lost to the A’s in four games. Right. The Tigers have been, well, rather powerful. They embarrassed the Yankees in the opening round and soundly defeated the A’s in ALCS. They deserve to be in the World Series – there’s no doubt about that – but still, this is the same team that blew a huge lead in the AL Central at the end of the season.
The other team – the St. Louis Cardinals – pulled the same stunt, on a much larger scale. They dropped something like 12 games in a row before the playoffs, almost losing their spot to the Houston Astros. And they had a worse record then the two teams they beat – the San Diego Padres and the New York Mets – to boot. Granted, they limped through the playoffs – they only won game seven on the ninth – but still. We now have the World Series for 2006 all set.
And both teams skidded into the playoffs.
I’m not even going to go into what the last week of the season means. Some guy at Baseball Prospectus can do that – he’s about a million times more qualified, actually – and hell, it’s an article I’d read. Right now… Well, I’m going to try and let the idea sink in…
The two teams that I least thought would make it – including one that I didn’t even think would make the playoffs in September – are in the World Series.
Jeez, what’ll happen next? Will the Texan’s whip out a string of victories and win the Super Bowl? Will the Columbus Blue Jackets win a Stanley Cup? Will the Knicks win the Finals? Hopefully not - I'd like to keep my sanity, if I could, please.
Thursday, October 05, 2006
The MVP Race - AL Edition
The American League Most Valuable Player award race has been narrowed down to three players: Derek Jeter of the New York Yankees, David Ortiz of the Boston Red Sox and Justin Morneau of the Minnesota Twins. One is having a great at the plate, one is having a great season on the field and another has led his team into a fantastic run into the postseason. But only one can win the award - who's it going to be?
Derek Jeter
As far as statistics go, Derek Jeter is having a decent year. He's ranked #5 overall in on-base percentage (.414), 31st in slugging (.481) and his batting average is #3 overall (.340). But Derek's one of the reasons that the Yankees - who, as I recall, have never been lower then second in the AL East this season - stayed competitive throughout the season, even when they were decimated by injuries to key players like Matsui or Sheffield.
Unlike David Ortiz or Justin Morneau, Derek Jeter has shown that he's a catalyst for a great team - a team that came from three games back and decimated the Red Sox in Boston, then went and took a commanding 11 game lead of the AL East. And even though he's posting some not-so-great numbers in fun stats like Home Runs (14) or RBI (96), Jeter has shown that he's still a threat during his at-bats with his on-base being higher then those of both Ortiz and Morneau. If the Yankees win the World Series this year, you can be sure that Derek Jeter will have been a huge part of it.
David Ortiz
Despite falling apart during the second half of the season, Ortiz has been absolutely fantastic at the plate this year - but then again, as the Designated Hitter, he has to be. He's set the record for Home Runs hit by a Red Sox player (52 and counting), he's posted a completely unbelievable slugging percentage (.631) a great on-base (.404) and a Walk/Strikeout ratio of 0.95 - meaning he's just as likely to walk as he is to strike out (always a good thing).
But is batting simply enough? Maybe so - he kept winning games all season long for the Red Sox. Something like 11 times this year alone Ortiz had a game-winning walk-off hit. When the Red Sox were leading the AL East earlier this year, Ortiz had a big, big role. But will voters be able to overlook his team's failure in August? Does Ortiz deserve to suffer due to the collapse of players like Papelbon or Schilling? The answer is simple - no. Is he, however, more deserving then Jeter is?
No. When you take everything into effect - batting, fielding and success of their team - over this season, what David Ortiz does is cool and fun to watch... But he's not as valuable to his team as much as Jeter is to his.
Justin Morneau
The Twins are a great story this year - they roared from third place and fading up to, and on the last day of the season, they clinched the Al Central as the Tigers fell apart, blowing a seven game lead.
Justin Morneau was a big, big part of their success. He's had one of his best years to date in 2006, batting in 130 runs, having a solid on-base (.375) and having a great slugging percentage (.559 ). When the Twins came roaring back into the race (first for the AL Wild Card and finally for the AL Central pennant) Morneau was there. It started in July, when he hit for a .700+ slugging percentage and he never looked back - and neither did the Twins. The Twins first overtook the 2005 World Series champion Chicago White Sox, then Boston Red Sox, who had led the AL east for most of the season, and finally won the AL Central, getting past the Detroit Tigers, on the last game of the season.
But, once again, is he better then Jeter? Kinda-sorta-not-really. Where Morneau's managed to out-hit Jeter in home runs, Jeter just missed the AL batting title, and had a combined OPS (on base + slugging) of .900 this year; Morneau had an OPS that was just higher, with .934. Jeter led his team through injuries to key players whereas Morneau led the Twins to a second-half surge.
Although they're pretty close, I'’m going to go with my gut here: which player would you like to play against the least? As good as Morneau is, I'’d much rather see him during a crucial at-bat then I'’d like to see Jeter. Why? I dunno, I can'’t really explain it. I know they are pretty similar in quality - but for Jeter, we know he's a good player. For Morneau... … Well, I'’m just not as sold on him - yet.
We'’ll see in 2007.
Derek Jeter
As far as statistics go, Derek Jeter is having a decent year. He's ranked #5 overall in on-base percentage (.414), 31st in slugging (.481) and his batting average is #3 overall (.340). But Derek's one of the reasons that the Yankees - who, as I recall, have never been lower then second in the AL East this season - stayed competitive throughout the season, even when they were decimated by injuries to key players like Matsui or Sheffield.
Unlike David Ortiz or Justin Morneau, Derek Jeter has shown that he's a catalyst for a great team - a team that came from three games back and decimated the Red Sox in Boston, then went and took a commanding 11 game lead of the AL East. And even though he's posting some not-so-great numbers in fun stats like Home Runs (14) or RBI (96), Jeter has shown that he's still a threat during his at-bats with his on-base being higher then those of both Ortiz and Morneau. If the Yankees win the World Series this year, you can be sure that Derek Jeter will have been a huge part of it.
David Ortiz
Despite falling apart during the second half of the season, Ortiz has been absolutely fantastic at the plate this year - but then again, as the Designated Hitter, he has to be. He's set the record for Home Runs hit by a Red Sox player (52 and counting), he's posted a completely unbelievable slugging percentage (.631) a great on-base (.404) and a Walk/Strikeout ratio of 0.95 - meaning he's just as likely to walk as he is to strike out (always a good thing).
But is batting simply enough? Maybe so - he kept winning games all season long for the Red Sox. Something like 11 times this year alone Ortiz had a game-winning walk-off hit. When the Red Sox were leading the AL East earlier this year, Ortiz had a big, big role. But will voters be able to overlook his team's failure in August? Does Ortiz deserve to suffer due to the collapse of players like Papelbon or Schilling? The answer is simple - no. Is he, however, more deserving then Jeter is?
No. When you take everything into effect - batting, fielding and success of their team - over this season, what David Ortiz does is cool and fun to watch... But he's not as valuable to his team as much as Jeter is to his.
Justin Morneau
The Twins are a great story this year - they roared from third place and fading up to, and on the last day of the season, they clinched the Al Central as the Tigers fell apart, blowing a seven game lead.
Justin Morneau was a big, big part of their success. He's had one of his best years to date in 2006, batting in 130 runs, having a solid on-base (.375) and having a great slugging percentage (.559 ). When the Twins came roaring back into the race (first for the AL Wild Card and finally for the AL Central pennant) Morneau was there. It started in July, when he hit for a .700+ slugging percentage and he never looked back - and neither did the Twins. The Twins first overtook the 2005 World Series champion Chicago White Sox, then Boston Red Sox, who had led the AL east for most of the season, and finally won the AL Central, getting past the Detroit Tigers, on the last game of the season.
But, once again, is he better then Jeter? Kinda-sorta-not-really. Where Morneau's managed to out-hit Jeter in home runs, Jeter just missed the AL batting title, and had a combined OPS (on base + slugging) of .900 this year; Morneau had an OPS that was just higher, with .934. Jeter led his team through injuries to key players whereas Morneau led the Twins to a second-half surge.
Although they're pretty close, I'’m going to go with my gut here: which player would you like to play against the least? As good as Morneau is, I'’d much rather see him during a crucial at-bat then I'’d like to see Jeter. Why? I dunno, I can'’t really explain it. I know they are pretty similar in quality - but for Jeter, we know he's a good player. For Morneau... … Well, I'’m just not as sold on him - yet.
We'’ll see in 2007.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)