Five Sports Stars I'd Like to Drink With

Just a list of the sports stars I'd most like to drink with and why. Why? For no particular reason, that's why. Also, I'm going in reverse order the was it should be.

5) Matt Leinart (QB-Arizona Cardinals): The reason I put Leinart here is largely because all the pictures of him partying during the offseason reminds me of high school with all the board shorts and beer bongs. Only at his party I would be next to Kristin Cavillari in the hot tub instead of in second hour English.

4) Dirk Nowitski (PF-Dallas Mavericks): This is just out of hope that this seven-foot kraut can down his share of beer and sausages, along with some good German drinking songs.

3) Shaquille O'Neal (C-Pheonix Suns): How could you not love the Big Aristotle? You know that you're going to get the most expensive booze in the place, and you would surely get noticed. But also Shaq seems to me like a deep and interesting man who might have some good insights on things outside of sports.

2) Derek Jeter (SS-New York Yankees): He's loved in the sports world, popular with the ladies, and resides in the true city of the world. What else is there?

1) Brett Favre: I'll just say this; Favre seems like the guy where when you go ice fishing for the day he brings 3 cases of beer, and then you bring up the fact that there are only two of you and he would just smile and say, "We'll get through it."

Lak

Let Them Gallop!

I cannot predict the future. Yes, that may disappoint you, but I am unable to tell you how Kentucky Derby winner Big Brown will do in today's Preakness. But this I am certain of, barring catastrophe, in one year Big Brown will be servicing mares in a breeding shed for $100,000 a date, the amount paid by breeders hoping that he will pass on his speed to the next generation of foals.

Let's say Big Brown goes on to win the Triple Crown. That would mean he would probably retire to stud after a mere six races. It was once unthinkable to let a horse that inexperience near a mare. A former breeder said in a recent NY Times article that his policy was that the horse had to had at least 25 starts. Now, buyers at yearling sales are no longer interested in durability. They are looking for the payday at the end and buy horses that mature quickly, win the Derby, and allow them to cash in on stud fees. These horses go on to pass on their genes to create more speedy but unsound horses destined for short, brilliant careers.

There is a way to ensure that the priciest studs are the most durable: open up the Triple Crown races to horses of all ages. That would immediately eliminate 3-year-olds from the gene pool because it would be nearly impossible for a 3-year-old to win the Kentucky Derby, the Preakness, or Belmont, because horses don't reach their athletic peak until they're 4 or 5. This shows in the Bayer Speed Figures, a way of measuring the performance of a horse on the track. The average score of Derby winners is 109, while top 4 year olds are capable of 120.

The Triple Crown used to be the beginning of a horse's career, now it's the early endpoint. They may as well put an ovulating mare just past the wire at Belmont Park, ready to receive the latest immature sire. The desire of breeders for instant gratification is destroying the Thoroughbred. So come on, equestrian poo-bahs, open the Triple Crown to horses of all ages.

Lak

NBA Playoff Predictions

Sorry this is after the playoffs have already started but so far the games haven't interfered with my picks at all, so here goes.

First Round

Eastern Conference (number of games in parentheses)

Boston over Atlanta (4)
Detroit over Philadelphia (6)
Orlando over Toronto (5)
Cleveland over Washington (6)

Western Conference

Los Angeles over Denver (4)
Dallas over New Orleans (6)
Pheonix over San Antonio (7)
Utah over Houston (6)

Second Round

Eastern Conference

Boston over Cleveland (6)
Detroit over Orlando (7)

Western Conference

Los Angeles over Utah (6)
Pheonix over Dallas (6)

Conference Finals

Boston over Detroit (5)
Los Angeles over Pheonix (7)

NBA Finals

Los Angeles over Boston (7)

Lak

Boycott Beijing

"We believe the Olympic Games are not the place for demonstrations and we hope that all people attending the Games recognize the importance of this." Thus spake Samsung Electronics, one of the 12 major sponsors of the Olympic Games in Beijing. Coca-Cola, another sponsor, has stated that it would be inappropriate to "comment on the political situations in other nations." The chairman of the IOC, Jacques Rogge, was also quick to declare that a boycott "doesn't solve anything," just as quick as he dismissed protesters at the flame lighting ceremony saying, rather pompously, "It's always sad to see such a ceremony disrupted."

This shouldn't surprise anyone. Companies have invested millions of dollars and Olympic bureaucrats have spent years trying to justify the decision to hold the Olympic Games in China, and they are using these types of arguments, but that doesn't mean I have to believe them. Let's run through them real quick, shall we?

A boycott doesn't solve anything.

Really? Some boycotts do help solve things. The boycott of South African athletes was probably the most effective thing the international community did to help end apartheid. There's a famous quote that said, "They (South Africans) didn't mind much about the business sanctions, but what they really, really minded--was the cricket." The 1980 boycott of the Moscow Olympics helped to undermine the Soviet propaganda concerning the invasion of Afghanistan, as well as helping the Western world to unify against something. I don't know for certain, but I'm pretty sure that from the Soviet perspective, their boycott of the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics did the same for them.

The Olympics are a source of good.

Not always! For those too young to remember, the 1936 Olympic Games were held in Berlin, and were used as an astonishing propaganda coup for Hitler of almost Leni Riefenstahl quality. It's true that Jesse Owens shot holes all through Hitler's theory of Aryan racial superiority, but Hitler still got what he wanted out of the Games. The whole world thought that Germany was back in the family of nations again, and that Hitler could be tolerated. All this while the Nuremburg Laws were being enforced, camps in Dacau were packed, and people were cheering in Berlin.

The Olympic Games are not the place for demonstrations.

Actually, aren't the Olympics the perfect place for demonstrations? The world's media is in one place with cameras rolling and the purpose of the Olympics is a political one: to promote international peace by encouraging healthy competition between nations. Hence the emphasis of national teams instead of individuals. Hence the medal count of nations. Hence the opening and closing ceremonies and the use of flags and national anthems.

These elements make the Olympics special and separate them from similar competitions, but it's also what gives them a nasty edge. The old US vs USSR rivalry, the parade of deep-voiced, mustachioed women from East Germany, and the medal counts. All these are examples of the politicization of the Olympics. The black power demonstrations at the 1968 Mexico City Games, the 1972 Munich Games, Aborigines protesting the 2000 Sydney Games. As well as everything associated with the 2008 Games; the passing of the torch through Tibet, the use of the Games to spur Chinese Socialist development, and to promote the domestic and foreign image of the Chinese state.

Some people have mentioned that the heads of state of different nations boycott attending the opening games. Seriously, what would that do? Were Bush and Blair at the Turin or Sydney Games? I don't remember nor care. Others have suggested that we go, and just protest at the games in similar vain to what was done in Mexico City. Does anyone really believe that would happen? Not because people wouldn't try, because I'm sure that they would, but because the Chinese state is one that has become very good at suppressing opinions that differ from their own, especially one's of performers. A teacher in one of my classes last night said that maybe athletes should carry Tibet flags under their shirts and unfurl them when they march out for the opening ceremony. Does anyone think that the Chinese will not be checking for anything like that? They've had nearly eight years to prepare themselves for something that they are already quite good at, and it's naive to think otherwise.

But it's no wonder that everyone who hates or fears China, from the people of Tibet, North Korea, Burma, Darfur, or even Beijing itself are calling for a boycott. And the Chinese and the IOC are terrified at the chance of their success. No one preparing for this year's games believes that it's "just about the athletes," or that Beijing will be simply a display of athletic prowess, or that they bear no nature of Chinese politics. And I don't see why we should all believe it either.

Lak

NFL Rules Committee Gets Something Right

At the latest NFL Owners meeting, one of the new ordinances passed was to eliminate force-out decisions on completions and interceptions near the sidelines. Now, officials only have to see if the receiver's feet land in-bounds or not, with the intended result of consistency.



Look at the above picture. Imagine no defenders there. Will Winslow land with his feet in-bounds or not? It's impossible to tell. The referees didn't rule it a force-out, but they very well could have, which would have impacted the seasons of multiple teams, from the Browns probably going to the playoffs over the Titans as well as effecting the draft spots of three teams.

Many people will say that it's an unfair advantage to the defense, which it can be interpreted as, but what about all the other rules that give an unfair advantage to the offense? Why should there be an invisible boundary for the offensive player that extends off the field, while a defensive player who hits an offensive player before he runs out of bounds gets a penalty? How is this fair? Why should the same game be played on two different planes?

My problem, though, is philosophical. I consider myself to be an empiricist and my point of view is that it is impossible to determine that a player's feet would have landed in-bounds anyway if it wasn't for the defender doing his job and pushing the receiver out of bounds. One can never be completely certain of a future outcome, that's why we keep doing scientific experiments. No matter how many times you test something, there's nothing keeping it from acting differently in the future in a future test.

Return of the Boys of Summer

Here are my baseball predictions for this year.

Division Champions

NL East-Atlanta Braves
NL Central-Chicago Cubs
NL West-Colorado Rockies
Wild Card-New York Mets

AL East-Boston Red Sox
AL Central-Detroit Tigers
AL West-Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim
Wild Card-Cleveland Indians

World Series
Red Sox over Mets

MVP-Magglio Ordonez

Cy Young-C.C. Sabathia

Lak

Clemens Dog-and-Pony Show and The Real Story

Come on, it's been everywhere, so it's only logical that it would eventually end up here. I'm skipping all of the specifics and just saying that this hearing accomplished absolutely nothing whatsoever. Each man stuck to his story and each story was the antithesis of the other so obviously someone is lying, but neither one can be trusted so the end result of this to the people involved will be nothing.

In my opinion, this is overshadowing the real steroid-baseball story of Bud Selig ruling out independent, third-party testing of baseball players to detect the use of performance-enhancing substances. This is important because independent testing was one of the recommendations made in the Mitchell Report, and when it came out Selig said that he agreed with all of the recommendations and that they will be implemented by Major League Baseball. So now the man that has allowed this steroid frenzy to take place is expected to police its use? How silly would a person have to be to believe this organization, interested only in its self-preservation, can successfully and rightly police itself?

Give me a break.

*Spygate End Note*

It strikes me as interesting the fact that Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) is the one person riding the NFL and the Patriots on the whole Spygate fiasco. What makes it interesting to me is the fact that Specter is one of the biggest proponents of the Patriot Act. An act passed by the government allowing illegal spying by the government on its own citizens sharing a name with an NFL team accused of spying on opponents and the government investigating this team for spying. Some things you just can't make up.

Lak

Everybody's an All-American except Australians

On a lighter Note....

I know it's early but here are my predictions for:

 First Team All-Americans

Derrick Rose - Frosh - Guard - Memphis

Brandon Rush - Junior - Guard - Kansas

Michael Beasley - Frosh - Forward - Kansas State

Tyler Hansbrough - Junior - Forward - North Carolina

Kevin Love - Frosh - Center - UCLA

It's pretty amazing to me that the state of Kansas has the best two basketballers in the country.

Freshman All-Americans

Derrick Rose - Guard - Memphis

Kevin Love - Center - UCLA

Eric Gordon - Guard - Indiana

Kyle Singler - Forward - Duke

Michael Beasley - Forward - Kansas State

I'd like to see Aussies A.J. Ogilvy (F, Vanderbilt) and Patrick Mills (G, Saint Mary's) make the squad but this 2008 class is probably one of the best you'll ever see.  Don't forget this is pretty premature; We gotta see if these guys can handle the post season.

First Team All-Big Ten

Eric Gordon - Frosh - Guard - Indiana

Drew Neitzel - Senior - Guard - Michigan State

Jamar Butler - Senior - Guard - Ohio State

Geary Claxton - Senior - Guard/Forward - Penn State

Brian Butch - Senior - Forward/Center - Wisconsin

It aches me giving this much props to Eric Gordan after he left Illinois high and dry, although it wasn't half as bad the behavior Joe McKnight exuded.

E.T.

Lean and Green (Update)

This is amazing. Not even 6 hours after I post something about the pollution in Beijing, which has become a huge issue for the Olympic Games coming there this summer. Many nations are deciding to prep their athletes in Japan in order to circumvent the pollution as much as possible.

The following nations will be sending athletes to Japan to prep instead of China: Germany, Britain, Sweden, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Australia.

In case anyone thinks that the reports of pollution in Beijing and China as a whole has been exaggerated by myself, I just offer this picture of Beijing taken from space.




Lak

Lean and Green

I noticed something the other day when I was working on an assignment for my event management class. Our assignment was to look at the bid London made for the 2012 Summer Olympic Games and compare it with the bids of other cities and come up with reasons why London got the games instead of other cities like Paris, Madrid, and Rio de Janeiro.

What I noticed (at least between the bids of the top two cities considered, London and Paris) was that there was a lot of attention paid in both of those bids to the games being carbon-neutral, environmentally minimal, however you want to say it. This makes perfect sense to me because the environmentalist movement seems like something that you think would go hand in hand with the Olympism movement.

And then there's China.

My feelings about other reasons China shouldn't have been awarded the games I feel are well documented (in fact just scroll down), but while those were political reasons I think that these are ideological differences between the Olympics and Western nations and those of China. A few months ago, there was a report that Justine Henin won't be competing in the Olympics to defend her gold medal because of the poor air quality. Other athletes, as well as teams, have come out saying that they will be wearing breathing masks when they're outside but not competing. This city poses a health risk for everyone, athletes and spectators alike. China has already come out and said that they have to shut down factories in the Beijing area a week in advance just so you can see the city through the muck.

After all, would you rather spend two weeks in this:



Or this:




Lak