Summer Sports Re-Cap: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

I've decided with this blog I'm going to try and limit the amount of posts I do about sports, movies, and television. I could write all day about these fine topics but my readership tends to find my opinions on them less interesting that those on social theory and the such. Therefore, I have decided to limit or devote (whichever way you want to look at it) one post a month to these topics on a rotating basis (not including monthly and quarterly segments). I would be remiss if I did not spend at least one post to recap my thoughts on this summer of sport. So here are my thoughts on the big season:

The World Cup

Only half the teams in the World Cup that warrant my opinions so if you are waiting to hear my opinions on Slovakia, Nigeria, or Denmark you might not want to get your hopes too high. I want to talk about the Winners and Losers of this World Cup and hand out some grades for effort and execution. I will start with the Winners.

Spain - A

Winners don't get much bigger than World Cup Champions. Furthermore, they never really left any doubt that they were the best team. They had an opening game stumble to Switzerland but rebounded to win the group and then methodically take down each team in their way with what has to be considered the best midfield and goalkeeping in all of soccer. The stranglehold they have on European soccer started with Euro Cup 2008 and it clearly hasn't diminished. Of the player's receiving votes for FIFA World Player of the Year in 2009, more than half played in Spain's La Liga and six play for their national team including three of the top 7, and the top midfielder, winger, and goalie in the World Cup. They have good coaching and a methodical, if not flashy, style that utilizes ball control to effectively dismantle any team that steps onto the pitch against them. They qualified through Europe by winning ten out of ten matches. Ten games without a tie in today's game is almost inconceivable. They may have lost their opening game to Switzerland, but their fan base responded with the appropriate amount of optimistic disappointment.

They have maintained their success despite changing managers between Euro Cup and the World Cup and they have kept the managerial job within the country which Samuel Adams will tell you is "Always a Good Decision!" They haven't gone out of the country for a manager since they were helmed by a Uruguayian for the 1982 World Cup. David Villa is also scoring goals at a pace unseen in Spain's history. I fully expect him to fly by Raul as the country's all-time leading goal scorer. He's one away and he's only 28. Iker Casillas is also a big winner. Not only did he win the Golden Gloves award for the tournament but apparently he has a ridiculously attractive girlfriend. To the victor go the spoils. Let's also consider that Spain's team is remarkably young. Every starter from the final could concievably be back for the next World Cup and young guns like Sergio Ramos could have three more Cups in him. Casillas could also have three more cups in him because he's only 28 and the older the goalie, the better. We have to see what Brazil relaods with in four years but as of right now Spain has to be considered the prohibitive favorite for World Cup 2014.

Netherlands - A

This runner-up has nothing to be ashamed of. Several commentators lambasted their style of play after the final. But what do those ninnies know? They dispatched some impressive teams along the way and did their country proud. It has to hurt to come that close and fall just short but you've got a trump card for every country except Spain and things are only looking up for the future of your national team. They are even younger than Spain with no current players over 30 and a solid young duo of Wesley Sneijder and Arjen Robben who are both 26. Unfortunately this takes into account that their oldest player, captain, and stud Giovanni van Bronckhorst (35) just retired after the World Cup. He will be sorely missed.

However, they won the UEFA U-21 Championships in both 2006 and 2007 which means that the young players they have hitting the squad now are the most talented in Europe. They're one of the best at ball control but Spain is better. They have no problem scoring goals but could shore up their defense a little. This is a team on the rise. They have great communication and I think every team in the tournament took notice when they dispatched Brazil. They'll be in the upper echilon of European football until at least the next World Cup.

Germany - A-

There really wasn't a more exciting team in the World Cup than the German side. This is another team that has a great deal of youth even though there two biggest names, Michael Ballack and Miroslav Klose, are in their early 30s. Hey, Thomas Muller is only 20. That kid is going to be a stud. The team plays together well and actually finished third place in the World Cup without their Captain and possibly best player. That is an impressive feat. I mentioned that the Dutch team has no problem scoring goals...well the German side REALLY has NO problem scoring goals. They unleashed an unholy fury of goals rarely seen in the World Cup. They had eight different players score. Spain only had three. They scored four goals in three different games. The rest of the field only did it twice and only when playing Korean teams. They've been the most consistently great team in Europe this decade. They don't necessarily have the gold to show for it but they've placed in the Top 3 in all three of the World Cups this decade and were Runner-Up at Euro Cup 2008.

They thrive where others fail because they have a very disciplined style of play. Further down this post I am going to rip England for having a very disciplined style of play so it is best that I explain myself lest you think of me as a hypocrite. Every member on their team has a clearly defined role. They are a cog in the greater German machine. They train these players to fulfill their role and players are hand-selected meet the needs of the team. Every player on their National Team and their U-21 plays within the German Bundesliga with the exception of Everton's Jerome Boateng. These players know each other very well and the camraderie shows on the field. Speaking of their U-21 team. They won the UEFA U-21 Championship in 2009 which means great young reinforcements are on the way. I see Germany as the third big superpower with Brazil and Spain in the mix for World Cup 2014.

USA - B+

I have to give props to America. They did us proud. They caught bad break after bad break from the officiating but somehow found a way to make the plays when they absolutely needed to be made. It was unfortunate that they went down earlier than they could have but progress was made and we definitely took a step in the right direction. We developed an international reputation as late game scrappers and clutch artists (though flip-side of the choke artist coin). I don't think anybody will debate that the USA owns the play of the tournament. Other countries may want to argue that we have three of the top five plays...but they have their work cut out for them in that argument. Landon Donovan now has several major European clubs down his pants for his services. We've also seen the superstar emergence of Clint Dempsey and Tim Howard. We still won't have the clout of their European power counterparts but nobody is going to want to see America in their draw in future World Cups. You've heard that American soccer has been turning a page for years now but finally we have an actual cause and effect to back up that it is happening. The young stars competing on the national team today are the first of the AYSO generation. American children didn't play soccer in the 60s. Landon Donovan pre-dates the AYSO boom that happened in the late 80s and early 90s. We now are seeing a generation that grew up playing soccer the way kids in Europe and South America did. We have been able to stay competitive because of our advanced training facilities and funding for our national program but now we have the added advantage of en masse young homegrown talent.

Let's look at America's future prospects. We are not young, but we've got up and comers. Also, we depend less on young talent than other countries. America has always been about mental toughness and thus uses wily veterans. Countries such as England and Brazil who left seasoned veterans at home could learn from this. Landon Donovan, Clint Dempsey, Carlos Bocanegra, and Tim Howard will all be in their early to mid 30s during the next World Cup but they're gutsy gamers so I expect that they will all still be elite players. I expect Donovan to still be elite at 36 two World Cups from now. Our fitness is tremendous. Jozy Altidore is only 20. Michael Bradley is only 23. And Maurice Edu is only 24. Then there are the young studs who are coming up. Jack McInerney just turned 18 and has already become a goal scorer for the MLS's newest team, the Philadelphia Union. Mykell Bates is also waiting in the wings as is Juan Agudelo who at 17 just signed with the New York Red Bulls. We also have the necessary flexibility down. Whereas other more rigid countries train their players to play a very specific position and system, US players are adaptable. Landon Donovan can play left, right, or center and can actually play midfielder or forward. We also have the best goalkeeping in the World which will keep us competitive as we continue to grow.

Uruguay - B+

A gutsy performance by South America's most successful team in this World Cup. Only eight different countries have ever managed to hold the World Cup and Uruguay seems like an unlikely one despite hoisting it twice. However, it's easy to see that they have guts and grit. After barely qualifying with a last ditch win over Costa Rica they really had very little business making it to the semi-finals. However, they clearly have a talented team and Diego Forlan has vaulted himself onto the World Stage as one of the world's premiere goalscorers by capturing the World Cup's Golden Ball. This is good because this is a team that does not have youth. Seven members of their national team are over 30 (including Forlan), however, they are in remarkably good shape which probably has a lot to do with their high altitude training. Uruguay has a supreme home court advantage in qualifying games because they play in the highest altitude national stadium in the world.

One solid young player that they do have is Luis Suarez who has found some new international swag after his desperate, blatent handball to save Uruguay and send them into the Semi-finals. He has been decried by football purists but I say "Bravo". That kind of desperation is what we need in sports. I haven't seen such desperate innovation since Nicholas Kiefer threw his racquet to distract Sebastian Grosjean at the Australian Open (another less than legal move that paid off brilliantly). Now that we know that Uruguay has players who can think outside the box to win, the sky is the limit. However, while Uruguay has some solid talent right now they really aren't getting any younger and I would enjoy this semi-final appearance because I don't foresee them having the same magical run in 2014 with a 35 year old Diego Forlan.

New Zealand - B+

Bravo, New Zealand. This small Oceanic nation with barely 25 footballers to rub together and call a team is the only nation in this World Cup to go undefeated. They also didn't win a game but several other teams accomplished that feat...so it's less impressive. Nobody could take down the mighty Kiwis or the All Whites as they like to refer to themselves (a little racist if you ask me considering that they are in fact all white). Quite frankly, I think they should be proud of that. I know your wondering how I can give New Zealand, a team which did not advance a B+ when I plan on giving out Cs and Ds to teams that did advance. It's a matter of expectations.

In New Zealand's only other trip to the World Cup in 1982 they got there face stomped on in all three games that they played. They had 12 goals scored on them, lost every game by at least three goals, and if Hungary hadn't stomped on El Salvador 10-1 then they would have ended up as the worst team in the tournament. And that was New Zealand's previous all-time best team. Not bad for the only team to actually feature multiple players who are not pro soccer players by profession. Aside from a couple players in the Premiere league and a few in the powerhouse MLS there isn't much talent on the New Zealand team and I wouldn't automatically expect things in 2014. But 2010 was something to be proud of, so savor it, boys.

South Africa - B

Let's hear it for the host nation. This was another team that didn't necessarily wow with it's soccer prowess, but did manage to impress people by defying it's low expectations. As the host nation South Africa got an automatic bid and that was about the only way they were getting into this World Cup. That don't have an abundance of talent on their squad. There captain does play for Portsmouth and they have a player on Everton but all in all not too much to be excited about.

That being said they performed more than admirably in what was considered to be a fairly tough group. They held their ground in the opener against a heavily favored Mexican team, thus protecting the undefeated streak of hosts in the opener. They then got pushed around by a very talented team from Uruguay but roared back to score a win against those highly touted French punks. They tied Mexico in the points and didn't advance based on goal differential because of the bad Uruguay loss. Still, not too shabby for a team that has spent time since the last World Cup ranked outside of the top 100 in the world. They showed guts on World stage and probably scored a lot of poon the entire month. Maybe not as much as Spain's team is still scoring right now but enough to warrant a B and allow them to hold their heads high until the next World Cup.

Honduras - B-

Honduras gets a B- for just getting to the World Cup. And by getting to the World Cup I mean the United States escorted them in when Jonathon Bornstein scored a final second goal to take care of Costa Rica. You're welcome Honduras. They did have kind of a tough break in that their second best scorer, Carlo Costly, was injured for the World Cup. However, they got to play, they didn't embarrass themselves and it's nice for Hondurans to have some relief now that Emily Kenney is currently terrorizing their countryside. (Just kidding, Emily.) They also appear to have gained a greater appreciation for America which is a victory in itself.

Now let's give the Losers their due.

Ghana - C+

I know what you're thinking. You're thinking how in the world I can I grade Ghana at a C+ when they made the Quarterfinals and beat the mighty USA team to which I awarded a B+. Believe me, if we were talking about quality of play Ghana would have an A-. But given that every person in Ghana felt absolutely sick with the way this ended, I don't think they want me to grade them that highly. They feel a sense of loss and thus I have to bestow on them a loser's grade. They played awesome. This was by far the best performance ever put up by an African nation. But that last minute and shootout against Uruguay has to feel like the ultimate stomach punch. They were less than 60 seconds away from advancing and then a crafty play that many are decrying as outside the spirit of the rules sent them into a penalty kicking tailspin.

However, this isn't Ghana's first rodeo and it's not likely to be their last for a while. They advanced to the Knockout Stages in 2006 and have a solid young core that includes players for Chelsea, AC Milan, and Internazionale. The only rapidly aging star that they have is Richard Kingson and he's their Goalkeeper so he is probably good for another go-around. I'm just surprised that he is the backup for a relegation-danger EPL team despite being better than any goalie that England has. The goals they scored and the skills that they showed proves that this team can compete with any team in the world. They beat a highly touted Serbian team and played right with an elite German squad. I expect Ghana can be the first African team to break through to the World Cup Semi-finals and I wouldn't be surprised if they did it as soon as next World Cup.

Portugal - C

I would fully agree that Portugal got dicked by their draw. The draw was set up so that one of the top 3 ranked teams in the world was not getting out of the Round of 16. However, I'm not excusing Portugal because they had multiple opportunities to prove that they weren't the weakest of those three teams and they blew them both. All they had to do was beat Brazil OR Spain. They only needed to win one of those games and they could advance. In truth, they didn't even need to do that. If they had just beaten the Ivory Coast, whose star Didier Drogba had had his arm broken only a week prior, they would have advanced. Portugal had a very rough draw but they still showed no ability to get it done outside of their 7-0 dismantling of North Korea. They had one of the two biggest stars in the tournament and he didn't show up. That seemed to be a theme for powerhouse teams: the biggest stars in the world were really quite quiet during this World Cup.

It seems like Portugal has always had a transcendent star within the World game. It started with Eusibio back in the 70s and has since continued with superstars like Pauleta, Luis Figo, and now Christiano Ronaldo. It just seems like on the national stage Ronaldo hasn't managed to live up to these other names. Granted these are tough names to live up to. Eusibio is one of the ten best players ever to play the game and shattered the Golden Boot competition at the 1966 World Cup with nine goals. Pauleta and Luis Figo were a fierce tandem that led Portugal to both a Euro Cup final and a World Cup Semi-final. Granted Ronaldo was on both of those teams and was even considered the best player on that 2006 World Cup team but he didn't produce for them the way Pauleta did. Sure everyone remembers his semis-clinching PK but you're supposed to make PKs. The only reason it seemed remarkable is because we had just seen 3/4 of England's PK team shank theirs. Ronaldo is still young but he has a lot of work to do if he wants a statue of himself to be erected like the one in that Nike commercial.

Algeria - C

Algeria...what a bunch of pansy-ass motherfuckers. The United States was in severe danger of going home because these lazy, mediocrists decided they wanted to play for a tie when they needed a two goal win to advance. They are getting a C because of their quality play which included a tie against the heralded English side. However, they deserve an F for their competitiveness. This is the World Cup. You go for the jugular every time. Ties are lame and playing to tie is not acceptable. If you tie a significantly better team then you can walk off the pitch with your head held high. However, if you did so because you were trying to tie them then shame on you.

And what really burns me up is that they did this after they were legitimately screwed by team collusion in the 1982 World Cup where Austria and Germany basically agreed on a 1-0 game to eliminate them. Algeria is the reason why group games are now played simultaneously. This was their chance at glory and they squandered it. They barely even made it to the World Cup after eking out a win over heavily-favored Egypt and they probably won't be back. This was their chance to compete on the World stage and they used it to compete for ties. Consider your nation shamed, Algeria. Try to come back in four years and pretend like you're attempting to win a game.

Italy - C-

Well, that was embarrassing for Italy. The defending champions from 2006 failed to make it to the Knockout stages of this World Cup. Not only did they not advance but they finished last in probably the weakest group in the field. They did have injury problems regarding their goalie but that still can't be considered an excuse for a team with such high expectations. When your team has every player come from it's own national league as well as several other team's top players you have to win. Only England, Germany, and Italy qualify in that regard. The Italians are easily one of the world's top three all-time squads and any exit before the Knockout stages is going to be disappointing. That being said this isn't a major setback for Italy. Italy in recent years has been a team without stars. In the last 15 years only one Italian has finished in the Top 3 for FIFA World Player of the Year voting and that was Fabio Cannavaro in 2006 which is the customary you led your team to the World Cup vote. He didn't receive a point the year before and was well out of consideration the year after. In this last two votes from 2008 and 2009 the only Italian player to receive a point was the aforementioned injured goalkeeper, Gianluigi Buffon.

The Italians may have been hurt by their lack of star power but they don't need stars. They will continue to win the same way that they always have: by playing a dirty, filthy brand of football. Right now Italy is just stuck between good crops of players. There top players are getting old and their young stars haven't reached full maturity yet. The players that led them to the World Cup were the same ones who led them to three Euro U-21 Championships in four years between 1992-96. Only now are Italian U-21 teams starting to do well again so it will be a few years before this team returns to prominence. I would fully expect them to compete in the next World Cup.

Brazil - C-

I really thought that this team had what it took to win this World Cup. And then they lost to the Netherlands. This is another team that's play warrants better than a C- but who's astronomical expectations allow for this to be a fitting grade when they depart the tournament in the Quarterfinals. I don't need to tell Brazil how to win World Cups because they've won it more times than anybody. However, I can't understand what the hell they were doing with their roster. They were needlessly persnickety with their roster bordering on downright stupid. Four of their five top active goalscorers weren't on the roster and five of their seven most capped active players weren't on it. I understand their not taking three-time World Player of the Year Ronaldo. I think they should have seeing as he was old and out of shape in 2006 and was still their best player because he's that damn good. However, I do not understand how they leave behind two-time FIFA World Player of the Year Ronaldinho. The guy is young and in shape and even if he isn't playing well he can help the team just with his presence, even if not in the game. Better to bring him than half of the young, useless bench players you brought. I also don't know why Adriano was left off. That guy is practically my age.

Brazil has very loosy-goosy style of play and it has worked for them a lot. This World Cup definitely favored a more disciplined style of play with teams like Germany and the Netherlands excelling. Brazil made the fatal mistake of cutting loose many of it's best and most experienced players in favor of young guns who were playing well in the moment. The beauty of the Brazilian system is that it will absolutely re-load by the next World Cup. If anything Brazil is cursed with an abundance of talent. Silly sports reporters like Bill Plashke have said that America should expect to be better at soccer because of our large population. What he doesn't understand is that population means nothing...soccer-playing population means everything. We have 300 million people, but our soccer-playing population is probably about 25 million. Brazil has a population of 200 million with a soccer-playing population of 200 million. Everybody in Brazil plays soccer. It is the world's fifth most populous country but China, India, the United States, and Indonesia all have soccer on the back-burner. Brazil will always be a soccer power because of what it means to the country. They do, however, need to realize that the World Cup only comes once every four years so they can't afford to screw it up by getting fancy with their roster.

Argentina - D+

Here was another team that had to be considered a World Cup favorite whose promise dried up in the Quarterfinals. There loss to Germany via a 4-0 stomping is in my mind the biggest game of the tournament. The final game wasn't spectacular so the honors of most important game go to this one. It was a statement game. It didn't just tell us about Germany or Argentina. It told us about soccer in 2010. On a tangent that will return to my main point, I played American football in high school. My senior year my team went to the state championships for a game that pitted football players (my Loyola Cubs) against athletes (the Long Beach Poly Jackrabbits). The athletes were heavily favored but the football players won. This game showcased that same principle. There was far more talent and ability on the Argentinian side. They had the best player in the world in Lionel Messi, a hot striker who was coming off a hat trick in Gonzalo Higulain, and a crazy coach who just so happens to be the second best player of all time in Diego Maradona. This team was on a roll. They had a solid core of young talent that was responsible for winning the last two Olympic gold medals in the sport. They weren't even really tested in the group stage. They even used all of their players except for their two reserve goalkeepers. And then they got absolutely stomped. This was an enormous victory for discipline over athletic prowess. There is absolutely no excuse for a team getting stomped 4-0 in a game like this. The reason for the D+ is because of the generally classifiable humiliation that this game brought upon Argentina and the weaknesses that it has exposed in their side.


First of all, Lionel Messi isn't that great. I bet my roommate $5 during Argentina's very first game that he wouldn't score a goal all tournament. Guess who won that bet. He is an impressive player but I've only seen flashy dynamo performances from him. I've never seen gamey, mentally tough performances. I think that he might be the best player in the world but is still wildly overrated. I don't see in him what I've seen in greats like Ronaldo, Zidane, or even his own coach, Maradona. It was especially clear during this World Cup that he's not leader he should be. He might be too young to be the captain but that doesn't mean he can't be a leader and communicator on the field. It was clear that no player on Argentina's team had any clue what their defensive assignment was against Germany. They were just freeballing it. Many people see Argentina as a team on the rise, but I'm not convinced that they aren't a team on the decline.

England - D

England is getting a D because of their poor performance versus high expectations. I understand the poor performance...I know exactly why it happened. What I can't wrap my head around is the high expectations. Why? What has England ever done in soccer that has warranted such high expectations. They won a World Cup in 1966. OK. They haven't scored a medal in the World Cup before that or since that. They've never even made the finals of Euro Cup. And they haven't even won a Euro U-21, U-19, or U-17 Championship since the early 80s. They are the original Sultans of Suck. There big scary reputation comes mainly from the fact that their rabid fan base likes to inflate their worth and other people buy in and the fact that they have the best National league in the World. That national league is, however, stocked with the best talent from other countries. The EPL may be the best pro league out there but the best player in the EPL doesn't play for England. He plays for the Ivory Coast. The second best player plays for Spain. Some play for Portugal, France, Germany, etc. It has been at least five years since the best player in the EPL actually played for England. However, England's lack of winning has nothing to do with lack of talent. They have enough of that to compete and maybe even excel. Though basically disowning the leading scorer from your last World Cup and the only great player you've had in the last quarter-century (David Beckham) probably isn't the way to go.

The main problem with England stems from their fans and their manager. England's fans are so rabid and brutal that they have mentally broken almost all of their players. The mental abuse that is showered upon anybody who screws up for the national team has wrecked their confidence to the point where England literally has no goalies left who are not a quivering mess. After Robert Green screwed the pooch against America in group play he was replaced by a 40-year-old. A 40-year-old whose is nicknamed "Calamity" for his penchant for screwing the pooch. They drive these players hard and then they turn on them viciously when they collapse. It really isn't a good long term solution. However, the main problem is their management. This is a team that has all of its players taken from its national league and yet it hires an Italian manager. World Cup managers should be managing their home country. And this manager plays in a very disciplined system without understanding it. Germany plays a very disciplined style, training every one of it's soccer athletes to fit within a certain mold for it's national team. England plays a disciplined style that trains players to fit molds for their club teams and then expects that it can just throw the best individuals together and that will work on the world stage. England needs to learn that there players are not Brazilians. They are not dynamic adaptive athletes. Steven Gerrard and Frank Lampard are both great center midfielders for their respective teams Liverpool and Chelsea. However, when you move one of them to left midfielder to accommodate the other they become useless. They need to train their players to be more versatile and fit within the national system. They always have high hopes for this team but I don't see them getting past the Quarterfinals in 2014. And I am willing to put money on that.

France - F

Giving England a D felt a little wrong since I can only give France an F (Sorry no F-s. That compromises the scoring system.). They not only proved to be just about the worst team at the World Cup but they humiliated their entire nation while doing so. They let South Africa, a team that was given a spot that they probably couldn't have qualified for, step on their throats. They acted like petulant little children who had no clue what an honor it is to represent your country at the most important sporting event this side of the Olympics. The most unfair thing is that France didn't even belong here. They qualified on a hand ball and now Ireland has to sit at home to watch France disrespect the tournament and the sport. This opportunity only comes around once every four years and they squandered it. They acted like the defeatist quitters that we often stereotype them to be. It's one thing for a once great team to embarrass themselves by just falling off and not living up to their legacy. This was bound to happen to a post-Zidane France. They weren't that good before him and apparently they weren't that good after him. However, it's a totally different thing for a once great team to disgrace themselves and their nation by disrespecting the game and what is stands for. People thought it was an embarrassment when Zidane got roped in and headbutted Materazzi in the last World Cup. Well at least he stood up and fought for something which was very un-French of him. I mean do you even remember who was the captain of France's 1944 World Cup team? That's a trick question...ze fuhrer didn't like futbol. I'd spend the next paragraph talking about France's future prospects but I really don't want to waste the paragraph on a bunch of quitters, malcontents, and losers.

Summer NBA Free Agency

While we're on the subject of losers we find ourselves with a perfect segway into this summer's free agency debacle...LeBracle, if that is what we are calling it. The trick here is that for every loser there is a winner. It's a seesaw effect. Here are some things I think I think and questions I think I have:

Small market teams are more screwed than ever. Ever since the NBA-ABA merger the financial rules of owning a basketball team have been ever-changing. Large market teams have always had a competitive advantage because they produce more money and thus can spend more money. This is why teams like the Boston Celtics, the Los Angeles Lakers, and the Chicago Bulls are the NBA's storied franchises. However, with the advent of the salary cap era we saw a sort of competitive balance arise. During the mid to late 90s we saw perennial powers like the Celtics and Lakers weaken and we saw the Utah Jazz (from the leagues smallest market) become one of it's best teams. Teams from lower third of market size began to thrive. In the 1999 Finals the lowly San Antonio market (1,711,703) crushed the mighty New York market (18,323,002). San Antonio then went on to win four titles in nine years, while the leagues biggest market became arguably it's worst team over that span. Teams like the Indiana Pacers and Portland Trailblazers actually contended for titles. This can't happen in baseball. Mark my words...the Kansas City Royals will never win another World Series in an uncapped league. However, the salary cap made it so that anything was possible in basketball. Every team could spend the same amount of money. More profitable teams were more likely to spend all that money, but if our owner was rich enough you had more than a puncher's chance.

However, we saw a disturbing trend in this off season's free agent dealings. Despite being in a down economy, there was a boatload of money left on the table. In a free agent market that included Lebron James, Dwayne Wade, Chris Bosh, Amare Stoudemire, Dirk Nowitzki, Paul Pierce, Carlos Boozer, Ray Allen, Shaquille O'neal , Tracy McGrady, Yao Ming, Allen Iverson, Manu Ginobili, and countless other all-stars, Joe Johnson walked away with the biggest contract. He signed for $120 million. Miami may have shelled out a lot money for the Big 3 but Tiger Woods could shell out twice that much in divorce court. Elin Nordegrin could be the biggest free agent of 2010. LeBron took over $20 million less than he was entitled to to go to South Beach. This is a new phenomenon, but an explainable one. LeBron made about $15.8 million with the Cavaliers last year. He made over $40 million in endorsements last year. He's willing to take the hit to $14.5 million in salary with the Heat in the hopes that his endorsement number will go up with the change of scenery. The change in jerseys prompting increased sales of his new jersey is enough to make up the salary difference all by itself. And the ability to build your brand in a large market could be the death knell of the small market team. If something doesn't change (and it probably will given that this is the NBA) we could see the Utah Jazz become the Kansas City Royals.

However, the size of the market isn't the only thing shifting the balance of power. LeBron could have gone to New York or Chicago (which are markets #1 and #3 respectively), but he chose to go to Miami (market #9...but still a step up from Cleveland at #22). It's because of the locale. The Heat don't play in South Beach but that is where LeBron is taking his talents. It's because players are being drawn to the NBA's literal "hot spots". Los Angeles, Miami, Phoenix, and Dallas are now prime destinations for NBA free agents and you can bet that every owner except for cheap-ass Donald Sterling is going to cash in on this. We saw this a few seasons ago when Lamar Odom severely undercut his bargaining value for a new contract by admitting to the media that he couldn't play for a team that didn't have a beach. Looks like the Lakers didn't need to match any offers from the Pacers or Grizzlies. So if small market teams are screwed, consider the Milwaukee Bucks double screwed.

Any talk of LeBron ending up as a Top 10 Player of All-Time should be put to rest. Cleveland fans be damned. I still have to think that the biggest loser of the LeBracle is LeBron himself. His career has turned into the kitchen from that super sexy Rachel Leigh Cook "This is your brain on drugs" PSA. It's kind of hard to imagine how he could have fucked things up harder than he did. That extra endorsement money he was looking for probably isn't going to happen. Had he signed with New York or Miami or stayed in Cleveland...it was there for the taking. Instead Amare Stoudemire and Rajon Rondo have swooped in to get in the new lucrative Foot Locker and Nike marketing campaign. Also, after Kevin Durant totally stuck the landing by quietly signing an extension with the small market darlings the Thunder, he immediately received endorsement offers and interest from the likes of EA Sports and Gatorade, who are moving away from LeBron in terms of his spokesperson potential. With Durant signing on as the face of USA basketball for 2010 his star is rising right as LeBron's is plummeting.

Sure, Durant won the scoring title last year but LeBron was still MVP. How can he be in that bad of shape if he's still widely considered to be the best player on the planet? The truth is that it doesn't really matter how good he is. We as Americans don't celebrate the best athletes. We don't even really celebrate the biggest winners. We celebrate the toughest competitors. Look at who we consider to be the greatest of all time. Julius Erving is probably the best pure basketball athlete of all-time. Bill Russell is the greatest winner of all-time. But it appears to be almost consensus opinion that Michael Jordan is the best basketball player of all-time. This is because he is the fiercest competitor of all-time. LeBron didn't really care about competing. He wanted to win. So he fled to South Beach to join up with Wade and Bosh which many will consider to be the easy way out. What he didn't realize is that it isn't just that you win...it's how you win. Winning might not be the only thing as we were once told. And I mean that in that winning might not be enough.

We've already heard Jordan, Magic, Bird, and Barkley weigh in and they all clearly disapprove. And even if LeBron wins eight championships I think he gave up his chance to be Jordan or Magic or Bird or maybe even Barkley who has no championships. It's because those guys loved to compete. They've all said that they never would have dreamed of playing with each other because they reveled in playing against each other. Magic won five titles (mainly against Bird's Celtics) and Bird won three titles (mainly against Magic's Lakers). If you put them on the same team they definitely win more than eight titles but nobody gives a shit because they did it against a Sidney Moncrief led Bucks team, an Alex English led Nuggets team, and a Rockets team on which Rodney McCray was the second best player. I'm not sure that competitive balance would produce any classics.


What LeBron fails to grasp is that some titles mean more than others. A seven-game series usually means more than that of a four-game series because that means the title was earned rather than given. And where you win a title often means the most. It would have meant a lot in Cleveland. Ten years from now few people will be able to name three members of the 2003 Florida Marlins World Series Champions who snapped a five-year World Series drought. However, most good sports fans will probably still be able to name at least eight members of the 2004 Boston Red Sox team that broke at 86-year drought. One title in Cleveland probably equals about three in Miami who are in the midst of a four-year drought. This contrast highlights the two biggest problems for LeBron. #1- This isn't "his team". #2- "His team" couldn't win the big one. Let's address these separately.

This is Dwayne Wade's team and all of Miami knows it. Where as LeBron will be forever villainized in the city that drafted him Wade is now Miami's most beloved athlete of all time. Not only has he won them a title but he also brought in Big Papa Pump and made them the center of the sporting universe. Also, however many titles LeBron wins in Miami...that number will always be one less than Wade. So LeBron will have to live with the fact that Wade is the ringmaster of this three ring circus. That is something Magic, Bird, and Jordan never had to deal with even when they all played for the Dream Team. They would defer on certain plays but they all always thought that any team they were playing on was their team. On the plus side we now know what Scottie Pippen with two MVPs would look like.

However, even more damaging than his relationship with Miami is his relationship with Cleveland. He will forever be known as not being able to get it done in Cleveland. Great champions have to be able to win with the team that drafted them. Russell, Bird, Magic, and Jordan all did it. Sure Kareem left the Bucks but he gave them a title before doing so. Kobe was drafted by the Hornets but was part of a draft day trade so for all intents and purposes the Lakers are his original team. Shaq and Barkley both left their original teams without a title to move on to bigger things but both did so with the understanding that they were the best player and only superstar on their new team. LeBron now looks like the guy who tucked his tail and ran because he wasn't good enough to get it done in Cleveland. You can bemoan the supporting cast all you want but they had the best record in the league two years running. Superstars are the ones who kick it into the next gear during the playoffs and some true superstars (Kobe, Rondo, Howard, and Nash) did. His refusal to dance with the one that brought him will hurt his legacy in the end. Let's talk worst case scenario for LeBron. If the Cleveland rejects that he leaves behind make the Playoffs without him it will be the most damning thing of all. He should be praying that the Cavs flirt with the all-time loss record. Even if Cleveland snags an 8-seed it will say that LeBron wasn't the difference maker that everybody thought he was.

Cavaliers fans are the new Cubs fans. Cleveland hasn't won a sports title since 1946 and I'm not totally convinced that they really want for that streak to end. Suffering has become such a staple of who they are as a sports city that if they lose that part of their identity they'll be devastated. Oh, I know they think they want to win but they don't show it. They are to me the most annoying sports fans out there next to Cubs fans. I know most people hate Lakers fans and Yankees fans and Patriots fans because there winning ways have made them bloated with arrogance. And don't get me wrong, I do dislike all of these fans. But there is nothing that I find more annoying or perverse than fans who routinely whine about their teams losing ways and misfortune as a coping mechanism. My freshman year a die-hard Cubs fan from down the hall started sobbing on the floor in front of my dorm when they were eliminated on the last day of the season. He kept wailing that the Cubbies were killing him. I told him to get out of my doorway. As he sobbed at my feet I informed him that he was scratching my sneakers and that I had a date with destiny and no time left in my busy days to wipe tears from my shoes.

The point here is that I now view Cleveland fans the same way that I view that Cubs fan. Quit your whining! What the hell are you doing to make your city a winning city? Cities need to be viewed as a viable destination for an athlete and a lot of that has to do with the fans. Just because your city hasn't won a title since FDR's last term doesn't mean that you have to have such a defeatist attitude. And never ever rip your team just because they are performing poorly. You will never hear me say a bad word about Xavier basketball. Coping mechanisms are for losers. And losers are for Cleveland so apparently it's a perfect match.

Showmanship is clearly a lost art in the NBA. You can say many things about "The Decision". You could say that it was pompous and you'd be right. You can say that it was ill-advised and tawdry and you'd be right. You can say that it was ruthless and inconsiderate of the city of Cleveland and you'd be right. But I will say that it is boring as fuck and true dat! When I heard that LeBron was going to get an hour long special on ESPN I thought that we would be able to see how far this man had come as an entertainer. He had already shanghaied the sporting news for the summer of 2010 and this was going to be his Grand Finale. I didn't watch it but I considered DVRing it. And boy am I glad that I didn't. This guy is the Sultan of Suck. Pompous, tawdry, and ruthless I can forgive. But I really don't want to forgive boring. You had an opportunity here, son. I expected you to fill the 59 minutes and 55 seconds that you weren't telling us that you were taking your talents to South Beach with something more interesting.


Build your brand by showing off some of your stand-up comedy skills or do some man on the street sketches where members of your entourage go out and interview fans of all your perspective suitors. Do something other than jaw on and on in a dull, staged interview. This is why the dunk contest is all but dead...the NBA's premier talent have no sense of showmanship. Chad Ochocinco put on a full hour show...and nailed it! You have never even been the most entertaining person on any of your teams. Shaq VS. was ten times better than "The Decision". And I would definitely rather see an hour long D-Wade and Barkley Fave Five commercial because those guys are hilarious.

Summer Tennis Report

It's been an auspicious summer for tennis. Given the fact that Wimbledon was disappointing because for the first time in four years we didn't have an epic 5-set barn burner in the Gentlemen's Final this summer was salvaged by several other great matches and a solid hard court season leading up to the US Open which is currently running. Let's take a look my five highlights and lowlights from this summer of tennis:

The Lowlights - Booo!

5. All good streaks must come to an end.

I am referring to multiple streaks that ended this summer during June's French Open. The first was Roger Federer's epic streak of 23 consecutive Grand Slam semifinal appearances. I don't think this is a streak that will never be broken but I do think that it is an impressive one considering Ivan Lendl is in second place with 10. Only two other people (Lendl and Pete Sampras) have cracked ten consecutive quarterfinal appearances of which Roger's active streak is at 25. The man's consistency was sickening. This is a record that won't be touched for a long time (if ever) because only Rafael Nadal is good enough to attain it and the way he treats his knees won't allow him to even play in 20 consecutive Grand Slams.


The other major streak that went down at the French Open was Justine Henin's record of 40-consecutive sets won at Rolland Garros. This streak was less shocking when it came to an end because it was A) a harder streak to maintain, B) a match against the always tough and tantalizingly hot Maria Sharapova, and C) held by a player who had just come off of a two year retirement and had a little rust. That being said this is an amazing streak. She won three consecutive French Opens from 2005-07 and won the last two without dropping a set while stomping over tennis greats and a slow of women ranked at least #3 in the world including: Conchita Martinez, Svetlana Kuznetsova (twice), Maria Sharapova, Nadia Petrova, Mary Pierce, Anastasia Myskina, Kim Clijsters, Serena Williams, Jelena Jankovic, and Ana Ivanovic. Whenever somebody wins a Grand Slam without losing a set it's a masterstroke. To do it in back to back years is legendary. This is a feat that has never been replicated on the men's side and in the Open area has only been achieved by Steffi Graf at the Australian Open in 1988 and 1989 (and even she didn't make it to 40 straight sets). Streaks were meant to be broken but it's still sad to see them go.

4. The Nadal-Berdych Wimbledon final.

This is probably just a case of me being spoiled. Tennis players, fans, and writers alike have often considered the Gentleman's Final at Wimbledon to be the crown jewel of tennis and it has been fairly hard to disagree with them over the last three years as we got to see back to back Federer-Nadal five set classics including what many consider to be the greatest match of all-time in which Rafa finally toppled Roger on his third consecutive try with a 9-7 doozy of a fifth set. Then when Rafa had to pull out of Wimbledon last year Andy Roddick stepped up and challenged Roger in a 5-7, 7-6 (6), 7-6 (5), 3-6, 16-14 showdown in which he served his first 37 games without being broken. This only added to a legacy that includes several other history book matches including the back-to-back Bjorg McEnroe classics in 1980-81 and just about any final featuring Goran Ivanisevic including his classic 1992 final with Agassi, his 1998 final with Sampras, and what I consider the greatest match ever his 2001 slugfest with Patrick Rafter.

This match just failed to live up to that. I watched Nadal work Berdych all over the court and straight set his way to victory without even so much as a tie-breaker. Even during Federer's five straight Wimbledon domination streak we didn't see a final this lopsided. Since the 1996 Wimbledon final between Richard Krajicek and MaliVai Washington at least featured a hot female streaker, the Nadal-Berdych match can only compete with the 2002 Hewitt-Nalbandian final and the 1997 Sampras-Pioline final as the most boring Wimbledon Men's final of the last 25 years.

3. Injuries on the women's side.

You'll notice a lack of upcoming highlights on the women's side due mainly to the fact that this summer has been very injury-prone for them. We've been without #1 Serena Williams and former #1 Justine Henin at this year's US Open. Both the Williams sisters were missing from Cincinnati due to injuries and big-time players like Maria Sharapova, Kim Clijsters, and Caroline Wozniacki have also missed time with injuries. #10 ranked Agnieszka Radwanska is the only currently top 10 ranked player who has not missed time this year with injury. Injury problems have forced former #1s Ana Ivanovic and Dinara Safina out of the top 50 in the rankings and have become such a serious problem that the WTA is adjusting the schedule for next year to make it less demanding. While this might help combat the rash of injuries this is a huge blow for the women's game.


If you read my last blog you may remember that I ranted about Dinara Safina being ranked #1 when Serena Williams currently held three of the four Grand Slams. I stand by this rant. If an entire stadium assumes that the #2 or #3 player is going to destroy the #1 player in a match then your ranking system sucks. However, the Williams sisters skipping the Cincinnati Masters has made me reconsider my stance slightly in terms of how rankings should be tabulated. Fans want to see the top talent go at each other in every major tournament. These tournaments come around but once a year and fans who choose to attend don't want to miss the chance to see their favorite players. I think the Grand Slams do need to be waited heavily but I am now firmly on the side of mandating attendance by top players at Masters events. I would like to see a ruling that if you don't attend the Masters event prior to a Grand Slam due to injury or resting you cannot attend that Grand Slam. I'm fine with more rest to prevent injuries but the four Grand Slams and eight Masters events are must attends to protect the integrity of the competitive balance in tennis.

2. Bad post-match interviews.

I love tennis but it's interviews are just so boring. It's a two-way street. Tennis commentators don't know how to ask questions and tennis players don't know how to answer them. There is only one exception on each side: John McEnroe and Novak Djokovic. This was never more evident than at the US Open. With record-breaking heat during the early rounds every single player was asked about the heat and you kept hearing the same boring answers. Until Novak stated that the shade that came for the final set of his first round match felt like sleeping with his girlfriend. The crowd roared loudly. But they asked the question two hundred more times the rest of the tournament and no male player jumped on the chance to say that the shade or a big win or great shot felt like sleeping with Novak's girlfriend. There are some other decent personalities. Ana Ivanovic is delightful and perky, Marcos Baghdatis at least tries to give interesting perspectives, and Mardy Fish is slightly humorous and relateable, but I probably wouldn't tune into Leno to Ferguson for any of them.

We need more dynamic personalities in the sport. John McEnroe, Andre Agassi, Goran Ivanisevic, and Patrick Rafter were all great interviews. Even former female stars like Jennifer Capriati, Monica Seles, and Lindsey Davenport was good with a microphone. Roger Federer is informative and well-spoken (in every frickin' language) but he is too gracious. I want more bad-ass personality like the kind the McEnroe or young Agassi brought to interviews. And Nadal is just not good at interviews in the slightest. This is the reason that I think he isn't as big a star as Roger despite being #1. He doesn't even know how to kiss up to home crowds (especially Americans) the way all other great players do. Players like Federer, Roddick, and Djokovic have a way of making fans feel important. And let's tell Hannah Storm to vary her questions. She asks the same set of three or four questions to every player she interviews. And let's just teach Andy Murray how to have a conversation. Forget showmanship in his case. Baby steps.

1. No American men in the Top 10.

I attended the Western and Southern Financial Group Masters a few weeks ago and this tournament had the dubious distinction of being the only one during the Open Era of tennis in which there were no American men in the Top 10. I got to see all of the top Americans play but I still haven't seen a Top 10 American man play in person since Andre Agassi defeated Tommy Haas in Los Angeles back in 2004. Also, for the second year in a row an American man has failed to make the Quarterfinals at the US Open. As a hardcore fan of all things USA this hurts me a little. It's understandable because being good at tennis goes against the flow of American culture in the 21st Century. With the advent of MySpace, Facebook, and Twitter we have become a very social people and we find our young athletes flocking more towards team sports where they can both receive athletic accolades and foster relationships with teammates. This helps explain the lack of American single standouts on the men's side despite our continued success in doubles (which has that team dynamic). It also explains why the women's side is so barren with the exception of the Williams sisters who have had each other to lean on in terms of dealing with the loneliness and monotony that comes with singles tennis.

It isn't just tennis. The reason that this phenomenon hasn't been seen in golf yet is because golf stars tend to be older. Wait until the current young generation reaches their 30s. You'll see that the top young talents are from the United Kingdom, Italy, and Japan...not America. This is a frustrating turn of events for a die hard fan of America. But with technology bringing about the globalization of sports and Americans realizing that the greenest pastures lie in dominating sports that the whole world hold sacred, such as soccer and tennis...I expect this trend to change in our favor.

The Highlights - Woo Hoo!

5. Lleyton Hewitt returns to the winner's circle.

Everybody wants to see great champions in action and at their best and for those of us that have grown up in the Roger Federer-Rafael Nadal era of tennis Lleyton Hewitt was merely a memory of a once-great champion who played with the same sort of injury-invoking fury that Nadal plays with. He hadn't been a relevant player on the scene in several years and had taken a huge drop in the rankings when he was playing. It was nice to see him experience something of a comeback during Wimbledon last year during which he made some noise but this summer he won his first meaningful tournament in around four years when he defeated the mighty Roger Federer in the Gerry Weber Open.


This and several other solid performances allowed him to be seeded at all four of this years Grand Slams which had not been the case the last two years. I'm really glad I got to see him play in Cincinnati because the legendary Aussie has to be considered one of the greatest Davis Cup players of all-time and has a unique style which has been praised by peers such as Andre Agassi and Roger Federer. His baseline counter-puncher style of play has really not been effectively utilized by players since and it's good to see that it still holds up. He's not as big or powerful as other players but he is an excellent shot selector and might be the hardest player to ace in the history of the game.

4. Superpowers teaming up.

Sure I don't like it when LeBron, Wade, and Bosh do it because they lack respect for competitive balance. However, I was more than a little amused when #1 Rafael Nadal and #2 Novak Djokovic teamed up to play doubles at the Rogers Cup in Toronto. It was something that hadn't happened since 1976 and I appreciated the novelty of it. I liked it because it brought interest to the doubles game which could use more fanfare. It did not, however, upset the competitive balance because what most people don't realize is that doubles and singles are totally different games. Nadal and Djokovic got beat in the first round by a couple of unheralded Canadians. This is part of the reason that I think Roger Federer is so remarkable. The man stepped in and won the Olympic gold medal in doubles with Stanislas Wawrinka without playing doubles with any semblance of regularity on tour since 2000-01. Doubles doesn't always get the respect that it deserves so it is always appreciated when highly touted singles players enter the draw to help divert the spotlight over towards doubles players.

3. America rises again.

It's been very nice to see America pull out of it's swan dive. Following the men's drop out of the Top 10 for the first time they've already mounted a comeback. Andy Roddick and Marty Fish both thrived at the Cincinnati Masters vaulting Roddick back to #9 and Fish up to #21. This means that there are four Americans seeded in the top 20 at the US Open for the first time since 2001. Mardy Fish and Sam Querrey are playing the best tennis of their lives. Only two players have won four ATP titles this year. One of those is #1 Rafael Nadal and the other is American Sam Querrey with victories over the likes of Andy Murray, Andy Roddick, and Novak Djokovic. John Isner, Sam Querrey, and Marty Fish all have Top 10 potential as Fish and Querrey have no points to defend for the rest of the year. I also thought that young Ryan Harrison showed promise, though it greatly worried me that he blew three match points to lose his third round match.

American men are also getting more versatile in terms of the courts they can play on every country has their specialties. Nobody was surprised when Nadal, a Spaniard, started to dominate clay courts like countrymen and other latinos such as Juan Carlos Ferrero, Gaston Gaudio, Albert Costa, Gustavo Kuerten, Carlos Moya, Sergi Bruguera, Andres Gomez, Guillermo Vilas, and Andres Gimeno. However, people were surprised when he became the first Spaniard or latino of any nation to win Wimbledon (grass) in the Open Era. So you can imagine that I was very excited to see that Sam Querrey and John Isner set up the first All-American final on clay since Agassi and Courier played in the French Open back in 1991.

The women are also looking up as well...in doubles at least. American women have been represented on all four current Grand Slam doubles champions with Vania King breaking through to win at Wimbledon. Liezel Huber and Bethanie Sands-Mettek are also playing quite well and when Serena and Venus get healthy again they are of course the best in the world. Carley Gullickson has likewise brought home Grand Slam bacon for American doubles with her American male partner Travis Parrott. Our doubles dominance (with the Bryan brothers making up the best male team in the world) helps prove my theory that Americans being bred to excel at team sports.

But never fear, singles is looking up for America too. It might take a few years for our solid young crop to develop but solid results in Boys and Girls tournaments by players like Sloane Stevens, Denis Kudla, Andrea Collarini, Beatrice Capra, Ester Goldfeld, Chase Buchanan, Raymond Sarmiento, and Lauren Davis leave hope for the future. Until then we will have to be encouraged by strides being made by young American talents such as Sam Querrey, John Isner, and Melanie Oudin and hope that they can become noisemakers on the big stages.

2. The Isner-Mahut Triathlon Match at Wimbledon.

This was a match unlike anything we are likely to see again. It had me coming back to the TV three days in a row to follow the enthralling action. It shattered at least a hundred tennis records. Leaving both playing time and total aces so far in it's wake that they will likely never be eclipsed. You can add the second most aces ever in a match to the third most aces ever in a match and that combined total doesn't touch this match. They were going at it for over 11 hours. It wasn't always the highest level of tennis but the their ability to just keep going for that long is an accomplishment in itself.

They broke the scoreboard. An IBM programmer had to re-program it for the third day so that it could go as high as it did. They went through a rotation of 28 ball boys because the length of the match was too exhausting for the ball boys and ball girls. It took John Isner 183 games to win this one match. It took Rafael Nadal 169 games to win the entire 2008 French Open. But statistics don't do this match justice. It was so intense in terms of dehydration and muscle fatigue that it may have shortened both players careers by about six months. If that is the case at least they are legends now.

1. The S&W Masters in Cincinnati.

Possibly my favorite thing about living in Cincinnati is that it is one of only four cities in America that gets to host a major tennis tournament for men and women every year. I have been to the S&W Financial Group Masters the last few years and it is a tradition that I hope to keep of going every year. It is awesome. I went on Wednesday which basically means I get to see everybody. I didn't get to see a lot of marquee match-ups but I got to see a lot of tennis and all of the stars. How many tournaments allow you to say that you saw the top 4 ranked players in the world and Andy Roddick all on the same Centre Court in the same day?

Not to mention that all the best matches are on Court #1. Everybody is looking to Centre Court for the great matches and thus I was able to sneak away and sit in the front row of Court #1 for the two best matches of the day: Mardy Fish vs. Fernando Verdasco and Lleyton Hewitt vs. Robin Soderling. It is so much better to be able to watch tennis in person, especially when you are so close to the court. You realize things that don't translate on television. Things like how much Mardy Fish sweats (a lot), that Verdasco curses in English for some reason, or that Anna Chakvetadze does not get the credit she deserves for being a hottie little sex minx and that Robin Soderling does not get the credit he deserves for being a hideous gargoyle.

The other great thing about live tennis that you aren't likely to see on TV are the tremendous arguments that can happen between players and officials. Sure Roddick and Serena have gotten into it with officials in recent years but Hawk Eye has all but eliminated the John McEnroe tirades that made tennis so great to watch. Luckily Hawk Eye is only on Centre Court so if you watch matches on other courts which television often doesn't show you can still see some great throwdowns. Fernando Verdasco must have dropped half a dozen F-bombs while he ranted at the chair umpire for what was probably a pretty bad call. The days of "You Cannot Be Serious!" are still out there, you just need to go have a look for them in person.