Talk of a possible 10-game football contract between Notre Dame and Connecticut has set off quite a bit of controversy in Connecticut - and most of it is negative. According to rumors leaked over the Internet, UConn would play at Notre Dame for five games beginning in 2009. UConn's five home games would be split between Gilette Stadium and the new Giants Stadium, with the series ending in 2020. The controversy amongst UConn fans is that the Huskies would not get a chance to host Notre Dame at its true home stadium - Rentschler Field. Rightfully so. I would love to see Notre Dame run out onto the Rent's turf to their famous fight song as much as anyone, but playing home games in Massachusetts and New Jersey would be a good thing. Here's why:
1. For all UConn fans who have complained over the years about the Huskies' scheduling the likes of Maine, New Hampshire, Hofstra, and Buffalo, Notre Dame is obviously a HUGE step up. I realize that scheduling cupcakes is common practice in college football and for every Appalaichian State upset, there are 1,000 games that are decided by 5 touchdowns or more. These games serve little purpose and are only additional means for school's athletic departments to rake in another gameday gate. In fact, the games could wind up hurting more than they can help. Injuries occur in every game, but I'd hate to see someone like Donald Brown tear up a knee against Hofstra as opposed to a bigger name school. Notre Dame bring instant credibility to UConn's schedule and does nothing but boost their strength of schedule and BCS rating. Notre Dame struggled in 2007 but they had to replace about 2/3 of their roster. Notre Dame is a program that doesn't take long to rebuild (look at the 2008 UConn basketball team as an example) and the opportunity to play against them allows UConn to continually measure themselves up against a big-time program.
2. Look at where the "home" games are tentatively scheduled to be played. Gilette Stadium, just 20 miles outside of Boston, and Giants Stadium in New Jersey. Massachusetts and New Jersey have become important battleground states for UConn in terms of recruiting high school talent. Although they don't play each on the field, UConn and Boston College have a fierce rivalry in the recruiting wars since they often target the same area kids. In terms of an on-field rival, Rutgers serves of UConn's #1 hated conference foe. Randy Edsall's staff had dipped into Massachusetts and New Jersey for high school kids and they often compete against BC and Rutgers to land their targets. To play "home" games in these two school's backyards would be a major score for a program that is up-and-coming and trying to establish itself against geographic rivals. High school kids in the Mass and New Jersey areas would be able to go see UConn play close to their homes in a game that would have a fair amount of local hype. Think of the effect that a few thousand UConn carflags would have ripping down the Mass and Jersey Turnpikes. Granted, there will be a LARGE amount of Irish fans at these games since Boston and New York serve as two huge alumni centers for Notre Dame, but if UConn can be competitive or win a game, they'd be able to sell more tickets to Husky fans for these games in the future. UConn could gain a nice territorial recruiting advantage if their "home" games are outside of Connecticut. Not to mention, this would be an excellent chance to spread the buzz of the program outside of state lines.
3. Television. It's extremely frustrating to try to find a local bar or friend's house that has ESPNU to watch the Huskies play. Last time I checked, everyone who has a TV in their home has NBC. Notre Dame refuses to join a football conference in order to keep their highly lucrative television contract with NBC and that's not going to change anytime soon. If UConn can play competitively in the game - and there's no reason to think that they wouldn't be able to in 2009 with a Senior dominated team that year - then they will really make a mark on the national scene. If they win the game, they could create a buzz similar to what Boston College when they upset a highly ranked Irish team in Notre Dame Stadium. The opportunity to showcase the program, the new facilities, and the players on NBC is a no-brainer in terms of trying to market UConn football.
4. Playing "home" games outside of Connecticut because Notre Dame wants to play in larger venues will raise the question - when is it time to expand Rentschler Field? Once again, the UConn athletic department and the state of Connecticut built a venue far too small for a rapidly-growing sports program. Gampel Pavilion became far too small of an arena for basketball games just five years after its doors opened and with talk of possible XL Center renovations coming in the coming years, there's also talk that UConn could be building a bigger on-campus facility for their basketball teams. Over twenty years later, we may be seeing history repeat itself with the football program. Although the Huskies did not sell out every game in 2007, they were co-champions of the Big East conference and we all know that Connecticut loves a winner. This off-season has seen a more aggressive approach to selling season tickets for 2008 and the Huskies could be playing in front of full capacity for every game, including the meaningless opener against Hofstra. A few years of continued success (not improbable as this team is now going to be led by upper classmen in the upcoming years) will spark the season ticket campaign and the demand for tickets will intensify. Notre Dame turning its nose up on the small 40,000 seat Rentschler Field may in fact be the last straw to add 15,000 more seats and make the Rent a 55,000 seat venue. The stadium was designed to be easily expanded if needed and there are already blueprints to expand when the time is ready. A few "home" games in Boston and New York may strum up the battle-cry to increase the stadium size so that future out-of-conference opponents can't turn their noses up at UConn's small stadium.
There are alot of grumblings from UConn season ticket holders that they are upset with the fact that Notre Dame is not coming to the Rent and rightfully so. I would love to see the day that a team like Notre Dame, with their tradition, suits up in East Hartford. But that day isn't today. UConn is too new of a program and too desperate to increase its strength of schedule and national exposure to decline this contract because of it. I've even read ridiculous claims from "fans" threatening to boycott the games played in Gilette Stadium and Giants Stadium. That won't do anyone any good except allow Notre Dame to sell more tickets to its fans.
I understand that it's disappointing that Notre Dame doesn't want to play in the stadium that was built with tax-payer dollars but let's be realistic. The Fighting Irish can sell out any stadium in the country so why would they want to play in a puny 40,000 seat venue when they can play in stadiums that seat over 65,000? If UConn is designated the "home" team in these games, why would they pass up the opportunity to add an additional 25,000 tickets sold to their revenue stream? They wouldn't...and they shouldn't.
Monday, February 11, 2008
UConn vs. Notre Dame?
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Clemens Caption Contest!
I'm still bummed about the Super Bowl so I thought this might cheer me up. This beautifully cropped photo was submitted by an avid Doser a few weeks ago and I had been waiting for the Super Bowl buzz to subside a little to post it. What better day than today - the day that Roger Clemens met with congressional lawyers for over 5 hours in Washington to discuss the allegations in George Mitchell's steroid report by former trainer Brian McNamee that he injected Clemens with steroids and human growth hormone.
DOOLEY DOSE "CLEMENS CAPTION CONTEST" DISCLAIMER:
I, Dooley, do not condone the use of steroids or any other illegal drugs. I do not attribute guilt to Roger Clemens, nor do I suspect Mr. Clemens of taking any performance-enhancing drugs. The findings of former Senator George Mitchell are his and his alone. The needle shown in this photo may or may not contain a performance-enhancing drug. Although it is implied that the syringe may contain steroids or human growth hormone, this particular needle could also hold Vitamin B-12 water. The drug-testing lab at the Dooley Dose was unavailable to test this particular needle but, judging by the look on Mr. Clemens' face, a shot of B-12 water may, in fact, be of interest to Mr. Clemens. The Dooley Dose also does not take responsibility for any hurt feelings that you, the reader, may feel after seeing Roger Clemens sticking his tongue out at you. Clemens may not even see you; he does seem like he is extremely intent on obtaining the content that this needle appears to be holding and, instead of sticking his tongue out at you, he may be salivating at the thought of this delicious looking needle. In fact, we here at the Dooley Dose think that you need to get over yourself. Seriously, Clemens can't see you. The Dooley Dose also does not imply that all people who stick out their tongues take performance-enhancing drugs. This includes famous tongue wagglers, such as: Gene Simmons and Michael Jordan. There has been no scientific connection, as of this posting, that links sticking out your tongue and being a roidhead. I remember playfully sticking out my tongue at a girl in the 4th grade and, despite being offered a dozen needles filled to the rim with the juice, I did not accept the offer. See? There's one example of someone sticking out their tongue and not being hooked on steroids. Back to the girl: I think that this occurred during the stage of my life when I first attempted to flirt. In the official mid-80s 4th grade handbook, sticking one's tongue out was a sign of interest without being called a sissy by your playground peers. Nobody, except for the girl whom this "sign" was intended, saw the tongue. Some saw the girl immediately start to cry and run away, and everybody saw my 4th grade teacher yell at me while she was teaching me the valuable lesson that sticking your tongue out at people isn't nice. I didn't cry though - crying is for sissies.
Monday, February 4, 2008
David (Bleeping!) Tyree
Before the Red Sox won their first World Series in 86 years back in 2004, Boston-area fans spat venom towards a New York athlete because of his improbable heroics in a big game. After Bucky Dent hit an unlikely homer into the screen in left during the 1978 play-in playoff game at Fenway, Boston fans gave Dent a new middle name that captured the two feelings they had for Dent's home run that kept the Red Sox from making the playoffs: disbelief and anger. After the Giants 17-14 upset victory over the New England Patriots in Super Bowl XLII, New England fans may extend a new middle name to David Tyree.
David Tyree's improbable catch on an amazing 3rd and 5 play in the closing minute not only completed what will go down as one of the most remembered plays in Super Bowl history, it extended the Giants game-winning drive and set them up deep into Patriots territory at the 23 yard line. For as long as I live, I will never forget this play. I'll never forget that Richard Seymour had Eli Manning's jersey in both hands and couldn't bring him down to the ground. I'll never forget that Jarvis Green was also in Manning's area and had every opportunity to bring him down. I'll never forget that 4 or 5 Patriots had a chance to sack Manning right before he threw up his Hail Mary pass to Tyree. But most of all, I'll never forget that it was David Tyree - the one receiver on the Giants who I would feel comfortable with leaving wide open - who made the impossible catch (I've seen a replay of that catch 100 times and each time I am shocked that the ball didn't touch the ground) to turn the tides against the Patriots. With Rodney Harrison prodding and punching at the ball and Tyree, the improbable hero of Super Bowl XLII was able to leap higher than Harrison, pin the ball against his helmet as he fell backwards, and then prevent the ball from ever touching the ground. Seconds later, Ellis Hobbs jumped a phantom slant pattern and left Plaxico Burress wide open in the end zone to make an easy game-winning touchdown reception. 17-14, final.
I won't kid anyone - I'm devastated. This loss is the worst loss I've ever had to take as a sports fan. This loss ranks ahead of the Luis Gonzalez bloop hit game, blowing a 3-0 ALCS lead to the Red Sox, UConn's loss to George Mason in the Elite 8, Claude Lemieux's backhand goal in Game 7 of the '86 Adams Division Finals, or last year's blown lead in the AFC Championship Game. As the closing seconds ticked off the clock and the Giants fans began to celebrate at the Super Bowl party I went to, the only thought that repeatedly ran in my head was "David 'Effin'' Tyree".
I'm no dummy, I saw some warning signs before the game started. The Patriots hadn't played well in a few weeks and looked stale in the last few weeks of the season. If you re-read my Super Bowl Pick post, I knew that the Super Bowl gods were pissed. They wanted more justice for SpyPoop and re-kindled the whole controversy over Super Bowl weekend. Somewhere, Stanley Wilson, Eugene Robinson and Barrett Robbins are feeling less like Super Bowl goats and more like ordinary people compared to Arlen Specter and the ghosts of SpyPoop. The Super Bowl gods used the vote-seeking Senator like a puppet in order to remind everyone of SpyPoop and why the Patriots couldn't possibly win. Specter, a Republican from Philadelphia, satisfied thousands of still disgruntled Eagles fans over their Super Bowl loss to the Pats and raised questions about the validity of the Patriots Super Bowl success. That folks is much too big of a hurdle to climb to win a Super Bowl.
I also saw a warning signs during the game. The first play from scrimmage for the Patriots offense (after sitting on the sidelines for 25 agonizing minutes when the defense couldn't get off the field) was a botched fake-reverse screen pass that had no chance of success against the Giants defensive line. Tom Brady had about as much time to throw the ball as one might have to cross the street in Times Square during rush hour. Speaking of Brady, his supermodel girlfriend was shown on TV at the game to officially create her own version of the Jessica Simpson curse. The Patriot players mannerisms looked like they were already beaten as early as the first half. And at my party, a Patriots fan left to go home with the Patriots leading 7-3 in the third quarter (I tried to reverse the negative energy after the Giants took the lead 10-7 by turning my Seymour jersey and hat backwards and moving over to the other side of the room to bring more luck but it wasn't enough karma to un-do a Patriots fan leaving when their team was winning).
But, like any fan, I ignored all of these obvious signs of doom and continued to hold out hope that the Patriots could finish the perfect season and forever shut Mercury Morris up. When Brady found Randy Moss in the end zone with 2:47 left in the game to take a 14-10 lead, I thought that the Patriots might be able to win despite the Super Bowl gods, lack of emotion on the field, and the Patriots fan leaving the party with the Pats leading. A few Eli completions and then the improbable David (Effin') Tyree catch later, I finally was convinced that it was not meant to be. Even as Brady's bomb to Moss with 20 seconds left (the one that Corey Webster broke up) looked like it might have been complete, I didn't feel like the Patriots were going to win. There were no bad calls or controversial plays. The Giants outplayed the Patriots from start to finish and deserved to pull off the greatest Super Bowl upset ever.
So how will the Patriots respond in 2008? If Super Bowl loser's history could talk, it would say "not good". Almost always, the team that loses a Super Bowl has a disaster-filled season the following year. Take a look back at the past 5 Super Bowl losers; Chicago, Seattle, Philadelphia, Carolina and Oakland all had disappointing seasons the following year. Only Seattle was able to re-group and make the playoffs but they were bounced out early. The 2002 Giants followed their Super Bowl loss with a losing season. The Patriots now have to also deal with the Super Bowl loser's curse in 2008 and it won't be easy. Asante Samuel is almost as good as gone in free agency, Randy Moss and Donte Stallworth are free agents, the defense is aging and may face some retirements from players such as Junior Seau, Tedy Bruschi, and possibly Rodney Harrison. They do own the 49ers' 1st round pick (#7 overall) so they will be able to select an impact player on defense, but the pick that they are surrendering because of SpyPoop now looks alot bigger than it did 24 hours ago.
Congratulations to the Giants and especially coach Tom Coughlin and Eli Manning. They will both (finally) be accepted by Giants fans and will no longer be goats of New York City. After pulling off the biggest upset in Super Bowl history (and maybe sports history), this team will be celebrated as heroes and given a "giant" parade. Up in New England, and in my house, it's Depression Central thanks largely to David "Effin" Tyree.
Sunday, February 3, 2008
Super Bowl Pick
I've thought long and hard about this pick and, more importantly for you, what to write about it. A few days ago, I was all-aboard the Patriots Express and willing to lay down the 12 points thinking this game was going to be a blowout. That was before SpyPoop peeped its ugly head back into the foreground of Super Bowl weekend. Congress wants to ask the NFL why they destroyed the SpyPoop tapes that they ordered from the Patriots. Why? I have no idea. There is no steroids/drug issue here to teach kids a lesson about. Just accusations about video-taping coaches signals. I'm not sure why we need to have our federal government involved with this SpyPoop nonsense. And I really don't know why we need all of this brought up again just hours before the Super Bowl. Just as expected, we now have two other former Patriot employees now claiming that the Patriots have been video recording as far back as 1996 and may have video taped the St Louis Rams walk-through before their 2001 Super Bowl upset. The Patriots vehemently deny any wrong-doing, the NFL has stated that they have known about the accusations for months but there is no evidence of it, and the Rams won't comment other than to offer that they would have been walking through their red zone offense plays. Kurt Warner would like former video assistant Matt Walsh interviewed but Walsh says he wants no part with being put on trial and wants his legal fees to be paid for by media outlets so he can tell his "story". At some point, all of this may prove to be true, false, or just a big waste of time. But what it is doing right now is causing a form of distraction to the Patriots.
The Cardinal sin of any team in a Super Bowl is to have a controversy happen over Super Bowl weekend. The team that suffers this kind of a setback usually loses the game - big. In recent memory, how long did it take for John Elway to pick apart prostitute-hunting Eugene Robinson's Atlanta Falcons secondary just hours after Robinson was arrested for soliciting sex? That game was over by halftime. What about Barrett Robbins' Oakland Raiders? Do you recall what happened to Rich Gannon as he threw for interception after interception against Tampa Bay to lead to another Super Bowl blowout? He was under constant pressure all game and the Raiders offensive line, without its starting center, couldn't keep up with the blocking calls on blitz packages. How about Cincinnati Bengals running back Stanley Wilson on the eve of Super Bowl 23? This game was closer (49ers won 20-16), but Wilson's decision to crack himself out in his hotel bathroom the night before the Super Bowl certainly didn't help the Bengals prepare for their big game. Now, on the eve of Super XLII, we have SpyPoop...all over again. While there haven't been any players who have been arrested or doped up on drugs as of this posting, the controversy is big and distracting to New England.
Before the timely re-introduction of SpyPoop by Congress, I was ready to go all-in with New England. Tom Brady. Randy Moss. Rodney Harrison. Bill Belichick. Tedy Bruschi. Richard Seymour. Yup, I was ready to say that these guys want to put an end to Mercury Morris and those overly arrogant '72 Dolphins. I was ready to say that the Patriots have won their past 3 Super Bowls each by a field goal and that they want to close this one out with an exlamation mark like those 80s 49er teams or 90s Cowboys teams. I was ready to say that the week 17 showdown between the Giants and Patriots actually helped the Patriots more because they will come into the game with complete respect for the Giants and will prepare to play their best game to win. I was ready to say that the disparity between the AFC and NFC is too big for a #5 seed from the NFC to knock off the AFC's best Super Bowl respresentative since the '72 Dolphins. I was ready to say all of this, annoint the Patriots as 44-17 winners, and call them the greatest team of all time. Ready, that is, until the Super Bowl gods reminded everyone of SpyPoop.
If you think that I'm going to go against the Super Bowl gods and pick the Patriots, you're crazy. It's clear to me that the gods have stirred up some controversy to ground the Patriots. There seems to be an endless supply of ex-Patriot employees and elected government officials more than willing to try to bring down the Patriots. The Super Bowl gods have spoken and spoken loudly. Stanley Wilson was just an appetizer. Eugene Robinson was a warm-up. Barrett Robbins was a faceless center. We're talking about a decade of alleged video tapes and questions about past Super Bowl validity. If this was the regular season, the Patriots might be able to overcome all of this and win. But we're talking about the Super Bowl. Teams don't survive controversies on the eve of the big game - it's just the way it is.
Giants, 20-19. I believe this score prediction will bring chills down the spines of Giants fans everywhere as they remember the last time their team was a big underdog to an explosive offensive AFC East team.
(And if you think that I'm going to pick the Patriots and possibly serve as the final straw that broke the jinxed camel's back, you're even more crazy.)
Saturday, February 2, 2008
All (Jo)han's On Deck!
The Mets and ace hurler Johan Santana agreed to a 6-year, $137.5 million (although the deal could reach up to a 7-year $150 million, with options) contract extension on Friday. In doing so, the Mets were able to convince Santana to waive his no-trade clause by the 5PM Friday deadline and get their man for a sack of peanuts. What a great move by the Mets, a club still licking its wounds of last season's late meltdown to blow the NL East to the Philadelphia Phillies. This move not only helps to push that painful memory from the minds of the Mets organization and its fans, but the arrival of Johan Santana definitely makes them hands-on favorite to win the NL East and probably the National League.
To complete the deal, the Twins will receive outfielder Carlos Gomez and righthanders Philip Humber, Kevin Mulvey and Deolis Guerra from the Mets. There's no word whether or not Mets GM Omar Minaya will send Twins GM Bill Smith to the Broadway show "Is He Dead?" - as in, will Smith feel the wrath of disgruntled Twins fans for trading away its superstar?
I found this in the Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune:
FUN WITH NUMBERS
Between 2003 and '07, Johan Santana went 70-32 for the Twins as a full-time starting pitcher. Here are his season averages during that four-year span:
3,393 pitches
684 outs recorded
228 innings pitched
34 starts
18 victories
If he mainains those average while $21.5 million per year for the Mets, Santana will receive:
$6,337 per pitch
$31,433 per out
$94,298 per inning
$632,352 per start
$1,194,444 per victory
Anyway, as I stated before and I'll state it again, the move to acquire Santana gives the Mets the best rotation in the NL East. Let's take a look at how the division stacks up...
Mets:
Johan Santana - best pitcher in baseball not named Josh Beckett
Pedro Martinez - plenty of Cy Young Awards; if he can stay healthy, he's still dangerous
John Maine - is he the Maine of the 1st half of the 2007 season or 2nd half? The 1st half Maine was lights out
Oliver Perez - great bounce-back season in 2007
Mike Pelfrey - promising youngster yet to live up to form
Orlando Hernandez - a reliable 5th starter capable of winning games if Pelfrey falters
Braves:
John Smoltz - can still get it done and comes up big in big games
Tim Hudson - returned to normal in 2007
Tom Glavine - returns to Hot-lanta after a few years in New York to finish stellar career
Chuck James - respectable 11 wins and 4.24 ERA in 2007
Buddy Carlyle - awful
Mike Hampton - hurt
Phillies:
Cole Hamels - as good as anyone in baseball
Brett Myers - returns to the rotation after spending a year as the team's closer in 2007
Jamie Moyer - as he gets older, he is losing velocity...but is that a good thing???
Kyle Kendrick - big and young and posted a good 3.87 ERA in 2007
Adam Eaton - garbage
Chad Durbin - meh
Marlins:
Scott Olsen - turned out to be a head-case in 2007 and his numbers reflected it
Sergio Mitre - the ex-Cub started off well but came back down to Earth later in the season
Andrew Miller - a key ingredient of the Miguel Cabrera trade; lots of promise here
Rick VandenHurk - the pride of the Dutch
Anibal Sanchez - injuries killed his 2007 season and probably won't help in 2008
Mark Hendrickson - what he lacks in talent, he makes up for in height
Nationals:
Shawn Hill - injury plagued but decent when healthy
Matt Chico - young lefty will need to battle in 2008
John Patterson - injuries the past 2 seasons have wiped out his 2005 promise
Joel Hanrahan - another young guy who will need to battle to keep his spot in the rotation
Jason Bergmann - see: Hanrahan, Joel
John Lannan - see: Bergmann, Jason
