The Odd Stat of the Week

Issue: No football this week.  Where are you going to go for your stat?

Short Answer: How about tennis?

Reasoning: I can honestly say that I have yet to watch a single point during the Australian Open.  It is the first major of the year in the great sport of tennis, and, I can honestly say, I don't care.  Tennis is fine.  I don't mind it.  I have watched a match or two in my life.  I even enjoy watching Wimbledon - something about playing tennis on grass.  I don't know.  Maybe I don't care so much about tennis because I stink at it.  Sure, I am competent - I can hit the ball over the net, and I bet I could beat most people that are reading this - but, if I played against someone who was good, I would be made a fool of.  Let me tell you how I know this.

Allow me to take you back to the year 1999.  I was a 20 year old sophomore at Georgia Tech.  A good buddy and teammate of mine, Derek, was dating a girl who played on the tennis team.  I too happened to be "seeing" a girl on the tennis team (I'm not going to mention her name, but she is married to someone famous now.  Kinda weird.).  Somehow a conversation came up of which the result was this: sure, Derek and I will play you guys in tennis, and I bet we can hold our own.  Hell, I bet we can win.  We are dudes, and dudes don't lose to chicks at anything.  Obviously Derek and I weren't THAT sure of ourselves.  And, after a short warm-up period, any confidence we did have, was shattered.  Our damage control systems kicked in, and we agreed with the girls that maybe we needed a little head start.  We wanted 2 games.  They gave us 5.    A 5-0 lead in each set.  We could actually win this thing now.  Right?  Not quite.  Final tally?  7-5, 7-5.  I think we won 3 points the whole time.  I really never expected to win, but I didn't expect to be humiliated.  Lesson learned.  If you can't even serve over-handed, you probably aren't going to beat division-one tennis players.  Even if they are chicks.

Anyway.  This upcoming men's Australian Open final will be only the third major final since 2004 to not feature either Rafael Nadal or Roger Federer (or most likely, both of them).  The 2008 Australian Open final featured Novak Djokovic defeating Jo-Wilfried Tsonga.  The 2005 Australian Open featured Marat Safin defeating Lleyton Hewitt.  That's right, every single French Open final, every single Wimbledon final, and every single U.S. Open final has featured either Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal, since 2004.  25 total grand slam finals (counting the 2011 Australian).  22 have had Nadal or Federer.  7 ('06, '07, '08 Wimbledon, '06, '07, '08 French, and '09 Australian) have actually had both at the same time (Nadal is 5-2, but 3-0 at the French Open).  Federer has 18 grand slam finals appearances.  Nadal has 11 appearances.  These. Dudes. Are. Beasts.  Pretty sure either of them could handle me and Derek.

Runner-up for odd stat of the week: Roger Federer's career record, at a major, when winning the first two sets - 166-0.

The Return of Tiger Woods

Issue: Tiger finally tees it up this week at the Farmer's Insurance Open.  Any thoughts?

Short Answer: I can't wait.

Reasoning: Golf is a sport in which dominance is nonexistent.  The (arguably) greatest player of all time (to this point), Jack Nicklaus, still lost way more tournaments than he won.  His 18 majors sit in the record books alongside 511 wins (Cy Young), 755 home runs (Barry Bonds is not the record holder, I don't care what anyone says), 61 home runs (ibid), 1,549 receptions and 22,895 receiving yards (Jerry Rice), and 5,714 strikeouts (Nolan Ryan) as records that may never be broken.  18 certainly does not seem like a lot in a sport where players compete for 20+ years, and each year four different majors are contested.  But, when you take a look at how hard it is to win a major, or multiple majors for that fact, 18 becomes a hallowed number.  In the history of major tournaments, did you know, that only 76 men have won more than one major?  Did you also know that the list of men who have won 10 or more majors is exactly four people long?  Walter Hagen (11), Bobby Jones (13 - if you count the old majors, i.e., the British Amateur and the U.S. Amateur), Tiger Woods (14), and Jack Nicklaus (18).

I mention the above facts because if Tiger Woods never wins another tournament, he has already positioned himself as one of the top three golfers of all time.  In a sport that dates back longer than most, this is a fairly impressive accomplishment.  And the fact that I am alive to watch Tiger play, means that I can't wait to see him play again, even if it is in the Farmer's Insurance Open.  Many people have written Tiger Woods off, saying that he will never again be his old self.  So what?  Isn't what he gave us from 1999-2008 good enough?  The answer is a resounding, yes.  That being said, why would anyone write this guy off?  Is it because he FINALLY went an entire year without winning a tournament?  I would list all the PGA golfers who have never won a tournament in their entire career, but I'm not sure I have enough room.  Tiger Woods is only 35 years old.  He has won 71 times on the PGA Tour (3rd all time behind Jack Nicklaus (73) and Sam Snead (82)).  So, the guy has some marital problems (his biggest mistake was getting married in the first place - dude, you are one of the most famous athletes on the planet, maybe you should ride that one out for awhile - just a thought) and one substandard year, and it is time to start looking for who's next?  Bubba Watson, Ricky Fowler, Dustin Johnson, Martin Kaymer, Ryo Ishikawa, and Graham McDowell are all fine players and may have fantastic careers on the PGA Tour.  I will give you any of them, plus 2 shots a side, against Tiger, and I will bet you whatever amount of money you want.  One bad year does not a career make, and we should be willing to give that benefit to Tiger.

Tiger's problem is not his game.  It is his head.  Before the media circus surrounding his accident a year and a half ago, Tiger was all about golf all the time.  Now, you can see him attempting to be someone he isn't.  He says hello to fans, grants interviews whenever, and doesn't have that killer look in his eyes anymore.  If he can get that back, watch out.  Jack Nicklaus won his 18th major, at the Masters in 1986, at the age of 46.  Give me one reason Tiger can't still be winning majors at 46?  He is in better shape, has better equipment, and (I think) still has the desire to be the best. 

I have written a couple posts here at uncommonly sports about athletes who I believe have gotten a raw deal.  Cam Newton and Michael Vick come to mind.  Now, Tiger Woods has brought a lot of scrutiny on himself, so it is hard to say he has gotten a raw deal.  But the amount of doubters out there lead me to believe that Tiger, like Lou Brown (manager of the Major League Cleveland Indians) once said, can't wait to give the media a great big s**tburger.  I hope when he wins his first tournament of 2011 he stands up at the podium, holding his giant trophy and oversized check (yes, I realize they don't do this anymore) and gives everyone in the media tent the finger, says "I'm Tiger Woods b**ches," and walks out.  Don't doubt Tiger - he has already proven how good he is, and I feel sorry for the field if he decides he has to do it again.

Carson "The Traitor" Palmer

Issue: What do you think of Carson Palmer demanding a trade from the Bengals?

Short Answer: I don't blame him, but the title of this post should explain it fairly well.

Reasoning: I guess this should be a two part question - 1) why don't I blame him, and 2) why is he a traitor?  I don't blame Carson Palmer for demanding a trade because, well, these are the Cincinnati Bengals.  Mike Brown (the owner/GM/scout/idiot) has successfully run a once proud franchise into the ground, and I couldn't imagine anyone, ever, wanting to play for the Bengals.  I'm not sure why anyone would want to root for the Bengals either, but I do, and that's my life, and I deal with it.  Therapy sometimes helps.  The Bengals stink, and that's all there is to it.  At least we aren't the Lions (who are getting better) or the Bills (who beat us handily this year) or the Panthers (who at least get the first pick in the draft).  So, I understand where Carson is coming from.

So, why do I think he is a traitor?  Plain and simply - he has done nothing to improve the Bengals.  It's not like he is putting up MVP numbers every year only to finish 4-12.  That's right, a quarterback who just posted a 4-12 record, on a team with numerous offensive weapons (Ochostinko, T.O. the cancer, Cedric Benson, Jermaine Gresham), is demanding to be traded.  Hey, Carson - good riddance.  And can you take Chad and T.O. with you when you leave?  If there is one thing that makes Bengals fans, Bengals fans, it is the fact that we wallow in the sorrows of our crappy team TOGETHER.  Cincinnatians are bonded by the fact that we stink, we know we stink, but, THIS IS THE YEAR!  After about week 7 we realize this again is not the year, but there is still a team to be cheered on, and Cincinnatians do so every Sunday.  Carson, we thought you were one of us, but you are no Bengal.  I hope you enjoy Carolina, or Seattle, or San Francisco, and I hope they continue to be mediocre teams with you at quarterback.

Let's go to the stats - http://www.pro-football-reference.com/ is the best site I have seen when attempting to dissect stats.  One of the best features they have is called "similar players" in which they list players who have similar stats and production.  Here is a list of similar players to Carson Palmer: Tony Romo, Eli Manning (only Super Bowl winner on the list, and we all know how fortuitous that was), Aaron Brooks, Michael Vick (I am assuming they mean passing and not rushing similarities), David Garrard, Jake Delhomme, Scott Mitchell, Mark Rypien (I lied, he won a Super Bowl too - no, I'm not kidding), Philip Rivers (I only assume he is on this list for his playoff failures too), and Chad Pennington.  Whoa.  Who on this list could demand a trade and be taken seriously?  Not many.  Carson Palmer has a career record of 46-51.  He has posted a winning record only twice - 2005 (11-5) and 2009 (10-6).  Both times the Bengals made the playoffs.  Both times the Bengals lost in the 1st round (sidenote: I realize that had Kimo Von Oelhoffen not rolled up Carson's knee 2 minutes into the game in 2005, not only could we have won that game, but the next 5 years of Bengals "lore" may have been different, and I may not even be writing about this right now.  The Steelers are dirty and I hate them greatly.  They cheat and they knew if Carson was out of the game, we were in trouble.  Typical Steelers.  Go Packers!).

Carson Palmer's most impressive stat - in the 2005 playoff game he was 1 for 1 for 66 yards before the Steelers decided it would be easier to win without Palmer on the field.  That stat is not enough for Bengals fans to take this trade demand seriously.  See ya Carson.  Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.  Or do.  I, and Cincinnatians, shouldn't care either way.  It's time to rebuild.  Again.

Parody at its Finest

Issue: Did you know there is a "fair use" doctrine protecting people from copyright infringement if they use someone else's copyright for purposes of parody?

Short Answer: Yes I do.  And I am thankful.

Reasoning: I am not an internet junkie.  I use the internet for information, gambling, and, well, you know.  Viral videos rarely make appearances on my computer screen, because if everyone else thinks they are funny, then I usually don't.  On top of that, even if a viral video is funny, I don't want to think it's funny, because I don't want to be part of the crowd.  Yes, I know I have problems.

Funny thing is, viral videos are kind of like fraternity guys.  As a whole, viral videos are annoying and stupid.  But, if you carefully choose which videos to watch, they are actually quite funny.  Just like fraternities as a whole are annoying and stupid, but, if you have the opportunity to talk to a fraternity guy solo (you know, without 20+ drunk idiots attached to his ass), he is usually a pretty decent fella.  Usually.

Thanks to my brother Casey (Sigma Phi Epsilon, Indiana University) for sending me this video.  It is a parody of the LeBron James "What Should I Do?" commercial, starring a Brett Favre look-alike.  It is hilarious and it is not copyright infringement (hopefully).  It is also probably not 100% safe for work as a certain part of the male anatomy is discussed quite a bit.  So, maybe just turn the volume down a bit.  Even though everyone in the office will be able to hear you laugh out loud.  Here is the video:

I have watched it six times, and I am still laughing.