Showing posts with label labor disputes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label labor disputes. Show all posts

Thursday, August 11, 2011

TWIOT: NFL Training Camp Assessment




The AFC's two favorites?
Photo Credit: ESPN.com
Well, thank God professional football will come back with no missed games outside of a meaningless Hall of Fame preseason game. Hallelujah, hallelujah, praise the Lord! Praise the Lord! The season may a month or so out, but now that its back, why not give a very rudimentary look at the way things will shape up. I'll save my full predictions for the Opening Night, but now, here are ten essential questions for the upcoming NFL season.

1. Are the Eagles a "Dream Team"?

No, and I'm saying this as a fan who has every reason to believe that they could be the best squad money can buy under the constraints of the NFL salary cap. I'm not saying that they won't be good, because I think they will. I think they win the division, and depending on how the Giants or Cowboys gel as teams, we may just win it running away, and I don't mean at 2002-04 levels, but with the way the Phillies right now seem to be running away with their division (knock on wood, for the love of God, don't let me jinx the baseball team). I mean, look at the collection of players on both sides of the ball. Michael Vick, DeSean Jackson, Jeremy Maclin, Steve Smith, Brent Celek, LeSean McCoy, Ronnie Brown, Nnamdi Asomugha, Asante Samuel, Dominique Rogers-Cromartie and Trent Cole all range from very good to the best at their respective positions. However, that's only really looking at things in a vacuum.

For one, the NFC East rarely, if ever, is won going away by anyone. Remember, the Eagles were challenged in their salad days by the Giants, and I don't see them really going away this year either. Two, the Eagles may not even have the most impressive collection of talent in the conference. That distinction may still belong to the Green Bay Packers, who still boast the singular best offensive and defensive players in the NFL from last season in Aaron Rodgers and Clay Matthews. Plus, the defending Super Bowl Champions will be getting back a lot of players from injury as well.

Plus, there's that whole deal about the lines really being questions for the Birds. Games are won and lost in the trenches. That's a fact. Granted, there were signings that addressed both lines, but will they be enough, especially on the offensive line? I mean, Vick can do a lot with his feet to diffuse a pass rush, but for all his talents, his blitz awareness can be absolutely terrible at times. When the line had trouble holding back the front four from getting penetration, you could imagine how many free blitzers they let get into the backfield. I saw a really bad example of this at the infamous Tuesday night game, when a Vikings safety came into the backfield untouched and clobbered Vick, forcing a fumble. Vick didn't even know he was there until impact. That's bad. So while you think Vick may not need a line to be effective, well, even he can't turn every play into a positive if he's getting no protection.

Plus, the players that I did mention have some question marks. Maclin is battling a mystery illness. Samuel is on the trading block and isn't exactly happy about it. Jackson is holding out. The newly-signed Smith is battling through a knee injury and probably won't be ready Week 1. So yeah, there are plenty of reasons to think the Eagles will crash and burn. That being said, I still think they're in really good shape. Just don't crown 'em yet.

2. Okay then, other than the Packers, what other teams do you see with a chance at winning the NFC?

The Falcons are definitely a squad to contend with. Last year, they gained homefield advantage, and although they squandered it away, it wasn't like they lost to the Seahawks, right? The Packers were not going to be denied. The scary part is that the Dirty Birds got better all around for the most part. They signed DE Ray Edwards, a guy I wanted the Eagles to pick up, and they may have gotten the best overall offensive talent in the draft in Alabama WR Julio Jones. With Roddy White on the other side and Tony Gonzalez in the middle of the field, the Falcons all of a sudden have one of the scariest air attacks in the whole league. It's amazing that one of the three teams among the Eagles, Packers and Falcons is going to have to play on Wild Card weekend, because I think they may be three of the best four teams in the NFL right now, not NFC, but NFL.

Other than those three, well, anything goes. That's the beauty of the NFL; the best teams on paper in August rarely play out as the best teams on the field. The rest of the NFC right now has no fewer than ten teams that could make the playoffs. Right now, only the Redskins, Vikings and Panthers seem dead in the water to me, but who knows, I've been proven wrong before.

3. So what, is the AFC chopped liver?

No, but I think on the whole, it's a little more predictable, at least in the three divisions that aren't the West. I think there are fewer teams that are going to contend to go deep in the playoffs as well. For example, it wouldn't surprise me to see the Lions or 49ers make a deep run in the NFC, even at the expense of their big three teams. However, even though I'm not exactly sure that the Browns, Ravens, Jaguars or even the Broncos won't make the playoffs, I'd be utterly shocked if they crashed the party in the AFC Title game. There's less parity in the AFC this year. It's very top heavy.

Basically, it comes down to the Jets, Patriots, Steelers, maybe the Colts and possibly the Chiefs. That may seem like a lot of teams, but compared to how many I think can possibly make noise in the NFC, it's not that many at all.

4. Have we finally seen the last of Brett Favre?

...no, no, NO MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP!! Err... I mean, I don't think you're ever going to hear the last of him, at least for a couple more years. Any time a team has QB issues or is looking for a backup, Favre's name is probably going to be dropped, either by the hive mind of reporters who for some reason flock to slobber the guy no matter if he's playing "heroically" or texting dick pics to Jenn Sterger, or by his agent who will call a big press conference just to say Favre is retired and has no plans of coming back.

That being said, there will be bluster, but I think the worst is over. I don't want to definitively say that he's not coming back because when he does, I'll catch some of the blowback, and believe me, I don't want anything to do with being seen as a guy who supports the notion that Favre is good for the game right now. However, I'd be less surprised to see Cam Newton lead the Panthers to a perfect season than I would be to see Favre starting any games for a NFL team this year. I just think last year, he got battered, and even his dumb hick self has to have gotten the hint that he's too old for this shit anymore, right? Right?

*knocks on wood*

5. The rookie wage scale, the new policy on holdouts from training camp and the decree on a salary floor has made this offseason unique and interesting. However, did it make things better?

Depends on whose perspective you're taking here. It's clear the owners won the lockout because they now have way more leverage over players, both rookie and veteran, with the wage scale and the holdout policy. A guy wants more money, especially one drafted in rounds 2 or later from previous years (the dropoff into the second round for salaries is pretty epic... DeSean Jackson is only slated to make $565K whereas Darrius Heyward-Bey makes $2.42M), and not only does he have to grin and bear it, but now his holdout will cost him money and eat more into his bottom line. The first round picks now will make a fraction of what their forebears made. From that standpoint, the greedy shitbag owners got what they wanted with a minimal deflection of the salary floor, which really still amounts to pennies out of their pocket relatively speaking.

That being said, "only" $565K? While I can baffle at the average fan's siding with the owners over players (or at the very least their equal disdain for both sides in conflicts such as these), I can wholly understand their lack of sympathy for a guy like Jackson or Chris Johnson. Fans who plunk down their hard-earned cash to watch grown men play school yard games don't necessarily want to care about the economics (hm, sounds familiar on this, The Wrestling Blog, eh?). Quite frankly, this improves the quality of the game. It'll force more players into training camp on time, they'll be more prepared, and the quality of play will theoretically be sharper in week 1.

6. How long do you see Kyle Orton staying in Denver?

I thought he would have been gone already, and in fact, that Miami hasn't already traded for him means that I don't think he's going anywhere. If the Dolphins, a team struggling to find a QB for about a decade now in the post-Marino area, won't give up half of what the Cardinals gave up for Kevin Kolb, then I seem to think Orton, a valuable fantasy QB and not a whole lot else it seems, doesn't have the demand that the Broncos thinks he has. Looking around the league, there aren't a whole lot of teams that seem to think they have a need for a QB right now. Tennessee got themselves Matt Hasselbeck, a guy who may be washed up, but don't tell the Titans that. The Seahawks have hitched their wagon to Tavaris Jackson and Charlie Whitehurst. Whether you think Orton is better than both those guys or not, it doesn't matter what you think. Pete Carroll thinks he can salvage T-Jax, so that's what's going to happen.

The best thing that can happen for Denver is for a marquee name to get injured and for Tim Tebow to prove everyone wrong and make the jump from college-fabulous player to sound NFL signal caller. It would make Orton expendable, but given that he's a capable QB being bandied about midseason, he'd still command a big price tag. Until then, I expect him to be a Bronco until the end of the year.

7. How will Albert Haynesworth fit in with the Patriots?

Bill Belichick has this track record of taking problem guys and reining them in at the very least. Look at Randy Moss. He was enough of a problem in the locker room everywhere he went that you could at least loosely correlate his behavior to the on-field performance of the team on the whole, but in New England, he was summarily kept in line. When he started to become remotely close to a problem, they shipped his ass to Minnesota.

Haynesworth at the very least was lazy and at the very worst a malignant sore sport on the field in his previous two stints in Tennessee and Washington respectively. That being said, he's doing and saying all the right things right now, which leads me to believe that he'll be useful to the Pats for a year or so, which is good for them, because their defense is coming along nicely and is ready to be a dominant force again. A motivated, healthy, in-check Haynesworth only makes them deadlier.

8. What player would you take first overall in fantasy this year?

As of right now, before any preseason games played, the top player on my radar is Jamaal Charles. Arian Foster produced out of his mind last year, but reports are saying that he's battling a sore hamstring. It's always troubling to see backs struggle with their legs. To me, that catapults Charles to the top of the heap. He split carries last year and still busted out with 1400+ yards rushing/1900+ total yards from scrimmage and 8 total touchdowns. Impressive for a guy who gave up most of his goal line carries to Thomas Jones. In TD only leagues, he may not be as enticing an option due to Todd Haley's refusal to use him at the goal line, and even in yardage leagues, his 6.4 yards per carry last year is a major red flag in that I doubt he keeps it up this year with increased carries. That being said, I'm not sure there's a better candidate in a traditional league.

In other types of leagues, other players may have more value. Leagues that weigh passing yards the same as yards from scrimmage dictate that you take hard looks at both Michael Vick and Aaron Rodgers at the top spot. Point-per-reception leagues put LeSean McCoy, Ray Rice and Peyton Hillis near the top along with Charles and Foster. It depends on the league, but I think you can't go wrong going with Charles.

9. I know you said you weren't doing predictions, but what team is your bust-out candidate this year?

The Rams seem to me to be on the verge of something special. Last year, Sam Bradford shocked the world, coming back from a year inactive in college to take every snap for his team and lead them to the doorstep of the playoffs despite the fact that they didn't have a receiving threat greater than the world's most famous shoot German suplex victim, Danny Amendola. This year, they brought in Mike Sims-Walker from Jacksonville, a proven threat who will give Bradford someone to target more reliably than last year's crops.

Their defense really impresses me too. They have a good young core with the right coach molding them into a fierce unit. I wouldn't be surprised to see them take the NFC West this year with a record better than the 7-9 slate posted by last year's divisional Champion Seattle Seahawks.

10. Again, I know you said you weren't doing full predictions right now, but who do you have in the Super Bowl this year?

It's a tough call, because we haven't seen any teams play live ball, even in somewhat-meaningless preseason play. There are also a lot of injury questions that have yet to be posed. My gut feeling is to say Packers and Jets. My super optimistic homer glasses tell me Eagles and Jets. My ultra-pessimistic outlook says Giants and Patriots. I dunno. I'll get a better feeling for this after week 4 of the preseason, but for now, let's pencil in Eagles and Patriots and go from there.

Thursday, July 21, 2011

TWIOT: Even in Labor Strife, the NFL Does It Right

Reports are coming out that the NFL owners have ratified the new collective bargaining agreement. The players just need to recertify their union and ratify the CBA and the lockout is over. This could happen as early as tonight. I don't know about you, but I'm fucking thrilled. The prospect of missed football games on Sundays this fall scared the ever-loving shit out of me as a sports fan. There are a scant few things in life outside of wrestling and family that engross me the way the NFL does. I can watch any two teams play, even if it's a putrid NFC West matchup. I participate in fantasy football. If I gamble on sports (NOT WITH MONEY WINK WINK NUDGE NUDGE GUISE), it's primarily on the NFL.

So why is it that I and millions of other red-blooded Americans of both genders (mostly males probably though) love the NFL so much? It's because they do mostly everything right. They market their product correctly. They've fine-tuned the game to the point where it's easy for people to watch for the most part, although the tide for that may be turning with the overcompensation in the name of player safety. Regardless, it's still a league that for the most part does everything right.

That includes having labor strife. As I knock on wood, rub my rabbit's foot and do everything else imaginable to avoid jinxing this progress, with all the luck in the world, this lockout is going to end with no missed regular season games. If you think about how disastrous other labor struggles have been for other leagues, having a work stoppage that only really stops the interesting-for-a-second free agency process is a God-damned blessing. Baseball had the entire stretch run and postseason in 1994 cancelled. The NBA's 1998-99 season ended up only being a 1999 season because of time missed. Hell, the NHL missed an entire fucking season with their last work stoppage. The interruptions in play damaged all three leagues; not irreparably, but the lockouts and strikes were all instrumental in the NFL's rise to prominence as the new American pastime as well as the NFL's smart marketing.

That's why, again KNOCKING ON WOOD, if this deal is accepted without any lost regular season time, it proves that the NFL just gets it. They had their labor strife and their squabbles. The owners got to let their greedy-as-fuck flags fly a little bit without giving a fuck (mainly because toadies like Peter King would keep defending them like they were Little Sisters of the Poor). The players got to rage against the machine while getting a respite from the "voluntary" minicamps as well as getting a truncated training camp. Now, if this deal gets signed sooner rather than later? The owners and players got it out of their systems. Now it's time to play.

A quarter of the way through the season? This will all be forgotten. I guarantee it. We'll all be enjoying football, and no one will remember Jerry Richardson eating babies while claiming that the players were bankrupting him, or Adrian Peterson comparing his plight to those who sailed over as captives on the Amistad.

And that's the reason why the NFL is, and probably will be for the forseeable future, the king of sport in the United States. As the NBA descends into a destructive lockout that could break it due to the bleak predictions of how long it's going to last, the NFL shows everyone how it's done.

If you want to read more about the lockout and its impact, be it within the sport itself or in an unusually salient way concerning its socio-economic place, then read these two pieces by Drew Magary at Deadspin and Mike Tunison at Kissing Suzy Kolber.

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

The Fall Guy, Starring Terry Taylor

Pictured: The Worst
Via (who else) Cageside Seats

Another day, another S. Bruce expose on Impact Wrestling. This time, it's calling the former TNA to the carpet for their shoddy treatment of their administrative staff. Yep, it's not just the wrestlers who don't earn a livable wage. The executives and office staff do too. They often have to work ballbustingly long hours due to understaffing to make terrible wages. One guy, working 50 hours a week doing merchandise sales for them, took home $20K a year. $20K a year. That's fucking insane. Presumably, that's after taxes, since if it was before taxes, it's dangerously close or under the minimum wage line. Still, that's what full-time fry cooks earn in a year. Another high-ranking executive, who was not named but intimated to have a lot of responsibilities within the company, had to work part-time at Disney as a waitress.

In what seems to be the capstone of the piece, apparently, Terry Taylor, who has been named in several lawsuits against TNA/Impact, was apparently the primary fall guy for the company. Whatever Dixie Carter or other executive type Andy Barton wanted to heap on the wrestlers, be it a low-ball offer or a refusal to pay for medical, they made Taylor do it. In a way, I'm not surprised by this news; I figured out that this might have been the case listening to Jay Lethal's episode of the Art of Wrestling podcast. He spoke so glowingly about Taylor, and yet Taylor was supposed to be this monster. Well, turns out he was just a creation of Dixie's, albeit a spineless one who didn't have the courage to speak up for the wrestlers that he wanted to stand up for.

Now again, the natural defense here for Impact is "Well, those people didn't have to work for TNA!" And you'd be right if you said that to a point. The stranglehold that companies have on workers in ununionized labor is pretty bad. People say unions are corrupt, and I tend to agree with that, but they're absolutely necessary to keep regular industries from doing the same kind of shit that Impact is pulling and keeping America from becoming a third-world country. Livable wages, health care and having a friendly workplace aren't some magical luxuries, they're to be expected of a place that has people working for them. The moment you start denying that is the moment you deny yourself the opportunity to make a decent wage in your mind.

Thursday, June 2, 2011

TWIOT: Why Do the Florida Panthers Exist? And Other Ways to Shake up the NHL

DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE
As Raffi Torres scored the only goal in last night's Stanley Cup Finals opener with 18.5 seconds left in regulation, he finally gave the general public something game-related to talk about in the NHL rather than the buzz that had been dominating conversation in the last week. In case you haven't heard by now, and if you like hockey, you either have or you've been in a coma for the last week, the Atlanta Thrashers are no more, as the team will relocate to Winnipeg (hometown of Chris Jericho, baby!) and change their name, most likely to the Moose (although I hold out hope they can get a deal done to name the team the Jets like the old team that was there).

I can't say I'm too broken up about Atlanta losing their hockey team. I hate seeing a city lose any sports team as a rule, but it just seemed that hockey never took to the A-T-L. I think Atlanta gets a worse rap than they deserve as a sports city, but let's face facts here. They had one of the most consistently good if not dominant baseball teams in America for 14 years, and yet it was hit or miss whether they'd sell out, even in the playoffs. PLAYOFFS. If the city isn't going to support baseball like they should, then what makes anyone think that they'd have the patience involved in allowing hockey to take root there? Especially when the Thrash were never properly developed by their internal management? It was a fool's endeavor from start. The only places south of the Mason-Dixon that have turned out to be great hockey markets were either giant markets (Los Angeles), places with a ton of expats from hockey markets (Tampa Bay) or places that have great institutional makeup and put winners on the ice that people gravitated to (Carolina, Dallas). That brings me to the point I raised in the subject line.

Why do the Florida Panthers exist? I mean, really, after years and years of mediocrity, low attendance and only one Stanley Cup Final run to show for it, why aren't they the subject of relocation or contraction rumors? I mean, it's not like Miami's a great sports town either. It makes Atlanta look like Philly or Boston. There really needs to be discussion about moving them. And action on moving the Phoenix Coyotes. And decision on which LA team needs to hit the bricks (because I'm sorry, but does there really need to be two teams in ANY market, even if it's LA? Or even NY?). Seriously, the NHL, as good as it is now, isn't as good as it can be. I think it needs a bit of a shakeup.

Now, in a perfect world, there'd be some contraction going on, because hey, isn't it better to have more good players on each team rather than diluting the talent pool? That won't fly today though, because there's no way Gary Bettman is going to lop off potential revenue streams. Sad but true. So, I propose radical shuffling of teams and realignment. Why? Well, because there are cities right now that either have more than one team or that have a team period that don't need them. The NHL isn't really a league that strikes me as having demand for more than one team in an American market, let alone three. Sorry New York, not even you really have to have the Rangers, Islanders and Devils in your general vicinity. So, here's what I propose:

- The following teams are safe from being moved: Flyers, Rangers, Penguins, Bruins, Canadiens, Senators, Maple Leafs, Sabres, Capitals, Lightning, Hurricanes, currently unnamed Winnipeg franchise, Red Wings, Blues, Blackhawks, Blue Jackets, Predators, Avalanche, Flames, Oilers, Wild, Canucks, Sharks, Ducks, Stars

I teetered on some of those franchises. The Predators have been subject to relocation rumors (DAMN YOU JIM BALSILLIE), but at the same time, they've built up a solid franchise that has been in the playoffs for the last couple of seasons. The Blue Jackets are in a state that should take to hockey, although I wouldn't cry if they did get moved/chopped. As for the debate between the Ducks and Kings? Well, I flipped a coin, but I also looked at the fact that the Ducks have a Cup to their name and the Kings don't.

- Goodbye New Jersey Devils, say hello to the Hamilton Devils. This will definitely sadden a few people, like Seth Everett, but c'mon now, despite having the tradition of success the Devils have had in the last 20 years, they've also got one of the weakest fanbases in all the league despite being in New York's gravity. Hamilton as a market is in a precarious spot though. On one side, there's Toronto, and on the other, there's Detroit. The Red Wings and Maple Leafs both have rabid fanbases, and it might be hard for a new team there to develop. However, unlike in the US, I think there's more wiggle room for a multiple-team metro area in Canada because Canadians love them some hockey, amirite? Even if you don't want to do Hamilton, maybe Halifax is a destination. Despite it's low population for the metro area, it is the hub for the Maritime provinces, and if you count the entirety of Nova Scotia, as well as New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland, Eastern Quebec and possibly the northern parts of Maine, New Hampshire and even Vermont, well, that's a hefty base to draw fans from. For now though, let's go with Hamilton.

- Au revoir, New York Islanders, bienvenue Quebec Nordiques, v. 2.0. If the Devils are unpopular, then the Islanders are outcasts. Their salad days are even further removed, and really, are they even popular on Long Island anymore? I don't think so.

- Farewell, Florida Panthers, hey hey, Kansas City Panthers. KC has been courting a team for a good while now, even coming close to luring the Penguins out of Pittsburgh. Instead of taking a team from the 'Burgh, a good hockey town that had been plagued by bad ownership in the past, why not take from a city where people barely care about the basketball team with two superstars and Chris Bosh?

- Peace out, Los Angeles Kings, whazzup Utah Grizzlies. Salt Lake City is a growing metro area, and the popularity of the Jazz there is a good sign that they might be amenable to a hockey team. Plus, there's a lot of white people there, and the Kings are already a good team. They'd take to the city pretty well, I think.

- So long, Phoenix Coyotes, welcome aboard, Portland Orcas. I have to wonder if Americans in the Pacific Northwest really feel at home rooting for a Canadian team like the Canucks. I'm sure some do, but I'm also sure that some of them want a hockey team of their own to pull for. So, it's a coin-flip between Seattle and Portland. I'd go Portland, if only because they have a better arena and hey, why not tread new territory? Again, they love them the Trailblazers, so why not try a hockey team too?

With that much team movement, there'd have to be a good amount of realignment as well. You could stick with the two-conference, six-division model, but really, why is it that important to stay with that model? The All-Star Game has become a pick-up contest. Advances in travel have made road trips less strenuous. I say the NHL ditches the conference model and has a playoff tournament that seeds overall, 1-16 rather than 1-8 E and 1-8 W. Plus, while I'd still propose that divisions make geographic sense, I also think that the old way the NHL named its divisions, named after figures in the game, was rad. So, with that in mind, here you go with a five-division new NHL:

Patrick Division
Carolina Hurricanes
New York Rangers
Philadelphia Flyers
Pittsburgh Penguins
Tampa Bay Lightning
Washington Capitals

Adams Division
Boston Bruins
Buffalo Sabres
Columbus Blue Jackets
Montreal Canadiens
Ottawa Senators
Quebec Nordiques

Norris Division
Chicago Blackhawks
Detroit Red Wings
Hamilton Devils
Minnesota Wild
Nashville Predators
Toronto Maple Leafs

Gretzky Division
Calgary Flames
Dallas Stars
Edmonton Oilers
Kansas City Panthers
St. Louis Blues
Winnipeg Jets

Smythe Division
Anaheim Ducks
Colorado Avalanche
Portland Orcas
San Jose Sharks
Utah Grizzlies
Vancouver Canucks

Basically, you play the teams in your division 6 times, the teams in every other division twice and then the four remainder games are chosen as "marquee" match ups by the league that would give extra playoff rematches/rivalry games to put on the TV schedule. That sounds like a good plan, right? At least I do.

Truth be told, while I doubt that the Thrashers leaving Atlanta to go north is the last move that will be made, I also doubt that my plan is going to happen either. I'm a fan of the game, but I also don't really have a nose for business sense of what markets would take to a hockey team the way that would keep them there and keep them successful. However, I do know that coming up this winter, the NHL may end up being the only game in town with a football lockout in effect and another lockout in the NBA looming large, so maybe that's all that's needed for more people to appreciate hockey like I, and millions of other people in Philly and around the continent of North America, do.

Still though, it sticks in my craw that teams like the Phoenix Coyotes and especially the Florida Panthers exist. Sorry, it just does.

Remember you can contact TH and ask him questions about wrestling, life or anything else. Please refer to this post for contact information. He always takes questions!