Pick 4

**laughedatbytime** · November 22, 2012

Bal

Car

NO

NE

**Test4VitalSigns** · November 23, 2012

Bills

Ravens

Jags

Niners

**Rick N. Backer** · November 23, 2012

Like the ad says, it's only crazy if it doesn't work. :)

**laughedatbytime** · November 23, 2012

Well, I've done that many times before and never got it to work. And I never stooped to anything as prima facie ridiculous as picking a Mark Sanchez "led" team.

**Rick N. Backer** · November 23, 2012

Maybe you should give it a shot. I mean, you're approaching the 20th anniversary of the last time the Dolphins played in the Super Bowl. Even though they did get their butts kicked in that one.

On second thought, you can probably wait until Brady and/or Belichick retire.

**laughedatbytime** · November 23, 2012

Well, we've got you twice yet this year, so there's still hope for 2012. Maybe Belichick will get into one of those moods where he'll be more interested in telling the rest of the world to f off than in winning.

By the way, the last time we were in the Super Bowl, it was still "morning in America"...a lot more than 20 years ago.

**Rick N. Backer** · November 23, 2012

Shows how old I am. I'm thinking early 1985 was 20 years ago. We're actually approaching the 30th anniversary of the 49ers' dismantling of those laughable "Killer Bs."

**laughedatbytime** · November 23, 2012

Well, to be honest, there were quite a few good defenses that got destroyed by Montana, but then again, he came up clutch in the big games...4-0 in Super Bowls, did not lose a one. Kind of sets him apart from later pretenders to his throne...

It was a long time ago...even before this seminal game.

http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/0901/superbowl.qb.worstgames/images/tony-eason.jpg

**Rick N. Backer** · November 23, 2012

Well, it's true that Joe Cool didn't lose any Super Bowls. But really, when you think about it, he also didn't go up against any good QBs or teams, except maybe Esiason and the Bengals, in any of those Super Bowls.

You're also right that good defenses got beaten by Montana. Really bad defensive teams, like, say, the '84 Dolphins, got humiliated by him. And, of course, one dimensional, "fantasy football" players (before the term existed) like Marino didn't do well against the SF defense.

Edited November 23, 2012 by Rick N. Backer

**Test4VitalSigns** · November 23, 2012

Joe beat Ken Anderson, Dan Marino, John Elway and Boomer Esiason. 4 pretty good QBs. Bengals, Broncos and Dolphins were the class of the AFC in those days.

**laughedatbytime** · November 24, 2012

True, the Niners D didn't face any QBs of the quality of a Jake Delhomme, or have to worry about dodging the vomit of a Donovan McNabb in an opponents' last gasp two minute drill, or face an overconfident (if well filmed) Kurt Warner. Nor did they singlehandedly put any marginal QBs into consideration for the Hall of Fame by giving them two rings..

Gotta give it up to the Patriots for that.

**Rick N. Backer** · November 24, 2012

Well that, and the fact that they appeared in 5 Super Bowls in 10 seasons. In that same period, the Giants lead the NFC in appearances. With two.

**laughedatbytime** · November 24, 2012

I hate to be a pedant (well, actually I don't), but it's either 4 in 10 or 5 in 11. And the same number of championships in the last 7 as my Fins. But you do lead us in Arlen Specter investigations, 1-0, so there's that. Oh yeah, and logos on shirts used to clothe African kids (and teach them math, when they ask, "What does 19-0 mean"?)

http://the-adventurers-club.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/02/03/perfectville.jpg

**Rick N. Backer** · November 24, 2012

Well, like I said, we're approaching the 30th anniversary of the Dolphins' last trip to the Super Bowl. In that time, the Patriots have been there 7 times. Good luck convincing anyone that since the turn of the century the Dolphins and Patriots have had comparable success.

**laughedatbytime** · November 24, 2012

Well, duh, the Patriots have been better than the Fins since the turn of the century, so I won't try to convince anyone otherwise. Besides, I'm not very good at trying to get people to buy ridiculous arguments, for that, I'd have to enlist the help of some in SOCN, and I doubt they would help, since I'm sure I've offended some of those who are at least willing to try to get others believe things that are prima facie ludicrous.

But what goes around comes around, and there will be a line of those willing to dance on the grave of the Patriots once their inevitable slide begins.

**Rick N. Backer** · November 24, 2012

"And the same number of championships in the last 7 as my Fins."

My bad. I meant the last 7 years. You're right though. Any comparison of the two franchises, since the Reagan administration, is "ridiculous."

Back during the Nixon administration and the 14 game season, though, whew, those silly orange and teal uniforms were tough.

**laughedatbytime** · November 24, 2012

Ah, yes, the golden years of Rod Rust and Dick McPherson in the 90s. During the 90s the Fins won 29 games more than the Patsies. Comparing a team that won 100 games over 10 years to one that won 71 IS ridiculous.

Better limit your comparisons to the last 11 years.

**Rick N. Backer** · November 24, 2012

Yeah. So what if the Dolphins never even advanced to the Super Bowl during those years. It's all about those regular season wins, right?

Historically, they've met in the playoffs three times. The Dolphins are 1-2. And, because Miami hasn't been able to get out of it's own way for the most part since 2001, the Dolphins haven't met the Brady-Belichik led Patriots in the post-season.

A former Sox GM, can't remember his name just now, proudly proclaimed that the Sox were the best team in baseball in 2011 for 3 months. I guess you have to take your moral victories where you can find them.

**laughedatbytime** · November 25, 2012

So you believe that winning 71 regular season games over a decade but making one uncompetitive Super Bowl appearance (not being able to turn Favre over in a playoff game? WTF?) is superior to winning 100 games in that same decade...guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

As far as the playoff history between the two franchises go, I'll bet if they had to do it all over again the Pats would have lost the game in 1986. The complete embarrassment on and off the field for that franchise in Super Bowl XX set the team back quite a few years.

I don't suppose that you'd be too impressed, since regular season games are so meaningless, that the Dolphins lead the Pats 50-43. Then again, you might have a point, anyone can get through the regular season undefeated; it takes a truly great team to do the same in the playoffs.

But hey, you have the 2000s. I guess that one's on the Dolphin front office, coaching staff, and even the ownership group for making the wrong decision and failing to put the appropriate emphasis on their video coordinator. The Pats on the other hand, were way ahead of their time in emphasizing that role.

Also, I don't remember who the Sawx GM you're referring to is either. But he did do a great job bringing Bobby V into a clubhouse of guys who were all about winning. Only in retrospective could anyone have fathomed how well that worked out.

Wait, it wasn't him??? Oops...

**Rick N. Backer** · November 26, 2012

I can see why you'd place such value on regular season games. After all, since, what, the 80s, the Dolphins haven't really won any post season games. And while the 1985-1986 Patriots may have gotten embarrassed by the Chicago Bears in Super Bowl 20, they did humiliate the Dolphins, in Miami, on their way there. If you think about it, that was probably the last truly meaningful game the Dolphins played in. Since then, of course, the Patriots have played in 7 Super Bowls. Miami?

Good jab at the Sox. But they won the World Series in 2007 you know. Before that they had gone 3 whole years without winning it all. How are your Cubs doing?

A Dolphins/Cubs fan laughing at the Patriots and Red Sox? Wow.

**laughedatbytime** · November 26, 2012

Glad you're enjoying it so much...let's look at those 7 Super Bowls.

1985--we've covered this already. I guess you could say that you held Walter Payton out of the end zone...oh wait, Ditka did that. And we both had, collectively and individually, 19 more yards than the Patriot offense in the first half. Yeah, they did beat the Dolphins to get there, but that victory was the very definition of Pyrrhic...the franchise spent the next ten years recovering from the aftermath.

1996--covered that one too...just a garden variety unimpressive uncompetitive loss.

2001--*

2003--* (wonder how many yards Delhomme would have gotten if the D didn't know what was coming

2004--*

2007--was this loss the greatest embarrassment in NFL history? A team some called the greatest only won 2 games (the 16 in the regular season being meaningless). Maybe it was Belichick's humanitarian side, he just wanted to make sure all those Haitians had something to wear, and figured they'd be so grateful to be clothed that they wouldn't even realize the irony written across their chests. Or maybe the 1940 Redskins were more embarrassed...it's hard to say.

2011--let it not be said that this team looked a gift horse in the mouth. After getting to face Tebow in their first playoff game, Lee Evans and Billy Cundiff giftwrapped a trip to the big game. Too bad they couldn't keep Bradshaw from scoring the winning touchdown even when he didn't even want to score (which was indicative of the sieve that was the 2011 Patriot defense).

Hmmmm...let's move on to the Sawks. Championships in 04 and 07...pretty impressive. Led by the impressive hitting duo of ManRam and Big Papi. I remember watching them in person against the Twins, and thinking...wow those guys are pretty powerful! And very durable too...wonder how they got that way...they were kind of like freaks of nature...and their fans also played a key role...their post game celebrations were all at a "Fever Pitch".

Then before that, when was their last championship? I did some research, since it had never been mentioned in the media either prior to or post 2004. Turns out that it was in 1918, and they were led by a player who was sold to their main rival (no, no, Nanette), which led to an unmatched 45 year run of dominance. But at least the Sawks fans dealt with it well, leading to them soaking up the good will of the nation's sports fans impressed by their magnanimity and hardly human sense of optimism.

Seems Pyrrhus has taken up residence in the Bay State...he's so welcome there he won't even mind the high taxes and strangling government.

**Rick N. Backer** · November 26, 2012

Yeah. The Dolphins would never stoop so low as to, say

In fact, the Dolphins apparently got caught in 1985 for monitoring the radio communications of opposing teams, and were reprimanded by the NFL for doing so. So, while we can asterisk all of the Dolphins wins from at least 1985 forward, mercifully, none of them really affected post season games.

As for the Sox, I have to disagree that in either World Series they were truly "led" by Ramirez or Ortiz (Ramirez's MVP in 2004 was not deserved IMO). Ramirez drove in 6 runs and scored 5 in both series combined. Ortiz scored 7 and drove in 8. In 2004 they were "led" by Keith Foulke, Curt Schilling, Pedro Martinez and Derek Lowe. In 2007 they were "led" by Jonathan Papelbon, Josh Beckett, Curt Schilling Daisuke Matsuzaka and Jon Lester. Pitching is always the key. You know, the way the Cubs were led to their most recent championship by Mordecai Brown (RIP, 1948) and Orval Overall (RIP, 1947).

**Gompers** · November 26, 2012

I play a weekly parley. I had been doing fairly well (top 10%) until this past week. As of right now, for games Sun through Thursday, I only have 4 wins. Last week I had 10.

**laughedatbytime** · November 27, 2012

I googled "dolphins assistant coach radio transmissions 1985 league reprimand" and got 474 hits. Didn't find anything about the story you refer to (on the first two pages at least).

I googled "spygate patriots videotape", 234,000 hits, including many relevant to the story.

I would be interested in hearing more about this story. Were the Dolphins docked a first round pick? Was the franchise fined $250k (in 1985 dollars)? Was the coach fined $500k (in 1985 dollars)? Please share.

As far as who "led" the 2004 and 2007 Sawks, you can argue, I guess, that their two best hitters didn't "lead" them anywhere (actually they couldn't even have gotten to the park if it wasn't for the beneficience of government. And anyone could have an OPS+ of 152 (Ramirez) and 145 (Ortiz) like those two did in 2004. Now having a team with an ERA of 4.18, that's saying something.

In 2007, Ortiz only had an OPS of 1.066, 171% of league average...it is true that Ramirez missed a few games and only had an OPS+ of 126. Really, he was only as valuable as a Delcarmen or Gabbard.

I do have to say that, as grating as his Boston-centricism can be, I did think this Bill Simmons column was well written...

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/090507&sportCat=mlb

Dateline: May 7, 2014

My son and I have flown from California to spend the week in Boston. He is a little more than 6½ at this point. He has never set foot in Fenway Park. The time is right. He likes baseball. He likes the Red Sox. He's a little sports encyclopedia. I have brainwashed him. He is just old enough to understand the significance of his first Fenway game and, more importantly, old enough that he'll be able to remember the experience decades later.

[+] Enlargehttp://a.espncdn.com/photo/2009/0507/mlb_g_ramirez_sy_300.jpg

Harry How/Getty ImagesManny Ramirez was the best right-handed hitter of his generation. But now, we're not sure what that means.

We bring my father with us. Three generations of the Simmons family taking in a Yankees-Red Sox game for the first time. This should be a wonderful moment. A signature moment, even.

We find our $1,500 seats in the lower boxes near third base. We are sitting in Best Buy's Section 61, which is right between Bob's Discount Furniture's Section 60 and Costco's Section 62. Every section has a sponsor now. The Green Monster is now called "The Pepsi Green Monster" and has a big Pepsi can painted on it. Ted Williams' special seat in right field is now sponsored by Muscle Milk. Even home plate is sponsored by Dunkin' Donuts. Has the logo on it and everything. That's just the way sports work now.

We settle into our seats. I point toward the championship banners over the first-base side. They go in order: 1903, 1904, 1912, 1915, 1916, 1918, 2004, 2007. Ever since Boston won the World Series 10 years ago, I always imagined pointing to that 2004 banner and telling my little boy, "That's the team that changed everything."

So that's what I do. I point at the banner and tell him, "That's the team that changed everything."

"Isn't that the team that cheated?" he asks.

My father and I glance at each other. A few beats pass.

"Well, technically, no," I stammer. "I mean ..."

"I thought they had a whole bunch of steroids guys on that team," he says.

"Well, there have been some accusations, and yeah, some of the power numbers were a little suspicious, but ..."

"I'd do it again!" my dad yells happily.

"Dad!"

I shake my head at him. He shrugs. The thing is, he WOULD do it again. He wanted to see the Red Sox win the World Series in his lifetime. He worried about it constantly. So did I. So did every Red Sox fan. We worried about living a full life, then dying, without ever seeing them win. All of us knew people who fit in that category. None of us wanted to end up in there.

All of us would have made a deal with the devil at the time. And maybe we did. We just didn't know it.

"Nothing was ever really proved," I tell my son, trying to keep up the good fight.

He ignores me and starts rattling through our 2004 lineup with creepy precision. He points out Nomar Garciaparra's remarkable 1999 and 2000 seasons, his subsequent tendon injuries and how his career played out so blandly afterward for reasons that remain unclear. My dad points out the Sox traded Nomar midway through the 2004 season. Technically, that debate shouldn't even matter. Score one for Dad.

"But what about Trot Nixon and Bill Mueller?" my son says. "They missed a bunch of games every year with injuries, put on weight when they were skinny guys, peaked quickly and were never seen again. Same for Mark Bellhorn, right? That's suspicious."

"Well," I say, "their names never came up in anything, so that's not really fair ..."

"And Kevin Millar, he had a few big homer years, then his power numbers went way down once the testing started."

"That's true, but it doesn't prove anything ..."

"And Johnny Damon, he got bigger and started hitting for more power even though he was a singles hitter, right?"

"Well ..."

[+] Enlargehttp://a.espncdn.com/photo/2009/0507/mlb_g_manny_mvp1_200.jpg

Ezra Shaw/Getty ImagesThe events of that magical fall of 2004 are now in question.

"And what about Big Papi?" he wonders. "Played for Minnesota, didn't hit for power, came to the Red Sox, turned into the best slugger in the league, and as soon as they cracked down on steroids, he stopped hitting homers again. And he was friends with all the other Dominican players who were linked to performance-enhancing drugs. What about him?"

Silence. Nobody says anything.

Finally, my dad steps in: "He had an inside-outside swing at Minnesota, when he came to Boston, we encouraged him to pull the ball, so ..."

"Come on, Gramps!" my son says. "That's dumb, and you know it."

We glance out to the field. Big Papi is one of Boston's coaches now. After he hit 54 homers in 2006, his career was over within four years. Now he's just a fat guy in his early 40s coaching first base. You would never guess this is the same guy who carried us in 2004, the guy who fueled the Greatest Comeback Ever, the guy who helped convince an entire fan base that, yes, we could believe.

"And what about Manny?" my son asks. "He tested positive for performance enhancers in 2009 with the Dodgers. How do you know he wasn't using that whole time?"

"Well, we don't," I say. "But that was kind of a fluke -- he had a doctor in Florida who prescribed him a banned substance, and ..."

"Come on, Dad, I read your Red Sox book. You said that at least you knew Manny couldn't have ever used steroids because he was too dumb to figure out how to stick to a cycle. Then he tested positive. You were, like, his biggest fan. You wrote a big piece after he got traded that was so long, it took me a week to read it."

"I told him not to write that column," my dad says. "Manny needed to go. He was a selfish jerk. Your father had blinders on ..."

"Come on, that's not fair," I say. "I loved the guy. He was on the team for more than eight years. He helped us end the curse. He made our lives as Red Sox fans more fun. He was like family. I wasn't gonna dump the guy from my life after everything he did just because his agent poisoned him against the team."

"But you defended him and said he was a good guy at heart," my son says. "And then he cheated, right? So how does that make him a good guy?"

I take a deep breath.

"It doesn't make him a good guy," I say. "You don't understand what it was like to follow baseball before you were born. There was a strike in 1994, and the World Series was canceled. Everyone hated baseball. Then Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa started hitting homers, and the balls started flying out of the park, and it was so much fun that everyone looked the other way. We didn't care that these guys were practically busting out of their skin or growing second foreheads. We really didn't. All the cheating made baseball more fun to watch. We were in denial. It was weird.

"Then, Barry Bonds hit 73 home runs in a season, and that was like the turning point. We realized that things had gone too far. We blamed him for cheating and looked the other way with dozens of other guys who might have been doing the same thing. Brady Anderson hit 50 homers in 1996; we didn't care. Bret Boone had 141 RBIs in a season; we didn't care. Big Papi went from 10 homers to 41 in four seasons; we didn't care. Roger Clemens was washed up, but suddenly he could throw 98 miles per hour and win Cy Youngs again; we didn't care. Eric Gagne saved 84 straight games and threw 120 miles an hour; we didn't care. Good players started blowing out tendons nobody had ever heard of; we didn't care. Pitchers blew out elbow tendons and shoulder ligaments routinely; we didn't care. This was the deal. They cheated; we pretended they didn't. It's really hard to explain unless you were there."

My son tries to soak everything in. That's lot to process for a 6-year-old.

Finally ...

"So when the Red Sox won in 2004, did you know some of the guys might have been cheating?" he asks.

"At the time?" I answer. "No. Either we were in total denial, or we just didn't care."

"I'd do it again!" my dad yells happily, getting another withering glare from me.

"You have to understand," I say. "EVERYONE cheated back then. You know how I drive 80 on the highway even though all the signs say to go 55? That's how everyone thought back then -- the signs said one thing, but everyone did the other. There were so many people cheating that, competitively, you almost had to cheat to keep up with everyone else."

"So why didn't the people in charge get everyone to stop cheating?" my son asks.

"I wish I knew. The players' union didn't care, the commissioner's office didn't care, nobody cared. Until it was too late."

"So you won the World Series twice because of Manny and Papi," my son says, "but they might have been cheating the whole time, and so were some of their teammates? Dad,your whole book was about how you could die in peace because they won in 2004. If they cheated to win, does that make what happened OK?"

The question hangs in the air. And hangs. And hangs.

"I don't know," I finally answer. "I still haven't figured that part out. Again, you don't understand what it was like. Everyone was cheating, so the playing field was kind of even, as weird as that sounds. You can't imagine how depressing it was to be a Red Sox fan at the time. Things always went wrong. We hadn't won in 86 years. We were the whipping boy of the Yankees. We always expected the worst to happen, mainly because the worst always did happen. That 2004 title made life easier for everyone. We could just follow the team without all the other negative crap. Does that make sense?"

"I guess," he says, nodding. "But Manny was your favorite hitter on that team. And he tested positive later. Is he still your favorite hitter?"

"Yes and no," I say. "No, because he cheated. Yes, because whether he was cheating or not, I can't forget watching him hit baseballs on a daily basis. I just can't. You should have seen him. Perfect swing, perfect balance, perfect everything. He was a hitting savant. That's the funny thing -- he didn't NEED to cheat. The guy was put on the earth to hit.

"But he did cheat," my son says.

"He did. Yes. He did."

"So he's not your favorite player from that team now?"

"He never was; Pedro Martinez was. Manny was my favorite hitter. I loved Pedro the most."

I am dreading the next question. I am dreading it. I do not want him to ask it. I know it's coming.

"Did Pedro cheat?"

Silence.

I take a deep breath. So does my father. You can't describe in a few tidy sentences, off the cuff, what it was like to watch Pedro Martinez pitch in 1999 and 2000. To paraphrase Joe Mantegna in "Searching for Bobby Fischer," Pedro was better at pitching than you or I will ever be at anything. He had swagger. He had four A-plus pitches. He had everything. He spurred me to buy tickets from scalpers when I was broke. I would do it again. I watched Pedro Martinez pitch at his apex at Fenway Park. I get to brag about this when I'm old. He's the one guy who didn't cheat. He definitely didn't cheat. I bet anything, the man did not cheat.

Do I say this to my son? No. He wouldn't believe me.

"I looked at Pedro's numbers," my son says. "He peaked for like three years right as the steroids era was going, then he battled injuries and never did as well. Fits the profile, right?"

"Nah, I don't see it," my father says. "He was skinnier than you are. Steroids make you bulk up. Pedro was like a buck-sixty soaking wet."

"I don't see it, either," I say. "I don't think he did."

"But you don't know?" my son asks me.

"Honestly? I don't know anything anymore."

We look at the 2004 banner again. I always thought that, for the rest of my life, I would look at that banner and think only good thoughts. Now, there's a mental asterisk that won't go away. I wish I could take a pill to shake it from my brain. I see 2004 and 2007, and think of Manny and Papi first and foremost. The modern-day Ruth and Gehrig. One of the great one-two punches in sports history. Were they cheating the whole time? Was Pedro cheating, too? That 2004 banner makes me think of these things now. I wish it didn't, but it does. This makes me sad. This makes me profoundly sad.

My son can read it in my face. I am sad. He can see it.

"That's OK, Dad," he says, rubbing my shoulder. "Everyone cheated back then."

**Rick N. Backer** · November 28, 2012

^^^^

The Dolphins got a letter of reprimand. But Shula was on the competition committee then, and Goodell wasn't the commissioner. To paraphrase Shermer High School vice principal Richard Vernon, in the eyes of the NFL "[shula's] a swell guy. [belichick's] a lying sack of sh*t and everybody knows it." Holding up punishment laid out by Goodell wouldn't be my choice of example for propriety, but I guess that's why they make chocolate and vanilla.

You might want to check out Ortiz's stats over the last couple of seasons BTW.

Pick 4

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Recently Browsing 0 members