Best of 2021

In 2021, the sports world began to get back to "normal."  We still aren't there yet since everything is still screwed up because of 2020.  But we at least had some semblance of normalcy in that games were played and fans were in attendance (for the most part, anyway).  So, with hopes that "normal" returns in 2022, I mark the return of my "Games of the Year" countdown after a two-year absence (first because I did a "Teams of Decade" instead, then because last year was, well, you know).

15. Indianapolis 500: May 30, Indianapolis-It was actually one of the cleanest Indy 500s in history.  Of the 33 cars that started, 30 of them finished.  It was also the fastest Indy 500 in history.  And, at the end, more history was made, as Helio Castroneves took the checkered flag for the fourth time...12 years after his third win.  With that, Helio completed his place on Indy's Mount Rushmore as the fourth four-time winner of the race.

14. NHL Outdoors at Lake Tahoe (Avalanche 3, Golden Knights 2): February 20, Lake Tahoe-So what if there was an eight-hour sun delay after the first period?  The setting was absolutely incredible!  An ice rink on the 18th green of a golf course with Lake Tahoe in the background!  The NHL did it right, even if Mother Nature caused some issues.  It's also worth noting that the Avalanche and Golden Knights finished 1-2 in the NHL in points last season, so they even ended up nailing it with the teams they selected!

13. NCAA Women's College World Series, Game 1 (James Madison 4, Oklahoma 3-8 innings): June 3, Oklahoma City-Odicci sure is the right name for her, alright!  Because it was definitely quite an Odyssey that Ms. Alexander took the James Madison softball team on in the NCAA Softball Tournament!  They were unseeded, yet made it all the way to the College World Series, where they played No. 1 Oklahoma in the first game.  That game was 3-3 until the top of the eighth, when James Madison leadoff hitter Kate Gordon hit a home run.  Alexander then finished it off, and the Dukes had pulled the upset against the eventual National Champions.

12. Ryder Cup: September 24-26, Whistling Straits, WI-Was it the most competitive Ryder Cup in history?  Absolutely not!  But you won't find an American fan who didn't love what happened over that weekend in Wisconsin.  It was a dominant effort by a team that had nine of the top 11 players in the world.  The U.S. won going away, 19-9, the largest margin of victory in a Ryder Cup in more than 50 years.

11. WNBA Semifinals, Game 5 (Mercury 87, Aces 84): October 8, Las Vegas-Phoenix and Las Vegas played a highly entertaining series that, fittingly, went the distance.  And Game 5 went back-and-forth, too.  The Mercury led by two at halftime only to have the Aces come storming back in the third and take an eight-point lead into the fourth quarter.  Phoenix outscored Las Vegas 29-18 the rest of the way, though, to win by three and advance to the WNBA Finals.

10. French Open Men's Final (Novak Djokovic 3, Stefanos Tsitsipas 2): June 13, Paris-He ultimately didn't do it, but the thought of Novak Djokovic's potential Golden Slam was the dominant story in tennis all summer.  And to think, it all could've been derailed in Paris.  Djokovic beat Nadal in a four-hour semifinal, but dropped the first two sets in the final against Stefanos Tsitsipas.  However, just like in his fourth-round match, the Djoker rallied.  He came all the way back, in fact, winning 6-7, 2-6, 6-3, 6-2, 6-4 for his second French Open title and 19th career Grand Slam.

9. National League Wild Card Game (Dodgers 3, Cardinals 1): October 6, Los Angeles-Because the Giants came out of nowhere to win 107 games this season, the 106-win defending champion Dodgers had to play a winner-take-all Wild Card Game.  And their season almost ended there against a Cardinals team that only made the playoffs thanks to a 22-3 record in their final 25 games.  It was 1-1 until the bottom of the ninth, when Chris Taylor crushed a two-run walk-off homer to send the Dodgers to the Division Series.

8. NCAA Women's Basketball National Championship (Stanford 54, Arizona 53): April 4, San Antonio-Arizona upset UConn in one semifinal, while Stanford grinded out a one-point win over South Carolina in the other, setting up the two Pac-12 teams to face each other for the National Championship.  It looked like Stanford might run away with it early, but Arizona slowly chipped away, eventually pulling within one.  Arizona had a chance to win after a Stanford shot clock violation with six seconds left, but couldn't get a shot off and Stanford clinched its first National title in 29 years.

7. CONCACAF Nations League Final (United States 3, Mexico 2): June 6, Denver-There were four USA-Mexico games this year and this one, while it was the stupidest of the four (the Nations League is dumb, sorry!), was also the most entertaining.  Mexico scored just over a minute in, but the US tied it before halftime.  After Mexico scored in the 79th minute, Weston McKennie responded three minutes later.  The game ended up going to extra time, where Christian Pulisic converted a penalty kick in the 114th minute.  The U.S. didn't seal the victory until the 120th minute, though, when Ethan Horvath stopped a Mexico PK on the final play of the game.

6. NCAA Men's Final Four, Semifinal (Gonzaga 93, UCLA 90-OT): April 3, Indianapolis-Gonzaga was the unanimous No. 1 overall seed, looking to become the first undefeated National Champion since 1975-76.  UCLA was the No. 11 seed that went from First Four to Final Four.  What looked like a mismatch in the National Semifinal ended up being the game of the tournament!  There were 15 ties and 19 lead changes, and neither team led by more than seven all night!  Gonzaga missed a three that would've won it in regulation, then hit one at the buzzer in OT (after UCLA had tied it with three seconds left).  An outstanding show put on by two outstanding teams!

5. NCAA Women's Volleyball National Championship (Wisconsin 3, Nebraska 2): December 18, Columbus, OH-I'll admit it, recency bias may be part of the reason why I have this match so high.  (It was only two weeks ago, after all.)  But anybody who watched it will agree it was spectacular!  The overall score of the match was Wisconsin 116, Nebraska 114.  Three sets went the distance, including an incredible second set that had more set points than I can count before Wisconsin finally won, 31-29!  It ended up going five, and Wisconsin scored the first seven points of the fifth set.  So, naturally, Nebraska came nearly all the way back, fighting off three match points before the Badgers closed out their first National Championship, 15-12 in the fifth.

4. Raiders 36, Cowboys 33-OT: November 25, Arlington, TX-We got a good, old fashioned shootout on Thanksgiving Day in Dallas!  The Raiders led 14-6 after the first quarter were in front for most of the game until a 100-yard kickoff return got the Cowboys going.  Dallas tied it at 30-30 with three minutes left, then the Raiders went back in front on a 56-yard field goal with two minutes left.  That was plenty of time for Dak Prescott, as Dallas drove down and Greg Zuerlien kicked a 45-yard field goal to send the game to OT.  Las Vegas had the last laugh, though, forcing a punt then driving down for the game-winning field goal.

3. MLB at Field of Dreams (White Sox 9, Yankees 8): August 12, Dyersville, IA-Everything about it was perfect.  From the throwback uniforms to the players emerging from the corn to Kevin Costner's pregame introduction.  Then there was the game itself!  And boy did it deliver!  The White Sox took a 7-3 lead only for the Yankees to put up a four-spot in the top of the ninth on absolute bombs by (who else?) Aaron Judge and Giancarlo Stanton.  Not to be outdone, Tim Anderson hit a walk-off homer in the bottom of the ninth.  Was it Heaven?  No, it was Iowa!  Which, on this night, was pretty damn close!

2. NBA Eastern Conference Semifinals, Game 7 (Bucks 115, Nets 111-OT): June 19, Brooklyn-The Bucks' run to the title would not have been had Kevin Durant's foot been entirely behind the three-point line at the end of regulation!  Instead, the game went to overtime tied at 109.  The Nets had a chance to win it again, but Durant's three-pointer.  So, despite Durant's 48! points, it was Milwaukee who advanced.

1. Olympic Men's 400 Meter Hurdles Final: August 3, Tokyo-One of the most anticipated events of the Olympics was the men's 400 meter hurdles final and the expected duel between Norway's Karsten Warholm and American Rai Benjamin.  It did not disappoint!  It was one of the greatest races ever!  They were separated by inches both broke the world record, which Warholm had only just set a few weeks earlier (after the old one had stood for 29 years!), and bronze medalist Alison Dos Santos also ran faster than the Olympic record (which had been the world record until Warholm's first one).  Honorable mention goes to Sydney McLaughlin, Dalilah Muhammad and Femke Bol, who did the same thing the following morning in the women's 400 hurdles final!

All-Madden

As it turns out, the timing of FOX's brilliant documentary about John Madden couldn't have been more perfect.  They, of course, scheduled it for Christmas because it was Christmas and because they had an exclusive game right after it.  But it ended up also being a final tribute to a man who was larger than life, who lived just long enough to see it.

I forget who said it (I think it was one of his sons), but there was one quote in the documentary that really stuck with me.  To get to the top of one profession is one thing.  He's a Hall of Famer in two!  A true legend indeed!

Growing up, I only knew John Madden as a broadcaster.  And the fact that the Giants were good in the late 80s and early 90s meant that Madden & Summerall did a lot of their games.  So, I heard a lot of them as a kid.  They made the games so relatable and easy to understand, and I can honestly say that I wouldn't love football so much if not for Madden & Summerall.

That was the pair.  CBS knew that putting them together would be television gold, which is exactly what it was.  Then, after Summerall retired and Madden moved to Monday Night Football with Al Michaels, it was just as incredible!  As an analyst, he was in a class by himself.  Arguably the best to ever do it.

FOX knew that.  That's why when they got the NFL rights, they knew they had to get Madden & Summerall.  Logically, it made sense since CBS was losing the NFL and had no need for NFL announcers (and vice versa), but it was still a major coup.  It showed FOX was serious.  And it gave them instant credibility with football fans.  That was as important as anything for this newcomer that suddenly came sweeping in.  FOX wouldn't be where it is now without John Madden.

While I knew he wasn't with Summerall right away, what I didn't realize until I watched "All-Madden" was that he worked with so many other legendary broadcasters before CBS settled on that team.  You can bet that as soon as I found out he once worked with Vin Scully, I went to YouTube and sought out clips of those two legends together.  There are actually several games from the early 80s, and they're as glorious as you'd imagine!  Unfortunately, I couldn't find anything from his test game with a young, unknown broadcaster named Bob Costas.

Then there were the catchphrases.  Every big hit led to a "BOOM!" straight out of an old Batman comic.  And he also came up with "DOINK!," which perfectly explains the sound of a football hitting the goal post on a missed kick.  "BOOM!" and "DOINK!," two terms that are now permanently part of the football lexicon, immortalized for a new generation in the Madden video game.

It's been 13 years since John Madden retired from broadcasting after Super Bowl XLIII, but he remained just as popular as ever thanks to that stupid video game.  NFL players always talk about their Madden rating and want to be on the cover of the next year's edition.  There's even talk of a "Madden curse" on whoever gets the honor.  The game is ridiculously realistic!  It's like watching an actual football game on TV!  That's because Madden wouldn't have it any other way.  And it's helped people learn the X's and O's of football just as much as listening to Madden do a game.

The most amazing part of his broadcasting career is that it really only came about because he had a fear of flying.  Instead, he rode a bus across the country.  And the bus became part of his persona.  The bus WAS Madden!  Remember when Sunday Night Football first started and the players of the game went on the side of the bus every week?  Would that have worked if not for John Madden?  Of course not!  And, you'll notice, they haven't had a Sunday Night Football bus in years.  The whole concept was retired along with him.

Another one of my favorite unique John Madden things was the All-Madden Team.  He's the only guy who could pull off naming his own all-star team using his own (completely subjective) criteria, and getting an annual TV special where it's named.  The best part was how players would get angry when they weren't named All-Madden.  They took it THAT seriously!  I can even remember at least two Super Bowl pregames that included a special All-Madden Team.

And let's not forget the turducken legs!  Because two turkey legs weren't enough to give out to the MVPs on Thanksgiving, so why not stuff a chicken inside a duck inside a turkey?!  It went from something nobody had ever heard of and, frankly, sounds either disgusting or delicious, to something that we all knew what it was (and still sounds either delicious or disgusting).  Again, all because of John Madden.

Simply put, he completely changed the way football games were broadcast.  He made it easy to understand, which is also what made it enjoyable.  It didn't just make him a legend.  It made him arguably the most recognizable face in the NFL, even more so than many of the players.  The fact that he was so relatable only added to his appeal.  Everyone loved John Madden.  Players, coaches, fans, everyone.

All of this is to say nothing of his Hall of Fame coaching career.  He won a Super Bowl and led the Raiders to seven AFL/AFC Championship Games in 10 seasons.  His career winning percentage of .703 is the best in history.  That's why he has a bust in Canton.  (Although, he could easily have one as a Contributor for his broadcasting career.)

To say John Madden left an extraordinary legacy is an understatement.  He's one of the most unforgettable men ever to be associated with the NFL.  First as a coach, then as a broadcaster, and finally as the man behind the video game.  John Madden was truly one of a kind.  And football is forever better because of him.

New Year's Resolutions For 2022

As we get ready to close out 2021, it's crazy to think about the whirlwind that was this year.  It started in the specter of the worst year any of us have ever experienced, with all kinds of restrictions still in place.  Things gradually got closer to "normal" and people were allowed to attend events again (well, events other than the Olympics), only for COVID to come back at the end, bringing back the fun of restrictions, postponements and cancellations all over again.

My biggest hope for 2022 is for "normal" to no longer be a word we put in quotes.  Hopefully at this time next year, we're no longer talking about COVID lists and positive tests and vaccines or the related postponements/cancellations.  I'd love for people to be able to go to games without having to worry about capacity restrictions or showing proof of vaccination or mask mandates.

It's also the year when the sports world will get back to "normal" in terms of scheduling.  After the Tokyo Olympics were pushed back a year, all of the 2021 World Championships were moved to 2022.  We'll have a ridiculously late World Cup, but once that's done a week before Christmas, the sports calendar will, finally, have been reset.

The U.S. Men's National Team hasn't clinched its place in Qatar yet, but that seems like more of a formality at this point.  They've put themselves in a good spot with qualifying set to resume in late January.  So, the first of my New Year's resolutions for a sports team/figure should be taken care of without a problem.  U.S. Men's National Team: qualify for the 2022 World Cup.

After the 2019-20 seasons were interrupted and resumed months after the fact in "bubbles," the NHL and NBA obviously had to adjust their 2020-21 seasons.  They both finished in July, then started this season close to the normal time.  The NHL, of course, planned on having an Olympic break, so their New Year's resolution is actually fairly straightforward.  The NHL: play the 2022-23 season within the regular league calendar.

Likewise, MLB is in the midst of its first work stoppage since the infamous 1994-95 strike.  According to the Commissioner, the whole point of having a lockout now is to preserve the 162-game season.  I actually agree with that logic, and I do believe they'll get the new CBA done in time.  So, MLB's New Year's resolution should also be pretty simple.  MLB and the MLBPA: sign a new CBA and begin the 2022 season on schedule.

Then there are the New Year's resolutions for individual teams and athletes.  Winning a championship is obviously the goal for most teams/athletes heading into a new season, but there are so many other variables that it isn't really something you can "resolve" to do.  There are some things that they can resolve, though...

Duke men's basketball: make a memorable NCAA Tournament run.  I'm not saying they're gonna win the National Championship or even make the Final Four, even though they certainly have the talent for it.  You know the Blue Devils want to send Mike Krzyzewski out on top in his final season, but they'll settle for one last deep run with their legendary coach.  An ACC championship would probably do, but an NCAA run would be better.

Roger Federer: come back from injury to reach another Grand Slam final.  Roger's nearing the end of his career.  We all know this.  He knows this.  But he also still feels like he has another Grand Slam run in him.  Most likely at Wimbledon.  And wouldn't we all love to see Roger turning back the clock one more time before he retires?

Novak Djokovic: break the career Grand Slam record.  He'll probably break the three-way tie at some point in 2022.  Djokovic could even do it in Australia, assuming he's allowed to play.  Whether he wins the Australian Open or not, the idea of Djokovic getting completely shut out of Grand Slam titles in 2022 is highly unlikely.

Los Angeles Angels: make the playoffs and finally win a playoff game.  They have the two best players in the game in Mike Trout and Shohei Ohtani.  Yet, they've only made the playoffs once in Trout's career, and got swept by the Royals in the Division Series that year.  So, let's keep the goals modest for the Angels.  Just make the playoffs.  Then win a postseason game and go from there.

Seattle Mariners: sign a big-time free agent make the playoffs.  Ditto for the Seattle Mariners.  They have the longest postseason drought of any team in North American professional sports.  They came close in 2021 and actually won more games than the World Series champion Braves.  So you know they're gonna go for it in 2022.  Once the lockout ends, spend the money on a free agent like Kris Bryant (who I think will end up with the Phillies, BTW) and build a playoff team around him.

Washington Football Team: come up with a new name.  We've been promised they'll finally have a new name in time for next season.  They've even unveiled the unofficial list of finalists, along with some potential logos.  Unfortunately, "Washington Football Team" is among them.  Let's just hope that whatever they go with is better than that.  And better than "Guardians."

Finally, we've got our latest attempt at the spring football league that these intrepid founders/owners can't accept America doesn't actually want.  After the AAF didn't even make it through the season and XFL 2.0 was shut down early because of the pandemic, it's the reborn USFL's turn.  While it may sound optimistic to say this, they should start small and do what those other two leagues couldn't.  USFL 2.0: make it through the season.

Picking Football Games, Week 16

Merry Christmas to All!  With Christmas falling on a Saturday this year, we get an extra treat of two NFL games (and the Madden documentary), giving those of us who don't want to watch 35 NBA games another sports viewing option!  There are a lot of games with playoff implications across the board, too.  Of the 15 games left on the schedule, only three have no bearing on the playoff races (two if you actually consider Atlanta to be "in the race").

Thursday Night: Tennessee (Win)

Browns (7-7) at Packers (11-3): Green Bay-Last week was great for the Packers!  They became the first playoff team, clinched the NFC North and took over the No. 1 seed.  Now they're in the driver's seat with three weeks left.  As for the Browns, they had a rough Week 15.  Their game was delayed from Saturday to Monday, they had a chance to take over first place...and they ended up in last instead!  If that's not enough, they went from regular rest to a short week for a game in Green Bay!  A rough week for the Browns indeed!

Colts (8-6) at Cardinals (10-4): Indianapolis-Look out for the Indianapolis Colts!  You wanna talk about a team that's getting hot at the right time, you're looking at it.  The Arizona Cardinals, on the other hand, are going backwards.  They were 8-1.  They're 2-3 since, with losses to Carolina and Detroit.  They haven't even clinched their playoff spot, yet.  Fortunately, there are a bunch of scenarios where they clinch that don't involve them winning.  Because I'm not sure about that part.

Lions (2-11-1) at Falcons (6-8): Detroit-Good for the Lions!  That win over the Cardinals was unexpected, and they certainly deserved it.  And, as a result, they no longer have the No. 1 pick!  Now, wouldn't it be something if they make it two wins in a row?  Don't bet against it.  Of course, Atlanta's wins have come against teams like the Jets, Panthers and Jaguars, teams that are in a similar boat as Detroit.  I just have a feeling the Lions can pull it off though!

Ravens (8-6) at Bengals (8-6): Baltimore-This is perhaps the biggest game of the weekend.  The winner takes over first place in the AFC North, and if it's Cincinnati, they'll have the season sweep, so it would effectively be a two-game lead with two to play.  The Ravens have been in a free fall for the past few weeks, but the division is still theirs for the taking.  They also know that, because the Bengals hold the tiebreaker, they're currently on the outside looking in.  Something tells me that doesn't sit well with them and they'll want to do something about it.

Rams (10-4) at Vikings (7-7): Rams-Suddenly, the Rams are tied for first in the NFC West!  They've got three very tough games remaining, however, starting this week in Minnesota.  The Vikings are in a tough spot.  They're arguably the best of those five teams fighting for the two wild card spots, but the schedule's doing them no favors.  They have to win either this one or next week's matchup at Lambeau, plus Week 18 against the Bears, to have any shot.  So, it unfortunately doesn't look good for them to make the playoffs.

Bills (8-6) at Patriots (9-5): New England-Losing in Indianapolis last week might've been a good thing for the Patriots.  Because you got the feeling that they thought they were unbeatable, so a reality check was needed.  Speaking of needed, the Bills got exactly what they needed against Carolina.  Now, can they snap their trend of alternating wins and losses?  If they don't, the Patriots will be AFC East champions for the 17th time in 19 years.

Jaguars (2-12) at Jets (3-11): Jets-It's finally here!  The Game of the Year in the NFL!  A Christmas present for us all!  Maybe the winner can be Wake Forest's opponent in the Gator Bowl (the Jaguars are obviously going back to Jacksonville anyway).  Of course, they promoted this as the matchup of the two quarterbacks who were taken 1 and 2 in the draft, but is Zack Wilson even playing?  Regardless, they find themselves in pretty much the exact same position again this year.  The Jaguars currently have the No. 1 pick.  The Jets are currently No. 4.

Giants (4-10) at Eagles (7-7): Philadelphia-The Giants won the first game against the Eagles.  Philadelphia hasn't lost since, and has jumped into playoff position as a result.  And, frankly, the Eagles' chances of getting in are actually pretty good.  They've got the three division teams left, but that finale in Dallas could be against a Cowboys team that has nothing to play for.  If they get swept by the Giants, though, do they really deserve to be a playoff team?

Buccaneers (10-4) at Panthers (5-9): Tampa Bay-I've never seen a Brady-led offense look as bad as the Bucs did last week.  Yes, they were missing some key players, but you can bet that tape is circulating.  It also delayed their clinching of the division, which they should take care of this week.  You know Brady won't have two bad games in a row.  The Panthers have had a lot of bad games in a row.  Thus, Tampa rebounds and wraps up the NFC South.

Chargers (8-6) at Texans (3-11): Chargers-Once again, the Chargers look like a playoff team.  We all thought that at the beginning of the season, then questioned how good they actually were after some really bad performances, and now they're back to where they were earlier in the year.  Even last week, when some might argue they should've won, that probably says more about the Chiefs than the Chargers.  The Texans, however, are not the Chiefs.  They should keep hold of their wild card, which is all they've got left to play for.

Bears (4-10) at Seahawks (5-9): Seattle-Here's the craziest thing about this matchup--they both have top 10 picks, but neither one will actually be picking!  So, this game is really to determine whether the Giants' or Jets' second top 10 pick will be higher.  And the answer to that question should be the Giants, who have the Bears' pick.  Because, thankfully, after way too many national games, people are finally off the delusion that the Bears are a good team or even one worth watching.

Steelers (7-6-1) at Chiefs (10-4): Kansas City-Why am I surprised that the Steelers got a random win to keep themselves above .500 and still technically in the playoff hunt?  I shouldn't be.  That's been Pittsburgh's M.O. all season, even if it'll inevitably lead to an 8-8-1 finish.  As for their game in MO, don't expect a repeat of last week's performance.  Not with the way the Chiefs have been playing.  They should maintain their hold on the 1-seed and lock up their playoff spot.

Broncos (7-7) at Raiders (7-7): Denver-Just like seemingly every other team in the AFC (except for the Jaguars, Jets and Texans, of course), both of these teams are still in the wild card mix.  It's safe to say that the loser of this game no longer will be, though.  So it's big for both of them, especially since they've both got a pair of tough ones to close it out.  The Broncos got that extra day off, so I'll give them the nod here.

Washington (6-8) at Cowboys (10-4): Dallas-Dallas clinched a playoff berth when San Francisco lost on Thursday night, and the Cowboys can make their inevitable NFC East title official with a Sunday night victory over Washington.  The Cowboys are suddenly thinking bigger, though.  No team was a bigger beneficiary of the Cardinals' and Bucs' losses last week.  Suddenly, they're the 2-seed, which means avoiding the Wild Card Game against the Rams and avoiding the Divisional Playoff Game in Green Bay.  In other words, look out for the Cowboys.

Dolphins (7-7) at Saints (7-7): New Orleans-There's one thing about Miami's winning streak that I didn't even realize until I looked at it more closely the other day.  They've won six straight, but five of the six were at home and the only road game was against the Jets.  So, give them credit for taking advantage of that long home stretch, but now they have to get it done on the road if they want to jump into the AFC playoff picture.  Speaking of jumping into the playoff picture, New Orleans did just that with that win in Tampa.  And, after this, they've only got the Falcons and Panthers left.  The Saints are gonna get a wild card.

This Week: 1-0
Last Week: 11-5
Overall: 143-81-1

Wait Until 2034

We're coming up on the 20th anniversary of the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City (scary, I know!).  That's still the most recent Olympics to take place in the United States, which will remain true until Los Angeles plays host to the Summer Games in 2028.  While it's still six-plus years until LA, the USOPC is already thinking ahead to the next Winter Games in the U.S.  The host city for those Winter Olympics, whenever they may be, has already been decided.  Salt Lake City.

Salt Lake 2002 was glorious.  It's the first (and, so far, only) Olympics I attended, so for that reason alone it will always be my favorite Winter Games.  But they were also arguably the best Winter Olympics ever (and I'm not the only one who thinks so).  It's also the place where all the U.S. winter training facilities are located.  So it would make complete sense that the USOPC would want Salt Lake City to host again.

In fact, there's some momentum for Salt Lake to jump right into the race for the next available Olympics in 2030.  Which I think would be a tremendous mistake.  They'd be much better off waiting until 2034.

Yes, there is precedent for two Olympics to take place in the same country in a relatively short amount of time.  The 2002 Salt Lake Games were just six years after the Summer Olympics in Atlanta, and there was only four years between the 1980 Winter Olympics in Lake Placid and the 1984 Summer Games in LA.  In fact, Lake Placid and LA hosted within a few months of each other way back in 1932.  (But that doesn't really count since the same country automatically hosted both in the early days of the Winter Olympics.)

Holding two Olympics in the same country 18 months apart in this day and age, though, is a completely different animal.  And, frankly, it would doom Salt Lake 2030.  Because, for many, it would be an afterthought until mid-August 2028.  Sure, they'd be able to build off the momentum of LA 2028 over that final year and a half.  But it would kill any chance to properly promote the Winter Games before then.

Think about it.  When the Tokyo Games were postponed, that meant NBC was going to promote them for an additional year and couldn't even start promoting Beijing 2022 until after the Paralympics ended in September.  I saw a survey the other day that said most people aren't even aware that there's another Olympics seven weeks from now.  I'm not surprised.  NBC had to delay its promotion by a year!  Meanwhile, had COVID not intervened, they would've started their Beijing 2022 marketing sometime around last February.  That's quite a difference!

It would be a similar situation here.  All of the focus would be on LA 2028 until those Games concluded.  And, don't forget, LA was awarded those Olympics in 2017.  That's 11 years!  We're talking about Salt Lake City getting a year and a half!  Sure, it's possible to promote both Games at the same time, but there's no question that the second one would get overshadowed.  Especially since, again, LA has such a head start.

There's also this little dilemma: Olympic sponsors are locked in for a four-year period that ends with the Summer Games.  So, it's quite possible that some of the sponsors in 2028 won't be sponsors in 2030 and vice versa.  But, even for those that will be on board as sponsors for both the 2028 and 2030 Olympics it, again, stands to reason that they won't promote both simultaneously.  Which, again, would mean LA first.

Likewise, the domestic marketing by the NOC (in this case, the USOPC) generally begins when they get the flag from the previous host at the Closing Ceremony of the preceding Olympics.  That's four years of heavy promotion within the host country.  The USOPC, however, would not be able to follow that timeline because of LA 2028.  Even Salt Lake-Utah Bid Committee Chairman Fraser Bullock has acknowledged that potential difficulty.

Another thing worth considering is how long it'll take for there to be another Olympics in the U.S. after hosting two in a row.  It was six years between Atlanta and Salt Lake, then 26 between Salt Lake and LA.  While it's unlikely there'll be a 32-year gap between Summer Olympics in the U.S. again, you'd still think that spreading them out would be a much smarter idea.  For both the USOPC and NBC.

If you wait until 2034 for another Salt Lake City bid, however, you have none of these problems.  Promotion still wouldn't start until after LA.  But instead of 18 months, it's six years of lead time!  Campaigns could be built specifically around Salt Lake 2034, and people would have more than enough time to get excited.  It wouldn't feel like they're sneaking up on anyone like they would in 2030 (and like Beijing 2022 does).

Fortunately, it's not entirely the USOPC's call.  The 2030 Games are the first Winter Olympics under the new selection process that saw Brisbane, Australia selected for 2032 without a formal bidding phase.  So, even if the USOPC and Salt Lake City express interest in hosting in 2030, it's ultimately the IOC's decision whether to move beyond dialogue or not.  And you can bet that those issues I brought up will be included in that dialogue.
 
The one thing working in Salt Lake City's favor is that by 2030, it will have been 20 years since a Winter Olympics in North America (Vancouver 2010).  Meanwhile, Europe and Asia will have each had two in the interim (with Asia's coming back-to-back).  So, they may be inclined to go with a return to either Salt Lake City or Vancouver for that reason alone.  Although, Sapporo, Japan, which hosted the 1972 Winter Games and the marathons at the Tokyo Games, is the rumored favorite (and the IOC may feel like they owe it to Japan after Tokyo had to go on spectator-less).

So, ultimately, it might be a non-issue.  The IOC may gently nudge Salt Lake City towards 2034 the same way they nudged Los Angeles from 2024 to 2028.  Which, frankly, they should.  Because that's the best option for everybody.

NHL In Beijing? I'm No Longer Optimistic

Maybe we shouldn't have gotten our hopes up.  Because we should've known that the thought of NHL players returning to the Olympics after not going in 2018 was too good to be true.  The NHL hasn't made it official yet, but it's just a matter of time until they announce that the players will, in fact, NOT be going to Beijing for the Olympics in February.

Unlike 2018, when it was pretty clear that the owners (who didn't want the players to go) would get their way, all signs pointed towards NHL participation in 2022.  It was so important to the players that they worked it into the CBA.  So, even though they didn't work out all of the details and make the formal announcement until the summer, everyone was working under the assumption there'd be an Olympic break built in to the 2022 schedule.

But...there was also an opt-out just in case either the owners or the NHLPA changed their minds.  Which turned out to be a good thing.  Of course, for a while, it looked like neither side would exercise the opt-out.  Each team even named the first three players to the roster.  Then players started waffling, the league had to start postponing games, and it became obvious that the NHL pulling out was inevitable.

There are, of course, several reasons for this.  And individual players opting out wasn't one of them.  That's something that was likely anticipated.  Between COVID concerns, not wanting to quarantine and/or live in another bubble after the 2020 playoffs, issues with China being the host, and a slew of other reasons, players had every right to decide not to play.  And there's enough depth in the NHL to still field a quality 23-player roster for each nation even with opt-outs.

Then the COVID outbreaks started.  Even though every player in the NHL but one is vaccinated, there were still breakthrough cases that made their way through locker rooms.  As a result, numerous teams had to play short-handed before the NHL shut those teams' facilities down entirely until the players were out of quarantine.  If it had been just one or two teams, that still might not have forced the issue.  But, as the number of teams with outbreaks grew, so did the number of games that had to be postponed.

That was before the omicron variant reared its ugly head and caused the league to cancel all cross-border travel until after the Christmas break.  The Christmas break which was then extended by two days.  A full-blown 2020-like complete season suspension isn't currently in the cards, but isn't off the table either.

A total of 49 games have been postponed as a result of COVID pauses.  That's enough to cause "material damage" to the schedule, which is one of reasons that would allow the NHL to exercise its half of the opt-out.  Although, at this point, there's so much hesitancy among the players that it seems likely the NHLPA will opt out even if the league doesn't.  There are simply too many unknowns for either side to feel comfortable.

They knew it was a risk to plan on a full 82-game season with an Olympic break while still trying to navigate the pandemic.  And, frankly, everyone deserves a lot of credit for trying to make it work.  It, unfortunately, no longer seems possible, however.

The NHL's Olympic break is scheduled to begin after the All-Star Game on Feb. 5 and last until Feb. 22.  (The gold medal game in Beijing is on Feb. 20.)  No Olympics would obviously mean the Olympic break is no longer necessary, and it would allow the league to use most of that period for make-up games.  Assuming the All-Star break lasts a few days, they could resume on Feb. 8 and have an extra two weeks available to them.

Do they need that entire two weeks to reschedule the 49 games that have been postponed?  For some teams, maybe not.  But the Islanders and Bruins sure do!  They've both only played 26 games so far.  And the Avalanche have only played 27.  Meanwhile, the Ducks have played 32 games!  So Anaheim's looking at getting a lot more off days during that span than the Islanders, Bruins and Avalanche are.  Regardless, they don't want a repeat of what happened last season, where Vancouver and Calgary were finishing the regular season while the American teams had already started the playoffs.

Cancelling the Olympic break gives them some extra flexibility in case any more games need to be postponed between now and then, too.  Who knows if every team will actually be able to get going right away when they return from the Christmas break on Sunday?  Who knows if cross-border travel will be possible?  (And what additional adjustments will need to be made if it isn't?)

My biggest concern regarding the NHL opting out was actually a series of questions.  Who will make up the rosters now?  Because those teams will have to be named pretty soon.  And, even though I'd assume the same GMs will do the picking, who'll do the coaching now that the NHL coaches who were supposed to lead the Olympic teams will no longer be available?  More importantly, will the players have enough time to prepare?

In 2018, everyone knew early enough that the NHL wasn't going and was able to plan accordingly.  Some guys went over to Europe for that reason.  This time, everyone was working under the assumption that it would be NHL players.  Suddenly, every nation will have to transition to European-based players, assuming they're willing to go and COVID hasn't interrupted those seasons in the same way.

All of that was likely part of the contingency plans that the IIHF, IOC and national teams hoped wouldn't be necessary.  Unfortunately, now it looks like they will be.  Because, while there's still a chance the NHL and NHLPA won't opt out of the Beijing Games, that chance is incredibly slim.  The NHL season is their priority.  Which is why we'll almost certainly have to wait until Milan-Cortina 2026 for the NHL's return to the Olympics. 

Picking Football Games, Week 15

First, Baker Mayfield went off because the NFL didn't postpone the Browns-Raiders game.  Then the Raiders went off because the league did.  Throw in Seahawks-Rams and Eagles-Washington, and COVID has once again reared its ugly head and wreaked havoc with the NFL schedule.  I guess we should be grateful it took until Week 15 for it to happen!

Thursday Night: Kansas City (Win)

Patriots (9-4) at Colts (7-6): New England-While Patriots-Colts simply is no longer the must-see matchup it was in the Manning-Brady Era, this one is still definitely worth watching.  New England's on an incredible seven-game winning streak that was interrupted only by their ridiculously-late bye (thank God byes are finally over!).  There are a ton of complicated scenarios that can see the Patriots clinching a playoff berth this week, but they don't care about any of that.  They're thinking about the 1-seed and that playoff bye Belichick loves so much.  

Panthers (5-8) at Bills (7-6): Buffalo-In a few short weeks, Buffalo has gone from a playoff lock to clinging to a wild card.  The good news for the Bills is that they still have plenty of time to change that.  They just need to be a lot more consistent, not this team that's been alternating wins and losses for two months.  Although, that streak finally stopped with their second straight loss last week in Tampa, so maybe a win over the Panthers will be the start of a good stretch run.

Cardinals (10-3) at Lions (1-11-1): Arizona-Arizona will officially become the first team to clinch a playoff berth with a win over the Lions.  Which shouldn't be a problem, seeing as they're undefeated on the road this season.  Of course, they're in line to win the NFC West, which will mean at least one playoff home game, but their loss to the Rams knocked them out of the 1-seed.  That means they'd lose the bye, but it also means they'd also get to travel, so it may have been a blessing in disguise.

Jets (3-10) at Dolphins (6-7): Miami-Suddenly, the Dolphins are very much in the mix.  Miami started 1-7 but has won five in a row and, if things go their way in the other games, can end up tied for the 7-seed by the end of this week.  Fortunately, they're playing the Jets.  So the chances of that becoming six straight are pretty high.

Cowboys (9-4) at Giants (4-9): Dallas-Even if the Cowboys beat the Giants like they should, they'll have to wait to clinch their inevitable NFC East title, which they can only secure this week with a win and a Washington-Philadelphia tie (there are other complex scenarios, but that's the only straightforward one).  Either way, they're pretty much locked into the 4-seed, so all they can do is win and get ready for their Sunday night wild card game against the Rams.

Titans (9-4) at Steelers (6-6-1): Pittsburgh-Which Steelers team is going to show up this week?  The one that completely shut the Ravens down or the one that didn't show up until the fourth quarter in Minnesota?  There's a reason why this team is the only one capable of finishing .500 this season.  Because that's exactly what they look like.  A .500 team.  But they also haven't dipped below .500 since Week 5, so I actually think they'll get the win here. 

Texans (2-11) at Jaguars (2-11): Houston-It's the game that'll determine who gets the No. 2 pick in the draft (or maybe even the No. 1 pick if the Lions get another win)!  And I bet Jacksonville is thankful it's finally here so they can stop talking about the Urban Meyer drama (apparently the timing of the announcement after the Josh Lambo report was coincidence).  Anyway, this disaster of a season started with a loss to a Texans team most people consider the worst in football.  Just imagine how much worse it'll be when Houston finishes off a season sweep!

Bengals (7-6) at Broncos (7-6): Cincinnati-There are a lot of 7-6 teams in the AFC, and these are two of them.  Which makes this game full of playoff implications.  The loser can basically kiss their wild card hopes goodbye.  Cincinnati has bigger things in mind, though.  The Bengals still have hopes for a division title.  They've lost two straight, but I see a bounce back here.

Falcons (6-7) at 49ers (7-6): San Francisco-The 49ers can all but officially lock up a wild card this week.  A win here would solidify San Francisco's No. 6 position and not only make them two clear of the teams chasing them, it would give them another head-to-head tiebreaker.  So, basically, things are looking really good for the 49ers to make the playoffs.  An Atlanta win, of course, would greatly improve the Falcons' chances and actually move them ahead of San Francisco.

Packers (10-3) at Ravens (8-5): Green Bay-America's Game of the Week features a pair of first-place teams going in opposite directions.  The Packers took over the 1-seed in the NFC and can clinch the division with a win.  The Ravens, meanwhile, are in a dogfight just to hang on to a playoff berth in a division where everybody is .500 or better.  It wasn't too long ago that Baltimore was sitting pretty, but that loss in Miami started a five-game stretch where they're just 2-3.  Things will get tougher, too.  A loss here, and they could suddenly be tied for the division lead.

Saints (6-7) at Buccaneers (10-3): Tampa Bay-Brady is 0-3 in the regular season against the Saints since joining Tampa Bay.  The Bucs won when they met in the playoffs last season, but that's still an interesting stat that should give him plenty of incentive on Sunday night.  Of course, I'm not sure how much extra incentive is needed since Tampa clinches its first division title since 2007 with a victory (something they would've done last week if not for that pesky extra game this season).

Raiders (6-7) at Browns (7-6): Cleveland-Now that the game is on Monday afternoon instead of Saturday afternoon, Cleveland will presumably have at least one of its quarterbacks available.  And the delay certainly helps the Browns more than it helps the Raiders.  This is a game that Cleveland, frankly, needs to win too.  The AFC North is still very winnable, but it won't be if they don't get this one.  Not when their last three games are at Green Bay and two division matchups.

Vikings (6-7) at Bears (4-9): Minnesota-Let's, for a second, acknowledge the very real possibility that there'll be an 8-9 wild card team in the NFC.  Which plenty of people are gonna complain about, but is entirely the NFL's own doing because of that stupid 17th game!  OK, now that I've gotten that off my chest, if Minnesota wants to be that 8-9 wild card team, they need to beat the Bears.  It's been an interesting season for the Vikings, but, amazingly, they're still in prime position to make the playoffs.  As long as they take care of business here.

Seahawks (5-8) at Rams (9-4): Rams-Beating the Cardinals last week was absolutely HUGE!  Now the Rams can realistically think about catching Arizona.  Their remaining schedule is brutal though, and now they'll have a short week to deal with, as well.  Of course, the short week is because of all the COVID cases they have on the team, so they're probably grateful for the extra couple of days.  Because, with trips to Minnesota and Baltimore coming up after this, this is a big one they need to get.

Washington (6-7) at Eagles (6-7): Washington-Tuesday's other game is actually a pretty big one.  These two haven't met yet because the NFC East schedule is ridiculously backloaded (Washington's schedule for Weeks 14-18 is Cowboys, Eagles, Cowboys, Eagles, Giants, while the Eagles go Washington, Giants, Washington, Dallas).  But I digress.  The point is all those division games make it likely one of these two will end up getting a wild card.  And the winner of the first matchup will have the upper hand. (The fact that this game will now be played after all the others certainly helps, too.)

This Week: 1-0
Last Week: 10-4
Overall: 132-76-1

A Spectacularly Jaguar-like Mess

We all knew that the Urban Meyer In Jacksonville experiment was likely going to fail, but I don't think any of us expected it to fail this quickly and this spectacularly.  There were rumors that they were ready to fire him if they didn't beat the Texans in Sunday's battle of 2-11 teams, at which point I was thinking "Why not let him finish the season?  What difference does it make?"  But this week's turn of events prompted immediate action and Meyer was let go immediately, with owner Shad Khan admitting he got it wrong less than a year after proclaiming he finally "got it right."

I don't mean to minimize it, but things like this are exactly why the Jaguars are a laughingstock.  They're a team that, outside of one random year where they made the AFC Championship Game, you can count on for double-digit losses every season and, despite always having high draft picks, being in a constant state of rebuilding.  It doesn't matter who the coach or GM is.  It's one of the three certainties in life.  Death, taxes and the Jaguars sucking.

It hasn't always been like that, of course.  The Jaguars were actually really good in the late 90s.  They made the AFC Championship Game in 1995, just their second season in the league, and went 14-2 in 1999, when they lost to the Titans (for the third time that season) in the AFC Championship Game.  But, ever since Tom Coughlin and Mark Brunell left, it's been a whole lot of losing in North Florida.

That was all supposed to change with Urban Meyer, Shad Khan's white whale.  The guy he'd wanted for years and was finally able to lure away from the college ranks.  And this new era was gonna start with both Meyer and No. 1 overall pick Trevor Lawrence, the franchise quarterback they've long needed.

There were, of course, the skeptics who thought Meyer's stay in Jacksonville was only temporary and he'd bolt as soon as the right college job popped up.  (Like when he "retired" from Florida, only to resurface at Ohio State a year later.)  After all, Nick Saban lasted one season with the Dolphins before leaving for Alabama and Bobby Petrino bolted the Falcons for Arkansas with three games left in his first season.  Those are just two recent examples, and many expected Meyer to follow suit.  Whether he actually would've or not, we'll never know!

Meyer didn't give Khan much of a choice, either.  The writing was on the wall.  Meyer getting fired was as inevitable as Jon Gruden's "resignation" in Las Vegas.  The team's record was a completely separate problem that had absolutely nothing to do with why Meyer is now out of a job.  It didn't help, but even if they were 11-2 instead of 2-11, the off-the-field problems were simply too much to ignore.

The problems started almost immediately when he hired the guy who got fired at Iowa for bullying players and making racist comments as the Jaguars' director of sport performance.  That drew a strong rebuke from the Fritz Pollard Alliance and an admission that neither Meyer nor GM Trent Baalke had considered the implications of the hiring.  And that was just the start.

Then there was signing Tim Tebow as a tight end--a position he had never played before--and cutting him during training camp; the OTA violations that led to fines for both Meyer and the team, as well as the loss of two OTA's next offseason; having Lawrence and Gardner Minshew alternate snaps with the first team in preseason, only to trade Minshew to Philadelphia before the season started.  As it turns out, that was all just the precursor.

He also publicly stated that the Jaguars considered a player's vaccination when making final cuts, a rules violation that prompted an NFLPA investigation; he benched running back James Robinson, Jacksonville's best player, for long stretchs; then, when asked about it, he threw his assistant coaches under the bus.  He also lost several assistants because of the way he treated them, and his relationship with the players clearly wasn't much better.  Still, Khan didn't want to be "hasty" when it came to Meyer.  Until the last two incidents, that is.

In October, after losing a Thursday night game in Cincinnati, Meyer didn't travel back with the team so that he could visit his grandchildren in Columbus.  Two days later, a video of Meyer with a woman who's not his wife began circulating online.  After he apologized, another video of him with the same woman came out.  That drew a public rebuke from Khan, but it still wasn't enough for Meyer to get fired.

Finally, there was the last straw, the incident with ex-Jaguars kicker Josh Lambo.  According to the Tampa Bay Times, the incident happened during the last week of the preseason.  Lambo alleged that Meyer kicked him in the leg while stretching and, when Lambo told him never to do it again, responding by saying, "I'm the head ball coach.  I'll kick you whenever the f*** I want."  Meyer has denied this, but that doesn't matter.  It was clear that the Jaguars had to sever ties with him immediately.

So how did it go so spectacularly wrong so quickly?  It's clear that Meyer's coaching style simply didn't translate to the NFL.  (In fact, I think that was a big part of it.)  Or maybe he just couldn't handle losing.  It's not like his teams lost very often at Florida or Ohio State!  And, it's also worth noting that there were plenty of problems in both of those programs that should've been red flags.

Simply put, Shad Khan took a gamble with Urban Meyer and clearly lost that bet.  He somehow managed to take the most dysfunctional organization in the NFL and make it even more dysfunctional!  And it's not like the Jaguars can write this off as a one-time miss, either.  Meyer's the latest in a long line of coaches who couldn't win in Jacksonville.  What makes things worse this time, though, is that it sets the franchise back even further.

Where the Jaguars go from here is anybody's guess.  It's pretty obvious that a lot of things need to change for Jacksonville to be competitive at all, let alone consistently.  They at least have Trevor Lawrence.  Now they need to find the right coach.  Because Urban Meyer clearly wasn't it.

Going to School Makes You a STUDENT! Duh!

student (noun): a person who attends a school, college or university

That's how the word "student" is defined by Merriam-Webster.  That definition should be obvious.  Yet somehow it isn't.  Because there are still some college athletes who insist they aren't "students."  They're "employees."  Even though, by the sheer fact that they attend a school, college or university, they are, by definition, "students."

I bring this up because of the ridiculous article I saw in the US edition of the British newspaper The Guardian last week.  A group of BCS football players (who were apparently the only people they talked to for this article) take exception with the NCAA's use of the term "student-athlete."  Because evidently they don't consider themselves "students" even though they go to school and, presumably, attend classes (which, again, is literally the definition of the word!).

Really, the article is so absurd that it made me angry!  I won't say that it didn't make some valid points about the time commitment Division I athletics involves.  But that, frankly, is what makes what college athletes do so impressive.  They do all this while also doing everything required to be successful in the classroom.  That's why they're called student-athletes.  Because they do both.  It should be a source of pride!

Not only does this article fail to acknowledge that, it completely ignores the "student" part of the term.  The Guardian's entire argument is based on the comments of the few athletes they talked to who fit the narrative they were going for.  Never mind the fact that these "employees" are compensated with scholarships or that a vast majority of college athletes, as the NCAA constantly points out in its PSA's, won't become professional athletes.  They're using that scholarship (if they're lucky enough to be on one) to get an education that will prepare them for their chosen career.  So they take the "student" part of "student-athlete" very seriously.

All this article proves is that the players they interviewed couldn't care less about the free (or reduced-rate) education that they're receiving.  They likely view class as nothing more than a daily obligation and only go because they "have to" in order to remain eligible.  They're too selfish to even realize the incredible opportunity that they're given.  All they care about is the fact that they "work" for the school and don't receive any compensation (other than, you know, going to school for free while other non-athlete students will spend years paying off the debt they accrue to attend the same college).

It's important to note here that it's no longer true that student-athletes don't receive any compensation.  Now that the Name & Image Likeness laws have been passed, athletes are free to promote themselves and have individual sponsors.  The only restrictions are that they can't use their institution's name or logo in any of their personal endorsements (which is done, in part, to protect exclusivity).  Otherwise, they can pretty much do whatever they want.  (The NCAA, in fact, has asked Congress to create federal legislation on the topic since all the state laws are different.)

There definitely needs to be some sort of federal regulation regarding NIL deals.  Because they're gonna get out of control!  They've already started to!  We've got high school athletes signing six-figure deals!  And the NIL's further illustrate a point that the Guardian article conveniently ignores.  Similar to the way scholarships are so heavily skewed towards football and basketball players, NIL deals will be, too.  So, again, the people who are complaining the loudest are actually the ones who stand to benefit the most.

The whole crux of their argument seems to be based, not surprisingly, on a lawsuit.  In a nine-page memo written by Jennifer Abruzzo of the National Labor Relations Board in September, she tries to argue that the term "student-athlete" is somehow derogatory and that they should instead be considered college employees. 

As someone who has been employed by a college for the better part of the last 15-plus years, I can tell you that student-athletes are most definitely NOT college employees!  This has been argued time and again, and there's always going to be people who come down on both sides of the issue.  But all the athletes who want to be considered "employees" and not "students" are proving is that they simply don't get it.  They don't understand what it actually means to be an employee.  They just know they don't want to be students.

Again, I'm not trying to minimize what goes into being a student-athlete.  It is incredibly difficult to balance the two.  And, yes, it does sometimes feel like there aren't enough hours in a day between all of the sport commitments and all of the academic commitments.  Which is why the term student-athlete shouldn't be seen as some sort of dig.  It should be seen as a badge of honor!

My point about the 95 percent of college athletes who don't play Division I football or basketball needs to be reiterated again, too.  Many of them are paying for that education while also taking on everything required to play their sport.  And, even with NIL's, some of those student-athletes also have a part-time job so that they can earn some extra money.  So that's another thing on top of their sport and classes.  Something that football and basketball players who are only worried about the draft don't even have to think about.

When people criticize the IOC about decisions they make, it's usually because they're only viewing it from their own perspective while failing to acknowledge the IOC needs to make the decision that's best for 205 different countries.  It's the same thing with the NCAA.  A vast majority of NCAA student-athletes aren't Division I football and basketball players.  And the organization needs to act in the best interest of everybody!

They actually found a way to criticize that, too, in the article.  The new NCAA constitution uses the term "student-athlete" 44 times.  The committee that drafted that constitution included 23 student-athletes from all three divisions, none of whom seemed to have a problem with the term.  If they had an issue with it or thought there was something better, don't you think they would've changed it?  

Instead, the committee concluded that "there was a wide consensus among the thousands of current and former college athletes consulted that the term did more good than harm."  But that explanation, of course, wasn't enough for the group that The Guardian interviewed.  And why would it?  It didn't fit their narrative!

Everyone knows the NCAA isn't perfect.  Far from it.  Everyone knows major changes are coming to college athletics, too.  That was the whole point of drafting a new NCAA Constitution!  We'll likely see Power 5 schools be given a certain degree of autonomy, and student-athletes almost certainly will be given a greater voice.  How that'll look is anybody's guess, but I'm sure there'll be something.

And, frankly, this drummed-up non-controversy over the term "student-athlete" is just stupid!  Because that's exactly what you are if you play a sport in college.  You're an athlete.  No one's denying that.  But you also attend a school, which makes you a student.  Thus, you're a "student-athlete!"  Be proud of that fact!

Picking Football Games, Week 14

No more byes after this week!  I'm sorry, but mid-December byes are ridiculous!  Especially since there's an even number of teams in the league!  What makes it worse is that good teams had late byes, so they really screwed up the playoff picture!  Which, thankfully, we won't have to worry about anymore after this week!

Fortunately, the AFC playoff race won't get too screwed up by the Patriots' bye.  Even if the Titans, Ravens and Chiefs all win, New England will still have the tiebreaker.  What it would do, however, is set up an awesome race over the final four weeks!  Of course, that requires Tennessee, Baltimore and Kansas City taking care of business first.

Thursday Night: Pittsburgh (Loss)

Ravens (8-4) at Browns (6-6): Baltimore-Ah, NFL scheduling at its finest!  The Browns' last game was also against the Ravens.  But since last week was Cleveland's bye, the Ravens had a game against the Steelers in between.  It makes no sense at all!  And the back-to-back games are stupid too!  Anyway, I'd say the back-to-back thing favors Cleveland, but they'll be dealing with a Ravens team that's pissed off it lost to Pittsburgh, which should be what makes the difference.

Jaguars (2-10) at Titans (8-4): Tennessee-Remember when the Titans were the No. 1 seed in the AFC?  It seems so long ago, doesn't it?  They lost two straight before their bye and how have the same record as everybody else.  And it all started with a loss to Houston!  Now they play the other bad team in their division looking to avoid making that same mistake of looking past them.  Of course, the difference here is that this game is in Nashville.

Raiders (6-6) at Chiefs (8-4): Kansas City-Last year, the Raiders went into Kansas City and handed the Chiefs their first loss of the season.  This year, the script is strikingly similar.  The Chiefs were 6-0 when they hosted the Raiders last season.  They come into this one on a five-game winning streak.  However, that streak includes a 41-14 thumping of the Raiders in Las Vegas a month ago.  The Chiefs are playing their best football.  The Raiders are not.

Saints (5-7) at Jets (3-9): New Orleans-It was losing to the Giants that started the Saints' downward spiral that hasn't stopped.  Can playing the other New York team snap them out of it while they still have a chance?  The beating the Jets part is certainly doable.  The rest of it?  I'm not so sure.  But let's take one thing at a time.  Snapping the five-game losing streak is priority number one.

Cowboys (8-4) at Washington (6-6): Dallas-Dallas and Washington will meet twice in 14 days, starting with this week's showdown in DC.  So, the Cowboys don't have the division locked up yet.  They essentially will with a win against their archrivals, though.  Dallas is still working out some kinks after looking like the best team in football earlier this season, and you know Washington's gonna give them a game.  Washington can not only move within a game in the division here, they can solidify their playoff position.  But alas, a Dallas win will drop the Cowboys' magic number to one.

Falcons (5-7) at Panthers (5-7): Atlanta-This game is actually really important in the NFC playoff race, since the winner could be tied for the seventh spot at week's end.  It's doubly important for Atlanta since the Panthers won the first game.  Fortunately for them, Carolina has looked like crap since that win in Arizona.  That's why I think the Falcons take this one.

Seahawks (4-8) at Texans (2-10): Seattle-Seattle kept its season alive with that win over San Francisco last week.  Does that mean the Seahawks will make the playoffs?  Probably not!  But it's very possible that it got them started on a nice roll to end the season.  They've got a favorable schedule, too.  Of course, the Titans also thought that when they traveled to Houston and we all know what happened there.

Lions (1-10-1) at Broncos (6-6): Denver-The Lions finally won!  It was just so great to see that game-winning touchdown last week.  Because that team didn't deserve to go winless!  Unfortunately, it should be back to the losing ways this week against the Broncos.  Denver had a slight hiccup last week against Kansas City, but is still very much in the AFC playoff race.  That'll especially be the case after they improve to 7-6.

Giants (4-8) at Chargers (7-5): Chargers-Every time people start to have second thoughts about the Chargers, they go out and have a performance like last week in Cincinnati.  Now they've got a winnable game against the Giants before their Thursday-night showdown with Kansas City.  Don't forget, the Chargers won the first game against the Chiefs, so that could very well be for first place.  But they have to take care of the Giants before they can worry about that.  Otherwise, Thursday won't matter nearly as much.

49ers (6-6) at Bengals (7-5): Cincinnati-I was looking for Super Bowl XVI on YouTube the other day and it's not there.  They have the full game for most other Super Bowls, including a bunch from the 70s, but the San Francisco-Cincinnati game that was Madden and first Super Bowl together isn't one of them.  (For the record, Super Bowl XXIII IS available.)  As for the 2021 editions of the 49ers and Bengals, I'm convinced that Cincinnati is legit.  I'm not convinced that San Francisco is.  Thus, the pick is the Bengals.

Bills (7-5) at Buccaneers (9-3): Tampa Bay-What has happened to the Bills?  This certainly isn't the team that people viewed as a Super Bowl contender entering the season!  Now, they're struggling just to hang on to a wild card spot.  The good news is that they keep alternating wins and losses, so, since they're coming off a loss, this should theoretically be a win.  Except they're playing their old buddy Tom Brady, so that theory will definitely be put to the test this week.

Bears (4-8) at Packers (9-3): Green Bay-We've got the NFL's oldest rivals on Sunday Night Football.  I normally complain every time the Bears get a prime time game, but I'm always willing to make an exception when they play the Packers.  Had the Vikings lost on Thursday, Green Bay would've actually had a chance to clinch the division this week, and they'll know coming in whether they can clinch a playoff berth.  Regardless, they know they need to keep winning if they want to have any chance at the 1-seed (and, don't forget, they have the tiebreaker on Arizona).

Rams (8-4) at Cardinals (10-2): Arizona-Two weeks in a row we've got an excellent Monday night game between first- and second-place teams!  This time it's the Cardinals and Rams.  An Arizona win would basically clinch the NFC West, while a Rams victory keeps them very much in play for the division.  Of course, they put themselves in this position by losing three straight before playing the Jaguars last week.  They'll be looking at a wild card and trying to lock down that trip to Dallas after this one.

GREY CUP: Blue Bombers at Tiger-Cats: Hamilton-After taking last year off, the Grey Cup is back!  And it's actually a rematch of 2019.  Two years ago, Winnipeg won its first title since 1990.  Now it's Hamilton that has the longest Grey Cup drought in the CFL.  The Tiger-Cats haven't won the championship since 1999, but will be playing at home.  I think that makes the difference and they'll no longer be the only CFL team without a Grey Cup win this century.

This Week: 0-1
Last Week: 7-7
Overall: 121-73-1

Boycott Diplomacy

In 1971, the U.S. table tennis team traveled to Beijing for a series of exhibition matches against the Chinese National Team.  They became the first Westerners to set foot in China since 1949.  Forrest Gump told John Lennon all about it on The Dick Gavitt Show.  The Chinese team then visited Washington in 1972.  Without question, ping pong diplomacy paved the way for the normalization of relations between the United States and China.

Then, in 1984, when the Soviets led a revenge boycott of the LA Olympics, one notable country was there.  China returned to the Olympics after a 32-year absence and received a standing ovation at the Opening Ceremony.  The first gold medal of the Games went to a Chinese shooter, and Li Ning became a star, winning six medals.

Fast forward to 2021 and U.S.-China relations are very different.  They're acknowledged as the world's two superpowers, with vastly different viewpoints on numerous issues.  And, of course, a very high-profile Olympic rivalry.

With Beijing hosting the Winter Olympics in February, the Biden Administration was under immense pressure to take some sort of stand about China's treatment of Uyghurs that has been described by many in the West as "genocide."  There were even calls for the U.S. to boycott the Games, which, frankly, was just a stupid suggestion that wouldn't solve anything and would only punish U.S. athletes who'd been training hard for the last four years for absolutely no reason.  For that reason, President Biden said that a full boycott wasn't even on the table.  He didn't rule out a diplomatic boycott, however.

Earlier this week, Biden announced that the U.S. would indeed enact a "diplomatic boycott" of the 2022 Olympics.  The U.S. will send a full team to Beijing, but no government officials will attend.  It quickly became a diplomatic boycott by the entire English-speaking world, with Canada, Great Britain, Australia and New Zealand among the nations joining (although, it should be noted, New Zealand had already said it nobody would be going before the American announcement because of the country's COVID quarantine rules).

China, predictably, was not happy.  They vowed that the U.S. "will pay" and pointed out that no government officials from those nations had been invited to the Olympics, so, they reasoned that you can't technically "boycott" something you weren't invited to in the first place.  The IOC, for its part, is staying out of it (which is the only position it can take), saying that "the presence of government officials and diplomats is a purely political decision for each government."

What exactly is the diplomatic boycott meant to accomplish?  Frankly, I have no idea!  If the goal was to piss off China, good job!  But if the goal is to get China to change its approach to something more along the lines of what the West considers "acceptable," that ain't happenin'!  In fact, it'll accomplish the exact opposite.  China will just dig its heels in even further.

And, frankly, will anyone even notice?  Team USA will still be there.  They'll still be wearing red, white and blue, and the American flag will still be raised at medals ceremonies.  And NBC will still have hours of coverage (with a small break for the Super Bowl).  It'll, of course, be mentioned during the Opening Ceremony, but will the "diplomatic boycott" even be brought up at any other point?

Some people like to criticize the IOC for their handling of this entire situation, but the IOC doesn't have much of a choice other than to stay out of it.  The United States and China are two of the most important nations in the entire Olympic Movement.  Getting involved would've been taken as choosing one side over the other.  And that's the last thing the IOC wants to do.  So instead they'll do nothing and maintain their neutrality.  Which is really their only option.

The IOC has stressed over and over again that it's not a political organization or government.  Its job is to put on the Olympic Games, and awarding the Games to a particular country doesn't mean they necessarily agree with that country's government or policies.  Plenty of people are critical of that stance, and rightfully so, but the point remains.  They aren't responsible for the actions of the government in the host country and they aren't just gonna pick up and move an Olympics (with less than a year to go!) because some people disagree with the way something's being handled in that nation.  (Whether that's right or wrong is an entirely different debate.)

Everyone agrees that the 1980 boycott did nothing.  Well, nothing except water down the Olympics and rob an entire generation of American athletes of their opportunity.  The Soviets didn't withdraw their troops from Afghanistan, cleaned up in the medal count (along with East Germany) and countered with a boycott of their own in 1984.

Likewise, this boycott isn't going to improve U.S.-China relations.  It's more likely that things will become more tense, at least in the short term.  Although, it's also possible that there will be longer-lasting implications, as well.  Either way, the diplomatic boycott may appease those in the West who want to "send China a message," but that's really it.  And, considering the anticipated Chinese response, will it even be worth it? 

I'd like to say that at least the American athletes won't feel the affects of the boycott, but I'm not even sure that's true.  Don't forget, the only spectators allowed are those who live in China.  So you can expect an entirely Chinese crowd to have an extremely negative reaction towards Team USA.  The boos won't just be heard at the Opening Ceremony, either.  They'll likely follow the Americans wherever they go for the duration of the Games.

Those who wanted the U.S. to "do something" in response to China's human rights record are probably very happy about the diplomatic boycott.  They got exactly what they wanted.  But at what cost?  Because a "diplomatic boycott" may sound great in theory, but will have little-to-no impact on the Olympics themselves.  Which I guess is a good thing.  Since it means the American athletes will only have to deal with some booing.  They won't have to miss out on their Olympic opportunity, which is something the 1980 team can never get back!

2021 JB Athlete of the Year

Sports Illustrated will announce its annual "Sportsperson of the Year" tomorrow.  As usual, there are plenty of candidates.  No one stands out as an obvious selection, though, so I'm curious to see who they end up going with, especially in a year where things got "back to normal" in many ways but we still felt the hangover of the tumultuous 2020.

I've got some ideas for who should be in the running, as well as my thoughts for who should be the winner.  My reasons vary, too.  They all had historic performances, but the type of history they made was different.  Which is why I'm intrigued to see who they ultimately end up selecting.  Here are my top candidates, sorted in alphabetical order:

Giannis Antetokounmpo (Basketball): After winning both Defensive Player of the Year and MVP in 2020, Giannis picked up right where he left off in 2021.  He was MVP of the All-Star Game and dominated the NBA Finals, averaging 35 points and 13 rebounds to lead the Bucks to their first championship in 50 years.  Then in the offseason, he further cementing his ties to Milwaukee by purchasing a minority stake in the Brewers.

Simone Biles (Gymnastics): She won four gold medals and five overall in Rio.  She left Tokyo with just a silver and a bronze.  But those shined just as brightly, if not more so.  Biles withdrew in the middle of the team final for "mental health" reasons that turned out to be so much more.  Because her withdrawal brought attention to a bigger issue, and illustrated the dangers of a sport where you're twisting in the air.  Then she returned and won balance beam bronze.  She's also a survivor of Larry Nasser's abuse, which she also felt was important to come back from.

Tom Brady (Football): Believe it or not, Tom Brady has only been named SI Sportsperson of the Year once.  Of course, it's hard for a football player since their season ends in February, then they're in the middle of another one when it's time to pick a winner.  But there's no denying that this has been one of the most remarkable years of Brady's legendary career.  He won a seventh! Super Bowl, this time with a new team and was his usual dominant self during the Bucs' playoff run.  Plus, that drunken celebration!

Novak Djokovic (Tennis): He didn't win the Golden Slam, but the fact that it was even a possibility says enough about Djokovic's outstanding year.  He beat Nadal at Roland Garros, then rallied from two sets down in the final.  At Wimbledon, he tied Federer and Nadal's all-time record with 20 Grand Slam titles.  He actually went to the Olympics when so many other top players didn't and made the semifinals.  Then, even though the Golden Slam was gone, the Grand Slam dream was still alive until he lost the US Open final.  That's 27 consecutive Grand Slam wins in one year.  Outstanding.

Caeleb Dressel (Swimming): When Michael Phelps retired, there was the question of who'd inherit the mantle as the top U.S. male swimmer.  There's no question anymore.  It's Caeleb Dressel.  He won five gold medals in Tokyo, setting two world records and two Olympic records.  Without a doubt, Dressel was the biggest American star at the Tokyo Games.

Allyson Felix (Track & Field): Allyson Felix was already one of the greatest Olympians ever before her final act in Tokyo.  That final act only added to her legend.  The 35-year-old veteran finished third in the 400 at Trials to qualify for her first Olympics as a mom.  She was a long shot to even make the final in Tokyo, but ended up winning bronze, her 10th career Olympic medal.  Felix then had the perfect ending...a gold medal in the 4x400 relay.

Jessica Long (Paralympic Swimming): Long has been the face of the U.S. Paralympic team for a decade, and she added six more medals in Tokyo--three gold, two silver and a bronze.  She now has 29 career Paralympic medals (16 gold).  But it's not just about her performance in Tokyo, as great as it was.  Long is probably the most famous Paralympic athlete in the world, and she uses that platform to bring awareness and appreciation to Paralympic sports.  I can't think of a better ambassador, either.

Lionel Messi (Soccer): As great as he's been throughout his career, Messi finally did something in 2021 that he'd never done before.  He led Argentina to a trophy!  After so many second-place finishes, they beat Brazil to win Copa America, and Messi was involved in nine of his country's 12 goals in the tournament.  He also left Barcelona after 17 years and signed with PSG.  Combined, Messi scored 40 goals in 2021 to earn a record seventh Ballon d'Or.

U.S. Ryder Cup Team (Golf): There's precedent for a team to be honored (see the 2004 New England-based baseball team), and the 2021 U.S. Ryder Cup team certainly qualifies.  They were tired of seeing Europe win the Ryder Cup and wanted to do something about it.  And boy did they!  They didn't just win, they dominated!  They had eight of the top 10 players in the world on the roster, and they played like it, leaving no doubt who the better team was over those three days.  The final was 19-9, the largest margin of victory in the Ryder Cup since 1967.

While any of these nine finalists would've been a great selection, none of them get the nod.  Because in a year where all types of history was made in all kinds of sports, there's one historical performance that stands out above the rest.  It truly was a "Once In a Century" type of thing.  That's why the 2021 Joe Brackets Athlete of the Year award goes to...

SHOHEI OHTANI (Baseball): What he did in 2021 was extraordinary.  I've been as big a skeptic as anybody about this whole pitching and hitting thing, but I was clearly wrong (at least for this season).  The Angels finally let him loose, and it was incredible to watch.  Because he didn't just do both and do both well, he did it so effortlessly as if it was nothing.

Ohtani was the unanimous AL MVP for good reason.  He hit 46 home runs, drove in 100 and stole 26 bases AND he made 26 starts on the mound, went 9-2 and struck out 156 hitters!  The Angels had their freakin' pitcher hitting leadoff!  He was named All-MLB at both DH and pitcher!  He made the All-Star team at both positions!  Because why wouldn't the starting pitcher also be the DH?!

The best thing about Ohtani's season, though, is how he embraced it.  He knew he was the biggest draw in the game, and he knew what that entailed.  That's why he did the Home Run Derby (the night before starting the All-Star Game at pitcher).  Because people wanted to see him.  He did it without complaint and didn't say "No" to anything when he would've had every reason to.  And, don't forget, he had to do two completely different sets of interviews for both the American and Japanese media.  What he was doing was bigger than baseball.  Ohtani understood what he was doing and knew the significance of it.  The fact that he did it with such grace just made it that much more spectacular!

So, there you have it.  We're unlikely to ever seen anything like Shohei Ohtani's 2021 season again (unless he does it again in 2022).  It was historic in so many ways.  And he kept it going for six months!  That's why, even with so many great candidates to choose from, there's no doubt in my mind who the 2021 Joe Brackets Athlete of the Year was.  Shohei Ohtani.

The Golden Days of Early Baseball

Last year, because of the pandemic, there was no Veterans Committee vote for the Baseball Hall of Fame.  This year, they're making up for it by voting on two different eras.  This is year in the five-year cycle where the Golden Days Era Committee meets on players and managers from 1950-69, as well as the only time in a 10-year period where the Early Baseball Committee (pre-1950) will vote.  That committee won't meet again until the 2032 induction class.

I wanted some clarification, so I asked my friend Jim Henneman (who's a member of the Early Baseball Committee, as well as one of the people who helped formulate the two ballots) and he confirmed that, yes, the two eras will be considered and voted on separately.  So, it's possible (although unlikely) that we could get a pretty big group of Hall of Famers to join whoever's voted in by the writers.

While I have no idea how many of these 20 men will get the necessary 12 votes from the respective 16-member committee, I don't think we'll see a complete shutout.  Because these resumes are simply too good.  Especially on the Golden Days ballot, you could make a strong case that all 10 candidates should already be Hall of Famers.  I think it's very likely that at least one of them will finally get the long overdue nod.

The Early Baseball ballot is a bit tougher.  It includes a player from each of the three New York teams (Bill Dahlen-Giants, Lefty O'Doul-Dodgers, Allie Reynolds-Yankees), as well as seven Negro League and pre-Negro League players.  Stats from that era, especially for the Negro Leagues, are incomplete and unreliable, though, and it's tough to compare them without numbers.  However, the fact that this committee won't meet again for another 10 years leads me to believe that it, too, will yield at least one new Hall of Famer.

Bob Costas did a very good job of breaking down both ballots on MLB Tonight the other day.  They had in-depth discussions about several players, and it actually helped shape my opinion about how I'd vote.  Because the names I went in thinking I'd vote for aren't the same as the ones I'd vote for now.  However, really good points were also made about Roger Maris and Buck O'Neil, specifically how the "Fame" part of "Hall of Fame" applies in their cases.  Will that be enough to get them in, though?

Let's start with the Early Baseball ballot, where I'm particularly intrigued by four players, the first of which is Bill Dahlen.  Dahlen just missed election the last time he was up for consideration, getting 10 of the necessary 12 votes.  I think it's likely he gets over the hump this time.  He was the shortstop for the New York Giants team that won the 1905 World Series and was the all-time leader in both home runs and games played when he retired.  While his numbers are pedestrian by today's standards, Dahlen's known as one of the best power hitters of the Dead Ball Era.

Next we've got Allie Reynolds.  He was almost elected in 2008, then received fewer than three votes the next time he was up.  I view Reynolds in this context: he was the ace of the pitching staff for a Yankees team that won five consecutive World Series.  He also threw two no-hitters in the same year and twice finished top-three in MVP voting (the Cy Young didn't exist yet when he played, but he likely would've won a few if it had).

There are also a pair of Negro League players who I admittedly knew absolutely nothing about, but am now glad to endorse as Hall of Famers.  That especially includes John Donaldson, who some consider the greatest pitcher of his era.  He pitched for more than 30 years and threw at least 14 no-hitters that researchers have found.  Donaldson's credited for a 413-161 record and more than 5,000 strikeouts.  More importantly, he led successful barnstorming tours, establishing that as a business model that Black teams would use for decades.

Then there's Vic Harris, who played and managed for the legendary Homestead Grays.  He hit .306 in his 18-year career, but I think his managerial career is perhaps more significant.  Harris managed the Grays for 11 years and won eight pennants, including six straight from 1937-42.  I can't think of any Negro Leagues managers who are in the Hall of Fame, which is why Harris stands out to me.

Moving on to the Golden Days Era, narrowing it down to four is much tougher.  Because, if the number of votes was unlimited, I'd probably want to vote for seven of them.  And the argument has already been made about why each of these guys should be in the Hall of Fame.  Fortunately, the long wait is likely to finally end for at least one of them.

My first choice is Tony Oliva, who has come close to election several times in the past.  In 2014, he missed by one vote.  And, frankly, Tony Oliva's a Hall of Famer.  He was an All-Star in each of his first eight seasons and won three AL batting titles.  Injuries forced him to become the Twins' DH when the position was established in 1973, but, thanks to the inductions of Edgar Martinez and Harold Baines (and David Ortiz's coming election), that's no longer considered a stigma.  Those Twins teams had Rod Carew and Carew wasn't even the best hitter on those teams.  That tells you all you need to know about Tony Oliva.

Dick Allen is someone I had never much considered until I looked deeper into his stats and realized he really was one of the best power hitters of the 60s and early 70s.  He was the NL Rookie of the Year for that excellent 1964 Phillies team and AL MVP eight years later for the White Sox.  Allen led each league in slugging and on-base percentage, and he finished his career with 351 home runs.  He also had a .292 career average during a very pitcher-friendly era.  I've come around on Dick Allen.  I think he belongs.  (And should he get in, his election will be almost exactly one year after his death.)

Maury Wills, meanwhile, I think has been overlooked because his calling card was the stolen base.  However, it's precisely because his calling card was the stolen base that he's even a worthy Hall of Fame candidate.  Wills made the stolen base a weapon and set an MLB record with 104 in 1962 (which was more than any other team that season).  He also won a Gold Glove and was NL MVP that season.  The Dodgers don't win three World Series in eight years without Maury Wills.

Finally, I've got another Dodger, one who played in Brooklyn.  Gil Hodges is the only one of the legendary "Boys of Summer" who isn't in the Hall of Fame yet.  And there are many people who think he should be.  Hodges is considered one of the greatest players of the 1950s, when he was an eight-time All-Star and three-time Gold Glove winner.  And, let's not forget his role as manager of the 1969 Mets.  Let's finally end the controversy surrounding Gil Hodges' candidacy and just put him in the Hall of Fame already!

You'll notice that I didn't include either Roger Maris or Buck O'Neil.  Maris' 1961 season is obviously stuff of legend (and it's still the AL single-season record 60 years later), but there's a reason why he isn't a Hall of Famer.  (Fun fact, Babe Ruth is single-season home run record-holder among those actually in the Hall of Fame.)  O'Neil, meanwhile, has had his career romanticized ever since his appearance in Ken Burns' Baseball.

Who'll ultimately get elected?  I have no idea!  My best guess, though, is that Dahlen and Donaldson will be voted in from the Early Baseball ballot, while Oliva and Allen will each get that extra vote this time around and take their rightful places in Cooperstown.