Best In the Baseball World

With the United States fresh off a pair of Olympic golds in hockey, another American team has a chance to add to the patriotic feeling in this 250th year.  And this might be the best team the United States has ever put together for the World Baseball Classic.  Better than the 2017 championship squad.  Better than the 2023 team that made the final.  And yet, despite this being the best American WBC team ever, there's no guarantee of anything.  That's the beauty of this tournament.  Major League stars on every team, so many with a legitimate chance to win.

So, why do I think this is the best American team ever?  Pitching.  It's that simple.  Pitching has always been the weakness.  It's understandable that teams and pitchers are cautious at this time of year.  The tournament takes place during Spring Training and there are so many rules put in place to protect the pitchers.  As a result, the U.S. has never had elite top-tier starting pitchers available and willing to participate.  That's not the case this year.  Both Cy Young winners will make a start, as will Giants ace Logan Webb, who'll pitch the opener.  People are making a big deal about Tarik Skubal only making one start.  But...the maximum number of starts he'd make is two anyway, and I'll take one Tarik Skubal start over zero Tarik Skubal starts!

You also still need to consider defending champion Japan as, at the very least, a co-favorite.  Japan has the best player on the planet.  Ohtani won't pitch in the WBC, but his mere presence is intimidating enough.  And the Japanese pitching staff still includes a Dodger--who just happens to be coming off winning World Series MVP.  So, yeah, the Japanese will be as formidable as ever.

Then there's the Dominican Republic.  They have the strongest lineup in the tournament (the United States is really the only team that's remotely comparable).  They also have the pitching to back it up.  Sandy Alcantara.  Cristopher Sanchez.  Brayan Bello.  Then, in the bullpen, Gregory Soto, Camilo Doval and Seranthony Dominguez, among others.  A second WBC championship by the DR wouldn't be a shock at all.

There's one other team I think is a formidable contender for the title.  Venezuela.  This is the first time they're playing a WBC without Miguel Cabrera (who's on the coaching staff), but still boast an incredibly strong lineup.  The only question is the pitching.  They nearly beat the U.S. in the quarterfinals three years ago.  You know the memory of that loss will drive them in 2026.  And getting past the quarterfinals is definitely a realistic possibility.

Pool A: Pool A is perhaps the most evenly-matched of the four.  Puerto Rico is playing at home and probably the most talented of the four teams (even if they've had stronger rosters at past WBCs).  Cuba, meanwhile, reached the semifinals in 2023 and boasts the legend Alfredo Despaigne along with a good number of Cuban-born MLB players.  Either one of them can win the pool.

This is a really great opportunity for Canada, too.  Canada is not in the same pool as the U.S. for the first time, which could be their ticket for advancing to the second round for the first time.  Panama finished fourth in its group in 2023 to avoid the qualifying round, while Colombia had to play in the qualifiers and rolled right through it.  Colombia beat eventual semifinalist Mexico in the opening game of the 2023 tournament and has a much stronger roster than Panama.  I expect them to win that game and get the automatic spot in the next WBC.

Pool B: It's odd that they put two of the 2023 semifinalists--the United States and Mexico--in the same group.  I get wanting Mexico to play in Houston.  But they also just as easily could've had Mexico hosting the first round and send either Venezuela or the DR to Houston.  Either way, they should both easily advance.  It's just a question of who'll win that game to take the pool.

Also curious was the decision to put Great Britain and Brazil, two of the weakest teams, in the same group.  Which is good news for whoever wins that game and doesn't have to go to the qualifiers.  Italy advanced to the quarterfinals in 2023 thanks to that wacky five-way tiebreaker.  And, in 2017, they beat Mexico in the opening game, then only missed reaching the second round because they lost a winner-take-all tiebreaker game.  If any of the other three teams is gonna challenge the U.S. or Mexico, it'll be Italy.

Pool C: Czechia was the darlings of the 2023 WBC, qualifying for the first time and beating China in the opening game.  That got them a spot in the 2026 edition, where they've once again been drawn into the Asian pool.  Unfortunately, I don't see how the Czechs avoid dropping into the qualifier this time.  This pool is just too strong.  It's arguably the strongest of the tournament.

Japan has been to the semifinals of every WBC, so let's assume they've got one of the two quarterfinal spots.  Australia took the other one in 2023 after beating South Korea in the opening game.  Chinese Taipei, meanwhile, went 2-2, but finished last in its pool on a tiebreaker, then nearly didn't make it out of the qualifiers.  But they're the No. 2 team in the world and looking to get out of the first round for the first time since 2013.  On paper, you've gotta give the nod to the Koreans, though.

Pool D: I already pegged the Dominican Republic and Venezuela as two of the tournament favorites, so it shouldn't be a surprise to hear that I expect them both to advance.  This pool doesn't have a "home" team, but has the advantage of playing the entire tournament in Miami.  The teams they'll face in the quarterfinals will both be traveling from Tokyo, meanwhile.  That could make a huge difference, and it's one of the reasons I can see both the DR and Venezuela reaching the semifinals.

Of course, getting out of the pool isn't guaranteed.  Not when a formidable team from the Netherlands, a two-time semifinalist, is lurking.  While I don't expect it to happen, it wouldn't be shocking to see the Dutch advance over either of the Latin American teams.  Israel had a much better WBC in its 2017 debut than it did in 2023, when they lost back-to-back games 10-0 and Puerto Rico threw a perfect game against them.  Still, they should beat Nicaragua and avoid needing to play the qualifiers next time.

My quarterfinal matchups are Puerto Rico vs. Mexico, the United States vs. Cuba, Japan vs. Venezuela and Dominican Republic vs. South Korea.  That's the importance of that Dominican Republic-Venezuela game.  Winning Pool D and avoiding a quarterfinal against Japan.  It's the last game of pool play in the entire tournament, and it might as well be a playoff game.  Because the stakes will be HUGE.  And you know the intensity will be there.

Whoever wins that goes to the semifinals.  Whoever loses likely loses to Japan.  Since I've got the DR winning that game, I've also got them reaching the semis.  Along with the United States, Mexico and Japan.  The semifinal matchups would be a rematch of 2023: Mexico vs. Japan and arguably the game of the tournament: the United States vs. the Dominican Republic.

That USA vs DR game could easily be a de facto championship.  Although, I do have the United States winning to set up a rematch of the 2026 championship against Japan.  Except this time, the U.S. will come out on top.  After two hockey gold medals over archrival Canada, why not add a baseball championship over archrival Japan to the collection in 2026?

ABS Is Here

After almost a full month of Olympics and football posts, I've decided to give you all a break and talk about something else.  Baseball.  A topic that I'm sure you'll probably be sick of once the season starts, especially with the WBC starting next week.  One of the things we'll see in the WBC is something new for the regular season that we've already seen used in Spring Training.  The ABS challenge system.

We've known that the ABS challenge system was coming this year since MLB announced it towards the end of last season.  While some fans were clamoring for MLB to fully adopt ABS, that was never going to happen.  They experimented with it both ways (challenge system and completely automated) in the Minors, and the clear preference among players was the challenge system.  Which was definitely the way to go, for several reasons.

Each team gets two challenges per game, and only the pitcher, catcher or hitter can challenge.  They also need to do it immediately.  No asking the dugout.  No checking with anybody else.  So, there's a strategy element to it.  Because you've gotta know the situation and whether it's worth it to use a challenge that may be needed later in the game.

Some teams have already indicated that they won't let their pitchers challenge.  Which is probably a good idea.  Because pitchers think everything is a strike!  We've seen that already in Spring Training--pitchers challenging on pitches that aren't even close to being in the strike zone.  The Yankees were out of challenges in the second inning the other day because Luis Gil was completely wrong twice!

Another thing that we've seen thru the first few days of Spring Training games is how some ABS challenges are kind of ridiculous.  There are clips of ABS challenges that show an umpire's call being overturned from a ball to a strike because a low pitch nicked the very bottom edge of the zone.  Likewise, ABS turned a strike into a ball because the pitch was a millimeter outside.

Seriously, how can you blame the home plate umpire for "missing" either of those?  If anything, ABS is showing just how accurate Major League umpires actually are.  They are the best in the business for a reason, after all.  And everybody's getting used to the system, so is it possible that we're seeing pitches challenged in Spring Training that wouldn't necessarily be challenged in the regular season?  Absolutely!

Challenging pitches that close really isn't in the spirit of the ABS system.  Especially since teams only get two challenges.  Do you really want to use one unless you're sure you're right?  And, again, can you fault the umpire for getting that "wrong" initially?  It's worth keeping in mind, too, that the ABS strike zone is based on the individual batter's height, so the exact same pitch might be a strike to one hitter and a ball to somebody else.

Much like instant replay, the purpose of the ABS challenge system is designed to correct calls that are obviously wrong.  Close pitches that just nick the corner aren't "obviously" wrong.  If it's late in the game and you have your challenges left, I can see it.  Even if you're not sure.  But that's the type of challenge I hope we don't see (from either the offense or defense) with the bases empty and nobody out in the third inning of a 0-0 game once the games start to count.  Does it really matter if the count is 2-0 or 1-1 at that point?

Umpires aren't perfect.  They know that.  That's why they're in favor of replay.  And that's why they're all for the ABS challenge system, as well.  They want to get it right.  Just like replay, ABS is a tool for them to do that.  And that's what ABS is designed to be.  A tool.  No one is looking to replace human umpires.  This is just a tool at their disposal to help them get it correct.  Which is everyone's goal.

Like replay reviews, ABS challenges will be a fun new element for fans.  As soon as the challenge is initiated, it'll be shown on the stadium video board for everybody to see.  And, like replay reviews, whatever the video shows is the call.  It'll either confirm that the call was correct and the count stays the same or overturn it and change the count.  Teams are required to put the remaining challenges on the scoreboard, too, so the entire stadium will know how many each team has left.

It'll change broadcasts, too.  Any team that has the strike zone box on their TV broadcast has to put it on a delay.  Likewise, MLB has asked broadcasters that have little circles in that box to not differentiate between balls and strikes on the graphic.  It'll be up to them to determine how to do it, but I'd imagine it'll just show the location of each pitch and nothing else (although, balls that are put in play would probably still be notated on MLB.com's live stats).

So, why a challenge system instead of full ABS?  Well, for one, it would eliminate the human element, which I don't think anybody wanted.  It would also eliminate catchers' ability to frame pitches, a skill that has been developed over time that players don't want to see taken out of the game.  Not to mention the fact that full ABS (A) would be boring and (B) wouldn't entirely be correct.

During the Minor League testing, they found that full ABS resulted in more walks, which made games longer.  And, as I said, it wouldn't necessarily be completely accurate.  Breaking balls that broke late for strikes could still end up getting registered as balls based on where the ABS picked up when they crossed the plate.  Same thing with pitches that catch the corner.  And, as infrequent as it is at the professional level, a pitch could bounce before the plate, then get picked up by ABS as a strike even though it's obviously a ball.

Ultimately, the ABS challenge system is the best of both worlds.  It's a compromise between fully automated and a fully umpire-called zone.  It's a welcome change without fully removing the traditional element.  And, like instant replay, the ABS challenge system will only enhance the game experience for everyone.  Players, umpires and fans alike.

Some Truly Stupid Suggestions

Count Gary Bettman among those who wishes the gold medal game had been "at a more convenient time."  Apparently, he's a member of that group who either doesn't understand time zones, that the game was being played in Italy and/or that world doesn't revolve around North America.  Or how the Olympic schedule actually works.  Because I've seen some absolutely moronic "suggestions" for how they should "fix" the men's hockey gold medal game, which isn't broken.

It's worth noting that the 8:15 am start time clearly wasn't a deterrent.  It was the most-watched hockey game on NBC since the 2010 Olympic gold medal game in Vancouver, and NBC's highest-rated sports program that started before 9:00 am ever!  It's also worth noting that the only reason people even cared and made a big deal about this "problem" is because it was the United States vs. Canada.  Had either one lost, different story.  Had they both lost and the gold medal game was Finland vs. Slovakia instead, nobody would even be batting an eye.  It's only because it was Canada-USA, a final that wasn't locked in until Friday evening.  Yes, they came into the Olympics as the two favorites.  But you can't just assume that'll be the gold medal game.

Each of the last two Olympics prior to Milan was in Asia.  That meant the men's hockey gold medal game started in the middle of the night in North America!  In 2022, it started at 11:10 pm on Saturday night, and it was 11:45 pm Saturday night four years earlier.  Even bringing it back to 2014, the last Olympics in Europe (and the last with NHL players), it started at 7:00 am Eastern time.  Yet we didn't hear a peep about any of them!

I think my favorite "idea" regarding the timing of the gold medal game was an article suggesting it'll be "fixed" in 2034 when Utah hosts.  This article was based on the premise that, since the game will be played in the U.S., it'll be scheduled for prime time.  Hate to break it to you, but it won't.  The gold medal men's hockey game is the final event of the Winter Olympics, played a few hours before the Closing Ceremony.  Since the Closing Ceremony is on Sunday night, the hockey game has to be in the afternoon local time.  It shouldn't really be that hard to understand this point.

When the 2002 Olympics were in Salt Lake City, the hockey game started at 1:00 Mountain/3:00 Eastern.  At the 2010 Olympics in Vancouver, it started at 12:15 Pacific/3:15 Eastern.  So, it's probably safe to assume that the men's hockey gold medal game in 2034 will be at either 1:00 or 1:15 local time (probably depending on whichever NBC prefers).

Another "suggestion" I saw was playing the men's gold medal game on Saturday night, which is currently when the bronze medal game takes place.  That wouldn't work for several reasons.  First and foremost, the men's hockey gold medal game is the marquee event on the final day.  And the schedule is also built around it being on Sunday.  The semifinals are on Friday, the quarterfinals are on Wednesday, and the playoffs are on Tuesday, with the women's semifinals and medal games on the two off days (Monday and Thursday).  If they moved the final to Saturday, they'd have to shift everything else up a day, which sounds easy until you factor in how it would impact both the women's tournament and the NHL schedule.

Or how about this one, which I also saw?  Playing the men's and women's gold medal games as a doubleheader.  Yeah, that's a no-go.  The men's gold medal hockey game is one of the most expensive, most in-demand tickets of any Olympic event, and the women's gold medal game isn't far behind.  No Olympic organizing committee is gonna be stupid enough to combine those two events and give up the ticket revenue that comes with both of them selling out separately.

If you wanted to make an argument for a bronze/gold doubleheader, that would at least make a little more sense.  But that would also be unworkable.  The men's bronze medal game is played the day after the semifinals while the finalists get a day off.  And, again, they'd have to rework the entire schedule to make that work.  Besides, tickets to every men's hockey game are sold as separate events.  And they're pretty much all sellouts.  So, again, why would they be stupid enough not to do that?!

There was also a thought that they should've scheduled the gold medal game for 3:10 pm Eastern, which is when each of the first five USA games were.  Those 9:10 pm local time starts were NBC's request.  But scheduling the gold medal game at that time WAS. NOT. POSSIBLE!  That would've put the hockey game during the Closing Ceremony!  Which obviously ain't happening!  (And, again, they're not moving the Closing Ceremony just to make things more convenient for North American hockey fans who don't want to get up early.)

Somebody said in one of the comments that the NHL "missed an opportunity" because of the early start time.  Well, there's a couple things wrong with that.  For starters, the NHL doesn't set the start time.  The IOC does.  The NHL isn't even allowed to use Olympic highlights for marketing purposes, much to their own frustration.  Second, the IOC doesn't care.  The start time is gonna be inconvenient for somebody regardless, so they're gonna do what works best for the host country and the people actually attending the game.

One guy was like, "that's like holding the Super Bowl at 10 am on a Wednesday!"  Not only is that a ridiculous comparison, it's also partially true.  If you're in Australia and you want to watch the Super Bowl, you're watching it on Monday afternoon.  If you're in Europe, it's midnight (which is why the people who think a Super Bowl in London is "inevitable" are morons!).

What I find funny, too, is how quickly people forget.  It was only a little more than a year and a half ago that the United States played France in the women's basketball final at the Paris Olympics, which, like the hockey game, was the last event of the Games.  Wanna guess what time it started?  9:30 am Eastern!  Where was the outrage about that?

Meanwhile, in every other situation people not only seem to understand the time difference between the United States and Europe, they seem to enjoy it.  The NFL's Europe games all start in the afternoon local time/9:30 am Eastern.  Fans love it.  It's a fourth window on Sundays.  Ditto about watching the Premier League on Saturday mornings or the Champions League on weekday afternoons.

And how do they think European fans will feel about their teams' unusual start times at the World Cup this summer?  What people seem to forget is that the North America has the latest time zones in the word.  The final is at 3:00 in the afternoon in New York.  Why is it in the middle of the afternoon?  Because that's prime time in Europe!

On the other end of the spectrum, the European team that ends up in Group C with the United States will have two 9 p.m. Pacific time starts.  That's 6 a.m. in Europe!  Their third game will be against the U.S.  At 4 a.m. local time!  And, you know what?  They're gonna get up early to watch the game and not complain about it!  The most convenient times here (the evening) are inconvenient for them and vice versa. 

Why should North American fans care about that?  Short answer: they shouldn't.  Kinda like how European fans/organizers shouldn't care about how convenient the timing of events in their countries are for North American fans.  If it works out for both, so much the better.  But sometimes you'll have events that happen either early in the North American morning or in the European overnight and there's nothing you can do about it.

Best of Milan Cortina

Another Olympics is in the books and LA28 is officially on deck.  Milan Cortina was an ambitious plan.  The first Olympics with two official host cities and venues spread across Northern Italy.  But you know what?  It worked!  Despite the competition being so spread out, it looked and felt like an Olympics.  And, like any Olympics, the Milan Cortina Games had plenty of memorable moments.

Norway made history with the most medals (41) and most gold medals (18) ever at a Winter Games.  Italy used the host country boost for its best-ever Winter Games, and the United States won its most-ever Winter Olympic gold medals with 12 (including both hockey tournaments).  Lucas Pinero Braathen's gold medal in the men's slalom wasn't just the first for Brazil--it was the first Winter Olympic medal ever for a South American nation.  Georgia won its first Winter Olympic medal, too, in pairs figure skating.

There were so many top moments to choose from that any top 10 list will seem like it's missing something.  So, I'm not going to call these the 10 most memorable moments of the Milan Cortina Games.  I won't even call them my 10 favorite moments.  They're simply the ones that will immediately come to mind when I think about the 2026 Olympics.

King Klaebo: Is there any other possible place to start?  It's Johannes Klaebo's world.  We're all just living in it.  He became the winningest Winter Olympian in history and now has more Olympic gold medals than anybody other than Michael Phelps.  Klaebo went a perfect 6-for-6 in Milan Cortina, winning both the longest and shortest events on the cross country program in the process.  Only Phelps has won more at a single Games.

Free Bird: For the first time since the 1980 Miracle on Ice, the United States won the gold medal in men's hockey.  In the final event of the Games, Jack Hughes scored the Golden Goal in overtime to beat archrival Canada, 2-1.  That was also the final score of the women's gold medal game, which was also against Canada.  Which also went to overtime.  The American men and women went a combined 13-0 in Milan Cortina and, for the first time, both brought home the gold.

Alysa Liu: Retired from the sport at 16, Olympic champion at 20.  Alysa Liu simply doesn't care anymore...and I mean that in the best possible way.  The smile never left her face in Milan Cortina!  And that free skate that won her the gold was simply spectacular.  That's how you win an Olympic title!  She, of course, left Milan with two gold medals, having also contributed to the Americans' victory in the team event.

Corypalooza: Prior to 2026, the United States had never won a medal in mixed doubles curling.  Korey Dropkin and Cory Thiesse changed that with a silver medal that captured the country's attention over the first few days of the Games.  The women's team then ended up making the semifinals for the first time in 24 years.  Cory Thiesse was a very busy lady in Italy.  Between the mixed doubles and women's tournaments, she played 22 curling games over two and a half weeks from two days before the Opening Ceremony to the day before the Closing.

Golden Dog: Every Olympics has its light-hearted moments, too.  Milan Cortina's came in the women's cross country team sprint, when a dog named Nazgul got loose on the course and ran across the finish line alongside some of the skiers.  Nazgul became as big a star as any of the human Olympians who took part in the race!

Bobsledding Mama: Milan Cortina was 41-year-old Elana Meyers Taylor's fifth Olympics.  She won five medals at the previous four, but never a gold.  That finally changed in Milan Cortina, when she won the women's monobob competition for her first career Olympic title.

Ilia's Implosion: Unfortunately, there are bad moments that we'll remember, too.  There was no bigger favorite in any event coming into the Games than Ilia Malinin in men's figure skating.  Instead, we were all stunned when he had one of the worst performances of his career in the free skate.  Malinin didn't only not win, he didn't even medal!  That's the thing about sports, though.  Nothing is preordained.  The Olympic pressure got to him, and now he has to wait four long years until French Alps 2030.

Bellissima: On the opening day of the Games, Italian Francesca Lollobrigida set an Olympic record to win gold in the women's 3000 meters in speed skating.  That was just the start of the host country's best Winter Olympics ever.  Lollobrigida added another gold five days later in the 5000.  Alpine skier Federica Brignone, meanwhile, only returned to competition in January after suffering a serious injury in an April 2025 crash.  All she did was win gold medals in the giant slalom and Super G.  The first two Olympic titles of her career.  At age 35.

Big Ben: Fifty years ago in Innsbruck, Bill Koch won the silver medal in the 30 kilometers.  Until 2018, that was the only cross country skiing medal ever won by an American.  It was still the only men's cross country medal until Milan Cortina, when Ben Ogden finished second behind Klaebo in the sprint.  Ogden then tripled the United States' all-time medal total in men's cross country skiing when he grabbed another silver with Gus Schumacher in the team sprint...then did a bad-ass backflip off the podium during the medals ceremony!

Jordan Stolz Arrives: Watching the 2010 Olympics on TV inspired Jordan Stolz to become a speed skater.  In his Olympic debut, the expectations were high.  He was entered in four events.  Could he win them all?  Stoltz started with victories in the 1000 and 500, then he settled for silver in the 1500.  He ended up off the podium in the mass start, finishing fourth.  Still, three medals were the most by any American speed skater at a single Olympics since Eric Heiden's legendary 5-for-5 performance in 1980.

While that rounds out the list, I want to wrap up by acknowledging some teams that dominated.  The Swiss men's alpine ski team won four of the five events, with Franjo von Allmen taking home three gold medals.  The French in biathlon and Sweden in women's cross country.  Japan in snowboarding and the ski jumping Prevc siblings, who contributed to all four of Slovenia's medals.  Finally, there's the Dutch short track team.  We already knew what they can do on the long track.  In Milan Cortina, they also painted the short track oranj.

Oh, and how about the American women?  Of the 12 gold medals won by the United States, eight were in either women's or mixed events.  The only exceptions were Stolz's two, the men's hockey team and Alex Ferreira.  If they were their own country, the American women would've had more gold medals than all but five other nations.  (For the record, Klaebo would've finished tied for eighth in the gold medal count all on his own.)

Milan Cortina 2026 was an unforgettable Olympics.  For so many reasons.  From the NHL's return to Klaebo's brilliance and everything in between, it was one for the history books, as well.  They tried something new in Northern Italy and they pulled it off in spectacular fashion.  Congratulazioni Italia per delle Olimpiadi meravgliose.

People Did Watch

Remember back four years ago when NBC's Olympic ratings weren't good and critics were quick to say that "nobody" watches the Olympics anymore?  Well, as the Paris Games proved, that analysis couldn't be further from the truth.  And that point was reiterated in Milan Cortina, which set a Winter Olympics ratings record!  They were the most-watched Winter Games since 2014 and had an average of 23.5 million viewers a night, an astounding 96 percent increase from Beijing. 

It's not a coincidence that the last two Winter Olympics were lower rated.  They were both in Asia.  Because of the time difference, Olympics in Asia aren't as highly-watched in the U.S.  Even with live primetime events (which are held the following morning local time), Games in Asia draw lower viewership numbers than Games in Europe (where live primetime events are impossible).  Then you throw in the fact that three Olympics in a row were held in Asia, and there was definitely some Asia fatigue there.

There were some other very obvious circumstances that came into play for both the Tokyo and Beijing Olympics that contributed to the low viewership.  It wasn't just because of Asia fatigue, which absolutely played a part.  It's because those were both COVID Olympics.  The Tokyo Games were delayed a year and held without spectators.  They looked and felt stale. 

Then Beijing 2.0 was only six months later.  In addition to Asia fatigue, having two Games so close together likely led to some Olympic fatigue, as well.  And there were still COVID restrictions that led to Beijing having limited crowds.  Plus, the American diplomatic boycott led to NBC doing all of its coverage from Connecticut instead of on-site.  And some people likely didn't watch as their own personal protest to China's policies.

Asian Olympics are difficult, too, because of the time difference.  Yes, it allows for live events in primetime, but a vast majority of them take place overnight and in the early morning.  That's not optimal viewing time.  And it makes for daytime shows that consist entirely of pre-taped competition.  That can be a tough sell, especially since those (A) aren't marquee events that NBC got scheduled for the morning so they can show them live and (B) Americans typically aren't strong in them.

American success obviously helps, too.  This was the United States' most successful Winter Olympics outside of North America ever.  And the 12 gold medals won by American athletes were a record for any Winter Olympics.  Don't think that didn't contributed to NBC's ratings success.  Whether they'd already watched it or not, people wanted to see Americans win on the primetime show.

For Paris, NBC changed its Olympic broadcast strategy with great success.  The time difference with Europe, while it didn't allow for live coverage in primetime, was advantageous in many other ways.  Most significantly, it allows for live coverage all afternoon.  And the marquee events take place in the late afternoon, which makes it much more likely that people will be able to watch them live if they want to.  And, if they missed it or wanted to see it again, they could watch in primetime only a few hours later (not half a day later).

And, yes, there were still early-morning events.  That's always going happen at any Olympics that isn't in North America (in LA, it'll be the opposite...the time difference goes the other way, so there won't be anything in the morning on the East Coast).  Most events didn't start until later in the morning or the afternoon in the United States, though.  That makes viewing live much easier.  And people were certainly willing to make an exception regarding the early-morning starts.

The men's hockey gold medal game began at 8:10 am Eastern.  People, of course, still complained about the start time, but what did they expect?  The game was in Italy and had to start in the afternoon local time because of the Closing Ceremony!  And, you know what?  Getting up at 8, even on a Sunday, isn't that crazy.  And plenty of people were willing to get up at 8 so that they could watch USA vs. Canada live!

After the success of their broadcast strategy in Paris a year and a half ago, it was no surprise that NBC used the same approach in Milan Cortina.  Primetime in Paris and Primetime in Milan were succinct, well-produced shows that had coverage of some of the same events that had aired only a few hours earlier, yet was also different.  Not just because it was edited, but because it had those prepackaged features.  And, in Milan Cortina, they also held some events for primetime.  Most alpine skiing was shown live on USA early in the morning, but wasn't featured on NBC until the primetime show.  So, they still managed to have something "new" on primetime every night.

Let's not forget the setting of the last two Olympics, either.  Paris is Paris.  It sells itself.  Milan does, too, in many ways.  Highlighting Milan and highlighting Italy is a winning strategy.  And it's one that really only works with those classic European locations framed with so much culture and so much history.  (I'm not a fan of the Snoop Dogg filler segments, but Mike Tirico and NBC seem to be, so it's doubtful they're going anywhere.)

When they first started making every event available live on streaming, some people thought NBC was cannibalizing itself and that it would eat into their linear television audience.  If anything, it's had the opposite effect.  People will stream it live and watch it on TV later.  Or they'll watch it live on USA in the morning before NBC shows it later in the day during their coverage.  Giving people a streaming option has only enhanced NBC's reach.  Because it wasn't just the Peacock-exclusive stuff available online.  All of NBC's broadcast and cable coverage was streamed, as well.  So, they could "watch" NBC even without watching NBC.

Up next, of course, is Los Angeles, where coverage will be completely different than the two most recent European Olympics.  Nothing will happen in the East Coast's morning.  Everything will be live, including the late night show.  It'll be NBC's first mostly-live Olympics since Rio 2016, and there won't be nearly as much room for the ridiculous filler.  But they'll also take some of the things they did well during their coverage in Paris and Milan Cortina and do them again in LA.

Perhaps the biggest takeaway here, though, is that those reports that "no one" watches the Olympics anymore were greatly exaggerated.  Paris was the perfect storm.  But it wasn't a fluke.  That momentum carried over to February 2026 and the Milan Cortina Olympics.  That enthusiasm for the Olympics is back.  NBC has 17 days' worth of viewership numbers that prove it.

An Outstanding Tournament, An Outstanding Finish

After 12 years, NHL players returned to the Olympics this year in Milan.  And the tournament was everything fans could've hoped for and then some.  It ended with the gold medal game that many expected/wanted--Canada vs. the United States.  The game itself lived up to the hype, as well, going into overtime before Jack Hughes gave the U.S. its first men's hockey gold since the Miracle On Ice, and its first ever on foreign soil.  For American fans, it was the perfect ending to a perfect tournament.

There were various reasons for the league's 12-year gap between Olympic appearances.  The NHL owners have never been the biggest fans of shutting down the season so that the players can participate while getting nothing out of it themselves, and they really weren't keen on back-to-back trips to Asia.  In 2018, the owners unilaterally decided that they weren't going and the players had no recourse.  That left a bad taste in a lot of mouths (especially among the players), so much so that Olympic participation was worked into the CBA.

In 2022, the NHL had every intent on shutting down the season and going to Beijing for the Olympics.  Then COVID happened.  Too many games involving too many teams ended up getting postponed and they needed what would've been the Olympic break to schedule the make-ups.  So, as a result, another Olympics in Asia came and went without NHL players suiting up for their nations.

If it were up to the players, they would've gone to both PyeongChang and Beijing.  They want to do it.  Playing in the Olympics and representing their country is that important to them.  For once, you have to actually credit the NHL for listening to what their players and fans both want and laid the groundwork for a return to the Olympics this year.

With the Olympic return in the works, the NHL and NHLPA set up the Four Nations Face-Off last year in place of the All*Star Game as an appetizer.  The tournament between the United States, Canada, Sweden and Finland was so successful that it caused the league to reconsider whether to ever have a traditional All*Star Game again.  And that was just four countries.  In Milan, there were 12 teams, all of which had NHL representation.

The Four Nations Face-Off was an exhibition tournament.  It was played with the intensity of a Stanley Cup Final.  Who cares if they were exhibition games?  Once you put on that National Team sweater, you're giving your all.  Players wanted to represent their countries so badly that simply being picked for the team was an honor.  And, for those who didn't, you can bet that not making the Four Nations roster served as motivation to make the Olympic team.

That tournament also provided plenty of motivation for those who did play in it.  Canada and the United States were the clear two best teams at the Four Nations, and the Americans didn't forget that final.  They wanted another shot at the Canadians and to avenge that loss, knowing they could go toe-to-toe with them.  They were also the clear two best teams both heading into and at the Olympics, putting them on a collision course for a gold medal game that seemed inevitable, yet also lived up to the hype.

What the Four Nations served to successfully remind people of was how great a best-on-best tournament featuring NHL players can be.  Not only are the games competitive, it's the highest-quality hockey imaginable.  And that was just the teaser.  Adding eight teams and five Olympic rings to the equation was only going to crank the intensity up to 11.

Construction delays resulted in the Olympic arena not being ready until January.  Then it was revealed that the ice surface was three feet short on either end (which was noticeable), which led to some concerns that the NHL would end up pulling out of participating again.  I'm not sure if there was ever a legitimate reason to be concerned.  Those were minor issues (although it did lead to getting a written guarantee that the 2030 rink in France will be the right size).  The players hadn't represented their countries at the Olympics in 12 years.  If they had any say in the matter (which they did), they were going.  There was little to no chance they weren't.

And once they got there, boy was it worth it!  You had guys playing with rivals and against teammates.  You had players talking about how much they hate and want to beat the country where their NHL team plays its home games.  That national pride is always there (more so in hockey & soccer than any other team sport), and it supersedes everything else in international play.  They'll be friends and teammates again on Wednesday when the NHL season resumes.  (When Auston Matthews will be returning to Toronto, Connor Hellebuyck will be returning to Winnipeg and Brady Tkachuk will be returning to Ottawa after all having a hand in Canada losing the gold medal game to its archrival.)

This Olympic tournament gave us everything we could've hoped.  There was Slovakia upsetting Finland in the first game, then celebrating a goal late in their loss to Sweden because they knew it clinched the three-way tiebreaker that made them the group winners and gave them a bye into the quarterfinals.  Italy was overmatched, as we knew they would be.  But their goalie put forth a Herculean effort and held his own against the NHL stars.

All of that was nothing compared to what we saw in the medal round.  The quarterfinals might've been the single greatest day of men's hockey in Olympic history.  Slovakia blew out Germany, but the other three games went to overtime.  Czechia and Sweden both tied it late to force OT (on the eventual finalists).  Then in the semis, Finland blew a 2-0 lead before losing to Canada in overtime.  And, of course, that epic gold medal game!

Ever since the first Olympics with NHL players, there's been something special about Olympic hockey.  For all he's done in his career, a career that includes three Stanley Cups and will end with a first-ballot selection to the Hall of Fame, the most important goal Sidney Crosby has ever scored wasn't for the Penguins.  It was the Golden Goal in overtime to give Canada the gold medal on home ice in Vancouver in 2010.  And, no matter how much success he has in his NHL career, Jack Hughes will always be remembered for his Golden Goal in Milan.  Just as his brother, Quinn, will be remembered for his OT winner against Sweden in the quarterfinals.

Nothing will ever change the significance of the Miracle On Ice and what it meant for hockey in the United States.  On the 46th anniversary of a miracle, the U.S. won another gold medal, which was just as significant.  It was their first in a best-on-best tournament featuring NHL players.  Just as the 1980 gold medal team inspired a generation, so will the 2026 gold medal team.  The best hockey team in the world is the United States.

Which begs the question: how could the NHL owners possibly not want to do this every four years?  Unfortunately, it isn't that simple.  But, frankly, it should be.  This Olympic tournament was the best advertisement for the NHL they possibly could've asked for.  Their product and their players were on display for the entire world to see, and they captured the world's attention and then some.

Despite the gold medal game starting at 8:10 AM Eastern time, bars were open and allowed to serve alcohol.  People who aren't even hockey fans were invested in the outcome.  Only the Olympics can do that.  It's a free showcase for the NHL.  One that they took advantage of every four years from 1998-2014, but voluntarily didn't utilize in 2018 or 2022.  Hopefully they've learned the error of their ways and those will be the last Olympic tournaments that didn't feature the best hockey players on the planet.  Who put on a show in Milan.

She's Not the Only One

The amount of vitriol I've seen directed towards Eileen Gu, the San Francisco-born freestyle skier who competes for China, over the past two weeks has been over-the-top ridiculous.  I don't remember it being this bad four years ago, when the Winter Olympics were actually in China!  Gu has been attacked from all angles, and she's even been called a "traitor" because she chose to compete for China instead of the United States (since, apparently, anyone who's eligible to compete for the United States is required to).

Meanwhile, do any of these people know why she opted to represent China?  Or that her mother is a first-generation Chinese immigrant?  Or that she speaks fluent Mandarin and conducts interviews in the language?  Or that she goes to China every year?  More importantly, would they even care which country she represents if she wasn't good and high-profile?  Frankly, it's such an entitled mindset to think that she "should" be winning medals for the U.S. simply because she's American.

Well, I've got news for you. Eileen Gu isn't the first American-born athlete to represent another country at the Olympics...and she won't be the last.  She isn't even the only American-born Olympian representing another country in Milan Cortina!  And each of those athletes has their individual reasons for their decision.  Who are we to criticize them for it?

Sarah Schleper skied for the U.S. at four Winter Olympics from 1998-2010.  Her husband is Mexican.  This is her third Olympics representing Mexico.  (Her son was also on the Mexican alpine ski team this year, making them the first mother & son ever to compete at the same Winter Olympics.) 

Snowboarder Vic Wild competed for the United States at the 2010 Olympics.  Then the U.S. shut down its alpine snowboarding program, so he married his Russian girlfriend (a fellow snowboarder) and gained Russian citizenship.  He won two gold medals for the home team in Sochi, something that wouldn't have been possible had he not switched nationalities.

Wild's circumstance is not an unusual one.  There are so many American athletes who've chosen to represent other nations.  For various reasons.  And nobody can begrudge them for taking advantage of those opportunities when they're presented.  In fact, many of those athletes take advantage of those opportunities because they're presented.  It's what they feel is in the best interest of their career and, not to mention, their pathway to the Olympics.

Making the U.S. National Team is extremely difficult.  If athletes have dual citizenship or another pathway to represent another country, can you blame them for taking it?  Representing another nation doesn't just make it easier to qualify for the Olympics (which is the ultimate goal), it can lead to things like increased funding, national team support, etc.  Or, like Vic Wild, it might give them an opportunity that they otherwise might not have at all.

One of the perks of hosting the Olympics is that you automatically qualify a team in every team sport...even if your National Team is low-ranked or borderline non-existent.  The South Korean hockey team is such an example.  So, when South Korea hosted in 2018, the team was comprised mainly of Canadians who played in Korea.  Ditto with the Chinese hockey team (that featured the son of Hall of Famer Chris Chelios) in 2022.  Were they "traitors" because they played for the two Asian hosts instead of their native land?

And, like I said, it isn't just Americans who compete for other nations.  Kenyan distance runners represent so many different countries on the world stage that I can't even keep track anymore!  At the World Baseball Classic next month, we'll see all kinds of loose representations for players on nearly all 20 teams.  There are plenty of other examples in Milan Cortina, too.  Where's the uproar about them?

Lucas Pinheiro Braaten, who was born in Oslo to a Norwegian father and Brazilian mother, represented Norway on the World Cup circuit until 2023.  In 2024, he began competing for Brazil instead.  Last week, he made history when he won the giant slalom.  It wasn't just Brazil's first-ever Winter Olympic gold medal.  It was the first Winter Olympic medal for any South American country!  Or, using the Eileen Gu critics' logic, should that medal have been Norway's since that's where he was born?

Another alpine skier, Lara Colturi, is the daughter of Italian Olympic champion Daniela Ceccarelli.  Her father is also Italian.  Except she doesn't compete for Italy.  She competes for Albania.  Why?  Because her mother has worked for the Albanian Ski Federation since 2020.  Sounds like a pretty reasonable explanation why she chose to ski for Albania rather than Italy.

There are plenty of other examples.  Laurence Fournier Beaudry (who, sidebar, looks exactly like Rachel Zegler) was part of the French team that won the gold medal in ice dancing.  She's from Montreal and finished eighth at the 2022 Olympics representing Canada.  And she's just one of the figure skaters who competed in Milan for a country other than where they were born and/or changed allegiances.  As long as it's allowed and all of the rules are followed, there's nothing wrong with it.

Athletes changing nations is nothing new.  Nor is it going to change anytime soon.  It happens in pretty much every sport, for a variety of reasons.  And, whatever the reason, that's the athlete's choice.  If that's what they feel is in their best interest or gives them the best opportunity, who are we to begrudge them?  Besides, who's to say that these critics wouldn't make the exact same decision if they were in that situation?

So, long story short, I have absolutely no issue with Eileen Gu representing her mother's homeland of China.  Nor do I have an issue with any other athlete deciding to represent whichever country they choose.  Because it's their decision to make.  Not mine.  It certainly doesn't make them a "traitor."  It makes them an Olympian.  For a country that's proud to have them.

Olympic Pressure

There was no bigger favorite coming into the Milan Cortina Games than Ilia Malinin.  His gold medal was preordained.  Everybody else was just skating for silver.  Here's the thing about sports, though.  Nothing is preordained.  You need to go out there and perform.  If you want something, you're gonna have to go out and earn it.

As we saw, Malinin's gold medal in the men's event was very much NOT preordained.  He completely unraveled and didn't just miss out on the goal, he ended up off the podium completely!  Everyone was shocked by his eighth-place finish, including Malinin.  After he stepped off the ice and was waiting for the scores to confirm what he already knew, Malinin flat out said they should've sent him to Beijing four years ago and that wouldn't have happened if they had.  Then, in his interviews afterwards, he admitted that the Olympic pressure got to him.

Malinin's point about going to Beijing was a valid one.  Four years ago, all the pressure was on Nathan Chen.  He was THE man.  Malinin, who was just 17 at the time, would've been going just for the experience.  Experience that would've been valuable.  Because, come 2026, he was experiencing the Olympics for the first time while bearing the weight of massive expectations.  It's not the easiest position to be in, especially when you factor in everything else.

He will, of course, still be leaving Milan with a gold medal from the team event.  But even in the team event, he was shaky.  Malinin finished second in the short program, which was his first time ever stepping on Olympic ice.  He rebounded to win the free skate and clinch the gold medal for the American team, then won the short program in the men's event.  But it all unraveled in the free skate.  The moment got to him and he succumbed to the pressure.  In devastating fashion.

Olympic pressure is a very real thing.  Some athletes aren't fazed by it and even thrive on it.  For others, it's a heavy burden that's tough to overcome.  Especially when you consider the fact that if it doesn't happen, you don't get another chance until four years later, if you get one at all.  There's nothing like that anywhere else in sports.  It's part of what makes the Olympics so great and special.  It's also part of what can make them so cruel.

Ilia Malinin has won everything in sight.  He's revolutionized his sport with his quadruple jumps and the ease with which he performs them.  No one would argue that he isn't the best male figure skater in the world and one of the best of all-time.  And, yes, he's an Olympic gold medalist.  But it's not the Olympic gold medal he wanted and the world expected.

So, what happened in the free skate?  It sure seemed like it wasn't anything physical.  It was entirely mental.  He was in the lead, which he was supposed to be.  He knew he was four minutes away from his dream.  But he also had two days to think about it between the short program and free skate.  Clearly that got to his head.  Then, after he bailed out of his quad axel (which would've been insane), it was like he felt it slipping away and was scrambling.

Contrast that to the gold medalist, Kazakhstan's Mikhail Shaidorov.  He came into the Olympics with an outside shot at maybe making the podium and was in fifth place after the short program.  The pressure was completely off.  Shaidorov could go out there and just skate.  He didn't have to think about anything.  The result was the performance of his life, and it won him Olympic gold.

The Olympics are unlike anything else in sports.  And not just because they only happen once every four years.  It's everything that surrounds them.  It's not just your sport and the competitors you go against all the time.  You're staying in an Olympic Village with athletes from all different sports.  You've suddenly got the entire world's attention.  During the two weeks your sport is in the Olympic spotlight, you go from a relative unknown to all those who don't regularly follow your sport to a household name.  And suddenly there's media everywhere. 

Not to mention all the other distractions!  As much as you may want to just focus on your sport, it's practically impossible.  The "Olympic Experience" doesn't just refer to the competition.  It refers to all that other stuff, as well.  It's difficult to balance enjoying the experience and simply being at the Olympics with doing the job you're there to do.  Especially if it's your first time there (adding more fuel to the argument that Ilia Malinin should've been on the team in 2022).  Especially since you're not sure you'll ever go again.

Some athletes thrive in the Olympic spotlight.  There are plenty of examples of those who were built for the biggest stage.  For others, it's too much.  Unfortunately, you don't find out until you get there.  And, whatever happens, you have to wait four years until you get another shot at it.  When the pressure may be even greater.

Ilia Malinin isn't the only athlete who's succumbed to Olympic pressure.  Four years ago, the controversy surrounding Kamila Valiyeva dominated the first week of the Games.  In the women's free skate, it all came crashing down and she fell apart.  The circumstances are obviously completely different, but I couldn't help thinking about what happened to her while Malinin was having his Olympic meltdown.  It happens.  Sports aren't scripted.

We've seen the reverse, too.  Mikaela Shiffrin won gold in Sochi when she was an 18-year-old unknown with absolutely no pressure on her.  Then she won two medals in PyeongChang.  In Beijing, she was expected to be one of the stars of the Games and entered all six events.  She went home 0-for-6 with two DNFs in her two best events.  Shiffrin is also 0-for-Cortina so far.  Being the household name brought pressure and increased expectations that she so far hasn't lived up to.  And the more she doesn't get it done, the bigger the focus on those failures becomes.

In many ways, Olympians are superhuman.  They do things athletically the average person can't even fathom doing themselves.  So, when they have moments that remind us that they are, in fact, also human, it can be shocking.  But that's the Olympics and the pressure that comes with them.  You don't know how someone will handle it until the situation arises.  And then it might be too late.

Helmet of Controversy

Other than a Norwegian biathlete deciding that the postrace press conference would be the best time to admit he cheated on his girlfriend, figure skaters scrambling to secure music rights and the inevitable questions about figure skating judging, the first week of the Milan Cortina Olympics was relatively controversy-free.  With one notable exception.  Ukrainian skeleton rider Vladyslav Heraskevych made headlines for the unapproved helmet he wanted to wear and his subsequent disqualification and appeal.

It's been four years since Russia invaded Ukraine days after the 2022 Olympics ended.  The difficulties Ukrainian athletes have faced because of the war are well-documented, as have the number of lives lost during the conflict.  Heraskevych wanted to pay tribute to the more than 20 athletes and coaches who've been killed during the war by wearing the "memory helmet" with their faces on it.  The helmet, however, violated IOC rules, which is why he was told he couldn't wear it.

While it's impossible to keep politics out of the Olympics entirely, the Olympic Charter prohibits athletes and coaches from making any sort of political message on the field of play.  They have other opportunities to express themselves (such as in the mixed zone and during press conferences...just as some American athletes about that).  Just not on the field of play.  The helmet was deemed to be a political message.  Thus, its use wasn't approved.

No one disagrees with the message, either.  That's not what this was about.  Nor is this what anyone wanted to happen.  The IOC tried to compromise with Heraskevych.  They let him wear the helmet during practice (which otherwise wouldn't have been allowed, either) and offered to let him wear a black armband during the competition instead (which would've been making an exception to their rule).  Heraskevych wouldn't budge, so they, unfortunately, weren't left with any other choice.

IOC President Kirsty Coventry personally met with Heraskevych hoping to find common ground.  Unfortunately, they couldn't.  Coventry left the meeting in tears, clearly disappointed that the situation came to this.  However, since Heraskevych refused to yield, he was disqualified and the competition began without him.  Heraskevych appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, but he knew that his chance to race was already over.

He, of course, doesn't see things the same way as the IOC.  Heraskevych feels he wasn't violating any rules and was unfairly being singled out.  He pointed out how he and other Ukrainian athletes have seen Russian flags in the stands, even though Russian flags are supposed to be banned.  And how there are Russian athletes competing under the "AIN" designation.  Heraskevych even cited some examples of other athletes who he felt were making political statements that the IOC chose to ignore--all of which were false equivalencies.

One of Heraskevych's examples really bothered me...because it's not even close to the same thing!  American figure skater Maxim Naumov's parents were both figure skating coaches who died in that plane crash involving an Army helicopter in Washington last January.  After both his short program and free skate, Naumov took out a picture of himself with his parents at a skating rink when he was a little boy.  There's nothing political about that, and the kiss & cry area is not the field of play.  So, no, that's not the same.  (Even if you wanted to argue that the helmet isn't political, the Naumov example still wouldn't apply since his tribute to his parents took place in an approved area and way.)

This isn't something that was suddenly sprung on him, either.  Hersakevych was given ample warning that he wouldn't be allowed to wear the helmet in competition.  He didn't care and insisted he was going to wear it anyway.  Heraskevych was basically taunting the IOC, telling them "Go ahead, DQ me," doubting that they would call his bluff.  They did.  Heraskevych was told that would only be allowed to compete if he wore a different helmet.  When he refused to yield, the IOC made good on their threat.

Whether you agree with Heraskevych's position and message or not isn't even the point.  Kirsty Coventry herself has said she sympathizes with him and wanted to come up with a solution that both sides were comfortable with.  Heraskevych believed he was right and stood by that stance, aware of what the potential consequences were.  So, right or wrong, he brought this upon himself.  And nobody takes any joy with this situation.

Despite knowing it would have no bearing on his ability to actually compete, Heraskevych appealed the decision to CAS in what really seemed like a matter of principle more than anything else.  He left the hearing confident that he'd been successful.  The arbitrator announced their decision a few hours later and, while sympathetic to Heraskevych, ruled against him.  The arbitrator agreed that the helmet violated IOC policy and found the limitations to be "reasonable and proportionate."  Heraskevych was also aware of this policy, which applies to all Olympians from all countries.

After his last run in Beijing, Heraskevych held up a Ukrainian flag with the phrase "No War Ukraine" on it.  The IOC deemed that to be an anti-war message, not a political one, so it didn't run afoul of IOC rules.  Whether the helmet makes a political statement is definitely subjective, but both the IOC and the International Bobsleigh & Skeleton Federation feel it does.  Which makes it a violation...a point that was emphasized in a letter to the Ukrainian Olympic Committee informing them of their decision (and sparking the controversy).

Specifically, the helmet violates Rule 50 of the Olympic Charter, which states that "no kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas."  Part of the reason Rule 50 exists is precisely because not everyone necessarily shares the same political viewpoints, so it's best to keep them out of the competition area entirely.  It's also a protection for athletes so that they're not pressured into pushing a certain point of view on the Olympic stage.  Whether the helmet actually violates Rule 50 is a matter of debate, but that doesn't change the purpose of Rule 50.  Or the fact that allowing it would've opened Pandora's box.

Was banning the helmet the easy way out for the IOC and the IBSF?  Maybe.  But did they have their reasons for doing it?  Absolutely.  And it wasn't because they're sympathetic to Russia or discriminating against Ukraine.  It's much simpler than that.  Some people would consider the helmet a political statement.  And if it was allowed, you'd inevitably get the questions of "how come that was allowed but my thing isn't?"  Questions that would much rather be avoided.

Heraskevych claims that he never expected it to be such a big scandal.  Really?  Because it sounds to me like he knew exactly what he was doing.  Making his point was more important to him than competing.  Which was clearly a sacrifice he was willing to make.  But he's not a victim.  The 20 people on his helmet are.

Lindsey's Last Olympics

When Lindsey Vonn came back to ski racing then, once she started competing again, made it seem like she had never left, I don't think this is what she had in mind.  She envisioned her comeback having a storybook ending with an Olympic medal on one of her favorite hills.  Instead, it ended with her being airlifted off the mountain after breaking her leg.  Instead of heartwarming, it was heartbreaking.

The fact that she even made it to the starting line in Cortina was a pretty remarkable feat in itself.  She tore her ACL in the final race a week before the Olympics.  If it wasn't the Olympics, which was the entire point of her comeback to begin with, she probably would've called it a season and not even tried to race on it.  But it was the Olympics and this is Lindsey Vonn, so it was no surprise that she was gonna do everything she could to compete.

It's ridiculous that people are criticizing her for racing with a busted knee and assuming it had anything to do with her crash.  Lindsey Vonn herself, when providing an update to her followers on social media, make it clear exactly what happened.  She got too close to the gate, her arm got caught, and it sent her flying.  It's just something that can happen if you make a mistake while going 70 mph down a mountain!  If she was perfectly healthy, she could've had the same crash and still broken her leg.

And it's just as irresponsible to blame the doctors and coaches for allowing her to compete (as if she didn't have the final say).  If they didn't think she should compete or that it would do further damage if she tried, they would've told her that.  The fact that they cleared her was a pretty clear indication that it was fine.  (Once your ACL's off, it's off.)

She was also required to complete at least one training run in order to even enter the Olympic Downhill.  She completed two, looking like her old self in the process.  So, clearly the knee wasn't an issue.  If it was, she wouldn't have even been able to finish the training runs (or she wouldn't have been cleared to continue).  That narrative is simply incorrect.

In fact, I'd argue that the fact she was even in the starting gate is just another example of her incredible resilience.  Whether it was a wise thing to do or not isn't even relevant.  The fact remains she suffered a torn ACL a week before the Olympics, yet was there on race day as a medal contender.  When she crashed on Jan. 30, nobody expected to see her in Cortina.  Nobody except Lindsey Vonn.  So maybe we should've.  Because when Lindsey Vonn sets her mind to something, she'll likely do everything she can to do it.

Just think about the story it would've been if this actually did have a storybook ending, too.  She retired because of injuries.  At the 2022 Olympics, she was working for NBC!  Then, eight years after her "last race," at age 41, Lindsey Vonn was back and making a run at another Olympics...where she was a legitimate medal contender!  That alone was a great story.  Now imagine if she had medaled?!

If it were up to NBC, that's exactly what would've happened.  She would've won the gold medal.  Not been screaming in pain and taken from the course in a helicopter.  Then she would've teamed with Mikaela Shiffrin in the team combined and they would've won the gold together.  America's two alpine skiing darlings.  It would've been ratings gold!

Sports don't always work that way, though.  The script was already written.  NBC would show the Super Bowl, then everyone would stick around to watch Lindsey Vonn win an Olympic gold.  Fate had other plans, though.  And an American woman did win a gold medal in the Downhill after the Super Bowl.  It just wasn't the American woman everyone thought or expected.  (It was also funny how they changed all of their Olympic promos that aired during the Super Bowl from being about Lindsey Vonn to being about Breezy Johnson.)

Injuries happen.  Especially in sports as volatile and dangerous as alpine skiing.  Lindsey Vonn knows and understands the risks better than anybody.  (She missed the 2014 Olympics due to injury.)  For her, it was worth it to come back and make another Olympic run.  The fact that it ended the way it didn't change the journey or make it any less valuable.  For her part, Vonn has even said she has no regrets.

Whether this is how her Olympic career ends only she knows, but it seems unlikely she'll compete again.  I can understand not wanting it to end this way, but recovering from and rehabbing the broken leg won't exactly be a quick process, and she's already 41.  In 2030, she'll be 45!  Besides, one of the reasons she came back for this Olympics is because she loves that hill in Cortina and has had success there.  Can the same be said about the Courchevel and Val d'Isere courses in France, where the next Olympics will be held?

We know what her dad's vote is if he has any say.  Alan Kildow was in the stands for Lindsey's accident and spent the night with her in the hospital.  He very publicly hopes that this is it.  He doesn't want her to attempt another comeback.  He's obviously a concerned father, so that's definitely influencing his feelings.  But his opinion is shared by many others.

I'm one of those who agrees with her dad.  I, frankly, never thought we'd see her at an Olympics again and was shocked when she announced her comeback.  But then she came back and was Lindsey Vonn again, as if any of us should've been surprised.  She came back for one more Olympics.  In Cortina.  I think she was planning on retiring again (permanently this time) after the Olympics anyway.  So, I'm not sure this injury will change that.  (Although, another comeback for 2030 would only add to her remarkable legacy some more.)

So, yes, this is probably the last we've seen of Lindsey Vonn the Ski Racer.  It didn't end the way anybody would've wanted, but that's what happens sometimes.  The fact that she was there at all, though, is an incredible story of resilience and perseverance.  Let's not focus on the end.  Let's focus on the journey.  And what a journey it's been!

NFL Picks, Super Bowl LX

We've finally made it!  After two weeks of analysis and every random stat under the sun, Super Bowl LX is upon us.  The Patriots will either be alone with the most wins in Super Bowl history or the most losses in Super Bowl history (that's what happens when you have four more appearances than anybody else).  The Seahawks will either get a small measure redemption for one of the worst play calls in Super Bowl history or lose to New England with the Lombardi Trophy on the line for the second time.

Also, a message to all of those "anybody but the Chiefs" people.  Congratulations, you got what you wanted!  Instead of the Chiefs, we're back to the Patriots (the team everybody hated and was sick of before Kansas City).  So, good job on that one!

The domination of those two teams really is incredible if you think about it.  Kansas City went to five out of six.  New England went to four out of five before that.  Now they've made it again.  So, it's been either the Patriots or Chiefs representing the AFC in 10 of the last 12 Super Bowls.  The only exceptions were Super Bowl 50 (when New England lost the AFC Championship Game) and Super Bowl LIV (when Kansas City lost the AFC Championship Game).  If those two AFC Championship Game results were reversed, it'd be 12 straight Super Bowls between them.

Is this the start of another dynasty era in New England?  It's too early to say.  Drake Maye will become the youngest quarterback to start a Super Bowl since Dan Marino, but Super Bowl XIX is the only one Marino ever played in.  At the time, it was just assumed the Dolphins would eventually make it back, but it never happened.  I'm not saying the same thing will happen to Maye.  I suspect it won't.  But you never know.  (People sure didn't think Super Bowl XXXVI would be the start of nearly two decades of Bradicheck domination.)

This is an incredibly important game for the Patriots franchise simply because of who's not here.  Tom Brady's in the broadcast booth and Bill Belichick's coaching college.  New England made it back here without them.  Their legacy cannot be taken away, and I don't think anyone wants to.  But the Patriots also needed to show that they could get to a Super Bowl without Bradicheck.  Which they have.

And how can you not feel incredible for Sam Darnold?  This is a guy who was passed around the league.  Even the bad teams decided he wasn't good enough.  That certainly wasn't the case (and further proof that maybe the Jets are the problem, not the quarterbacks).  After what he did last year in Minnesota, there was a question if he'd be able to follow it up.  He did and then some!  There's no question anymore about whether Sam Darnold is a viable NFL starter.

You know Seattle is relishing the opportunity to play New England again, too.  They were on the verge of repeating as Super Bowl champions until that fateful Malcolm Butler interception (which started the Bradicheck 2.0 run).  They've had to live with that for 11 years.  Beating the Patriots this time won't take that away or change the result, of course.  But it would be at least a small measure of revenge.

One of these teams will also be one of the more unlikely champions in recent memory.  Which is only fitting for this crazy season.  Both teams missed the playoffs last year.  At the start of the season, nobody had either one of them playing in the Super Bowl--let alone both!  They both lost in Week 1.  New England was 1-2.  Then they both went on massive winning streaks that got them to this point.  (They've lost a combined one game since mid-November!)

Seahawks (16-3) vs Patriots (17-3): Seattle-Both defenses have been dominant throughout the playoffs, so it would be wise to take the under.  New England has allowed a grand total of two touchdowns in three postseason games.  The Broncos scored on their second drive of the AFC Championship Game and not again.  And, yes, the Seahawks gave up 27 points in the NFC Championship Game.  But their defense came up big when it needed to in the fourth quarter, stopping the Rams on that final drive.

With that in mind, would it surprise anyone if a big defensive play impacts the game?  Whether it's a key stop or a big sack or a turnover, you know these defenses will make a difference.  Especially when the margin between the two teams is so small.  I'm not only expecting it to be low-scoring, I'm expecting field position to matter.  Neither offense is quick-strike.  They're both fine with long drives that eat a lot of clock.  And neither coach is afraid to kick a field goal.

Of course, the Seahawks aren't afraid to be aggressive when the situation calls for it, either.  Going for two against the Rams in the regular season played a big role in them getting here.  And, let's not forget, they have an All-Pro return man in Rashid Shaheed.  Mike Vrabel will have to take that into account with his decision making.  And Shaheed's presence could end up in his being a little more aggressive than he otherwise would've been.

Let's not forget, either, that neither quarterback has been here before.  Darnold has at least experienced the Super Bowl as a backup in San Francisco, but he didn't play a snap behind Brock Purdy.  Still, having gone through the routine and the two weeks of buildup will have to help.  As does the fact that he's a veteran.  It's the biggest game of Darnold's life.  Obviously.  But is the stage too big for him?  I don't think so.

Will the stage be too big for Maye?  So far, nothing has fazed him in his two-year NFL career.  This is the Super Bowl, though.  For New England to have any chance, Maye will need to play like the MVP runner-up he is.  If he can't or doesn't play up to the moment, that Seahawks defense might eat him alive.  I'm not saying the Patriots need him to win the game for them.  But he can't lose it.

Ultimately, though, I think the X factor will be the Seattle offense.  For all the talk about the Seahawks defense, it's easy to forget they've scored 72 points in two playoff games.  Jaxson Smith-Njigba is also the best player on either team.  Don't think the Offensive Player of the Year will just be silent.  Darnold, SJN and the Seahawks offense will do enough to claim an unlikely Super Bowl title and bring the Lombardi Trophy home to the 12s.

Conference Championships: 1-1
Playoffs: 8-4
Overall: 179-104-1

Brava Italia

After that trainwreck (or, since it was on boats, I guess shipwreck) of an Opening Ceremony in Paris, the Italians had quite a challenge on their hands with the Opening Ceremony for the Milan Cortina Games.  Especially since they had an ambitious plan to allow the athletes participating in each of the mountain clusters to participate in the ceremony.  Not only did they pull it off, they did so brilliantly!  Job well done, Italy!

When I first heard about the idea of having the main ceremony in Milan, with a separate, simultaneous ceremony in Cortina, I was a little skeptical.  I thought it was an intriguing idea that could either be spectacular if it worked or a disaster if it didn't.  As it turns out, there was no reason to worry.  The jumping between locations was seamless, and it really was cool to see the athletes be able to march in the parade regardless of where they were competing.  Milan Cortina very well might've started something that we'll see at future Winter Olympics.

What I loved most about the four separate Parades of Nations was how they still all felt like one.  Each venue had the ring for the athletes to start walking out at the same time as their teammates.  And my biggest question going in was how they'd handle having flagbearers at different locations.  Well, if they were at different locations, there were two flags and they each carried one.  If they were together, they carried the flag together.  And if there was no flagbearer at their location, they walked out with no flag.  Just a placard.  Italy even had two different sets of flagbearers, which I guess they can get away with as the host nation.  

Some people who were at the ceremony posted pictures online of just a placard entering the stadium with no flag or team behind it.  I will admit that was probably a very weird sight to see live, but the alternative would've been those athletes having to travel hours back and forth between the site of their competition and the Opening Ceremony.  Or missing the ceremony altogether.  Plus, Cortina is billed as the official co-host of these Olympics, so Cortina had to play a role in the ceremony in some way.

Cortina's ceremony was separate and distinct, but also brilliantly integrated into the ceremony that took place in Milan.  The Italian flag was raised and Italian anthem sung simultaneously in both places.  Ditto with the Olympic flag and anthem.  And, for the first time, there were two Olympic cauldrons.  Both were lit by alpine skiing legends--Alberto Tomba and Deborah Compagnoni in Milan, Sofia Goggia in Cortina.

My one issue is something that really isn't Milan's fault.  It's more an annoying trend that we've seen more and more at recent Olympics (both Winter & Summer).  The cauldron isn't inside a stadium.  In one respect, I get it.  They want it somewhere in the city where it's more accessible to more people and everyone can see it.  And, since the stadium was literally only being used for the Opening Ceremony, it wouldn't have made much sense for it to be in there.  Still, though, the lighting of the cauldron is the signature event of any Opening Ceremony, and it really feels like it's missing something when the cauldron isn't in the main stadium.

The rest of the ceremony, however, was spectacular.  It was quintessentially Italian and quintessentially Milan.  Milan is fashion.  Milan is art.  Milan is culture.  They captured all of it.  And they incorporated the synergy between the city and the mountains, uniting the two hosts that will be forever linked by these Olympics.  I would've liked to have seen more of a recognition of the 1956 Winter Olympics, the first time Cortina hosted, but that's just me being nitpicky.

I especially enjoyed the artistic program.  It's not uncommon for the artistic presentation at the Olympic Opening Ceremony to require a lot of explanation.  That wasn't the case here.  They celebrated Milan. They celebrated Italian history.  They honored a century of the Winter Olympics.  And they did it in a way where exposition wasn't needed.  It was the less is more approach.  And it worked.

In 2006, the finale of the Olympic Opening Ceremony in Torino was Pavarotti singing one of his signature songs--"Nessun Dorma."  It was his final performance before his death the following year.  Ever since then, Andrea Bocelli has been the signature Italian tenor.  So, it really was perfect for Pavarotti's successor to sing Pavarotti's song 20 years later at Italy's next Winter Olympics (in the home stadium of Inter Milan, Bocelli's favorite team).  And he performed it just as beautifully as Pavarotti did two decades ago.

As Bocelli was singing, the Olympic flame entered and made its way through the stadium.  I have to admit I found this a little weird, mainly because of the timing.  I was sitting there thinking, "It's too early," because there were several protocols that still hadn't happened.  The Games hadn't been declared open yet.  The Olympic flag hadn't even entered the stadium.  As it turns out, that was just a preview so that the fans in the stadium could see the Olympic flame before it made its way to its final destination at the heart of the city.  Seeing as the cauldron was outside the stadium, it was actually kind of cool that they did that.  Although, that didn't make it any less confusing.

Mostly, though, you couldn't help but be impressed by the show Milan and Cortina put on.  It ran a little on the long side.  At 3 1/2 hours, it was the longest Winter Olympic Opening Ceremony in history.  But part of the reason for that might've been the logistics of coordinating four separate Parades of Nations, as well as segments in both host cities.  And if that's the case, that was a small price to pay.  Because that's the element of this Opening Ceremony people will remember most.

Overall, that's the biggest takeaway from the Opening Ceremony of the Milan Cortina Olympics.  The cultural presentation was excellent, but that wasn't the memorable part.  It's how two separate ceremonies and four separate Parades of Nations were effortlessly worked together into one.  That will certainly be the biggest takeaway for the athletes.  They made it so that everybody could take part, no matter where they're competing.  The most spread out Winter Olympics in history found a way to bring all the athletes together as teammates despite the distance between them.

This, obviously, was just the start.  An ambitious Opening Ceremony as part of an ambitious Games plan that has venues scattered all across Northern Italy.  It's a huge undertaking to say the least.  But, coordinating all of the moving pieces for the Opening Ceremony was the hard part, and they passed that test with flying colors.  The Olympics themselves should be a breeze!

Milan Cortina is already one step ahead of Paris, too.  Paris recovered from a terrible Opening Ceremony to put on a spectacular Games.  If what we've got in store over the next two weeks comes anywhere close to what we saw on Friday night, the Italians are well on their way to putting on a spectacular Olympics of their own.

2025 NFL Awards

While most of the attention has gone to the Hall of Fame, let's not forget that the NFL Honors also includes the announcement of the league's annual awards.  It's been a few years since they moved it to Thursday night, which I have to say is much better.  Not only is Thursday Night Football an established part of the weekly schedule, doing the awards on Thursday gives them a little more of showcase.  On Saturday night, they were overshadowed by the game.

Anyway, this year, I'm especially interested to see how two of the races are decided.  MVP is most likely down to either Matthew Stafford or Drake Maye, while this is one of the most competitive Coach of the Year fields I've seen in quite some time.  While I think there's a clear winner, you could make a legitimate argument for all five finalists.

Speaking of all five finalists, I love that the NFL and AP have followed Baseball's lead by announcing them in advance.  Granted, it's mainly to invite them to the NFL Honors and make sure they're present to accept their award (unless, of course, they're playing in the Super Bowl).  But it also gives everyone a heads up who else is in the running, even if the winner is obvious.  And it really is nice to know who finished in the top five of the voting.

I've also noticed a significant change over the past few years.  It used to be taken for granted that the MVP and Offensive Player of the Year would be the same person.  That hasn't happened in quite a while.  They're two separate awards and they're treated as such.  The Offensive Player of the Year isn't necessarily the MVP and vice versa.  That's not saying they can't be the same player, of course, but you can be one and not the other.  As we've started to see regularly in recent years.  Which is a good thing.

MVP: Matthew Stafford, Rams-By December, Stafford and Drake Maye had separated themselves as the clear leaders in the MVP conversation.  I think Stafford has the slight edge, though.  The Rams had the best offense in football, and their 37-year-old quarterback had the best season of his 17-year career.  Stafford threw for 4,707 yards and 46 touchdowns (to just eight interceptions) and had a career-high 109.2 passer rating.  Maye had a higher QB rating, but Stafford was better in every other category.

Defensive Player: Myles Garrett, Browns-This is probably the easiest one of them all.  Garrett set an NFL record with 23 sacks playing for a bad Browns team.  Sometimes a performer can stand out on a bad team.  This is one of those years.  Garrett's record cannot be ignored.  The vote could be unanimous.

Offensive Player: Jaxon Smith-Njigba, Seahawks-What a year for JSN!  He was arguably the best receiver in the game this season and a big reason for the Seahawks' success.  Smith-Njigba had nearly 1,800 receiving yards on 119 catches, 10 of which went for touchdowns.  He obviously clicked with Sam Darnold!  Just like Saquon last year, Seattle is nowhere near as good this season without the type of year Jaxon Smith-Njigba had.

Offensive Rookie: Tetairoa McMillan, Panthers-It's kind of strange how there wasn't really a standout rookie anywhere on the offensive side of the ball this season.  No clear-cut Offensive Rookie of the Year.  The field is so weak that Jaxson Dart is a finalist!  I'm going with Carolina's Tetairoa McMillan simply because I think he had the most impact on his team's success.

Defensive Rookie: Nick Emmanwori, Seahawks-Unlike on offense, there are worthwhile choices for Defensive Rookie of the Year.  For a similar reason as McMillan, my choice is Seattle's Nick Emmanwori.  The Seahawks' offense got a lot of the credit (and deservedly so), but let's not forget how good their defense was.  It was no Legion of Boom, but it's a big a reason as any why Seattle is playing on Sunday.  Emmawori's presence in the secondary, especially late in the season, was a huge reason for that success.

Comeback Player: Christian McCaffrey, 49ers-McCaffrey missed A LOT of time in 2024.  First it was an ACL, then his season ended in Week 13.  In 2025, not only did he stay healthy, he played so well that he's a finalist for three different awards.  He won't win MVP or Offensive Player of the Year, but CMC should be a lock for Comeback Player.  The 49ers' success really hinges on his ability to stay healthy, and he showed why this year with an MVP-caliber season.

Coach: Mike Vrabel, Patriots-As deserving as the other candidates are, Vrabel is the clear choice for Coach of the Year.  He's the guy Kraft really wanted when Belichick retired, and we all saw why this season.  The Titans must feel like fools for letting him go!  But Tennessee's loss was New England's gain.  Vrabel led a worst-to-first turnaround that included a 10-game winning streak and an undefeated road record.  Is it any surprise then that the Patriots are back in the Super Bowl?

Assistant Coach: Klint Kubiak, Seahawks-After the Super Bowl, he'll go from Seahawks Offensive Coordinator to Raiders Head Coach.  That offense is one of the biggest reasons why Seattle had the best record in football and won the NFC title.  Sam Darnold proved last season in Minnesota wasn't a fluke and JSN had a career year.  The Seahawks were aggressive on offense, too, and more often than not, it paid off.  That two-point conversion in overtime against the Rams helped propel them to the Super Bowl.

Finally, we have the NFL's biggest honor.  This is always the toughest one because it isn't based on on-field performance.  That's important, but not as important as the impact on the community.  It's also the only award where all 32 teams designate their own nominee, and all of those nominees are on stage for the announcement.  As always, all 32 candidates are worthy of the honor.

Man of the Year: Dion Dawkins, Bills-Offensive linemen typically don't get the accolades.  They're the blue-collar, down-in-the-trenches guys who work hard.  Kind of like the City of Buffalo.  Which is why Dion Dawkins fits in so well with Western New Yorkers.  He's one of them.  Dawkins is so beloved by his team and its city that he's the Bills' nominee for the fourth straight year, and he's given his heart and soul to the people of Buffalo, both on the field and off.  Dawkins went out on a limb for his fellow offensive linemen, too.  He was a driving force in the creation of the "Protector of the Year" Award, ensuring that offensive linemen do get those deserved accolades.