Noah Eagle has proven himself to be one of the best up-and-coming sportscasters in the business. He was excellent calling Olympic basketball for NBC and will likely be one of the network's NBA voices when their contract starts next season. He also does play-by-play for NBC's weekly Big Ten game and gets the call whenever they need a second NFL crew. He even did one of the Netflix Christmas games and is a fixture on some of those alt-casts that are becoming increasingly popular!
It's also true that Noah Eagle is Ian Eagle's son. They sound so alike that I sometimes can't even tell their voices apart. But to say Noah Eagle has only gotten where he is because of his father isn't just ridiculous, it's insulting. Because he wouldn't have risen through the ranks so quickly if he didn't have the talent to back it up. And Noah Eagle most definitely has the talent!
The same can be said for Kenny Albert and Joe Buck. They're both the sons of legendary broadcasters, as well. That's not why they've risen to the top of the profession, though. And you'd get very little argument that Kenny Albert and Joe Buck are among the best in the business. Which has everything to do with them and nothing to do with Marv Albert or Jack Buck.
Kenny Albert is one of the most versatile broadcasters in all of sports. He's the lead play-by-play announcer for the NHL on TNT, has done football on FOX for years, and has also contributed to FOX's baseball coverage. "Marv Albert's son" rarely, if ever, comes up. And it shouldn't. Kenny has carved out a long, prolific career all on his own.
When Joe Buck was first hired by FOX as their primary baseball play-by-play announcer in the mid-90s, he was so you that the "Jack's son" comments were definitely there. By the time he left FOX for ESPN, he wasn't even doing baseball anymore. He had become one of the most respected football play-by-play guys and was so desired that ESPN actively sought him out for Monday Night Football. That was all Joe. He isn't just "Jack Buck's son" anymore.
I won't sit here and argue that being the son of a broadcasting legend hasn't helped them. I'm sure it was incredibly beneficial to learn the trade from a top professional from an early age. And, yes, having that connection probably opened some doors. But to suggest nepotism is the only reason is as unfair as it is untrue. Because no matter how you get your foot in the door, the only way you're staying there is if you're good enough.
Take Jac Collinsworth. He did play-by-play for Notre Dame and the UFL on NBC. He wasn't good at it, and, as a result, got replaced as the play-by-play voice of Notre Dame football. Now Jac is back doing "Football Night In America" and other studio work, which is much more suitable for him (and he still isn't great at that). Jac Collinsworth got promoted to Notre Dame play-by-play (in effect, NBC's No. 2 football guy), in large part, because he's Cris Collinsworth's son. But he couldn't cut it in the role, so he was replaced.
Let's not pretend that broadcasting is the only place in sports where nepotism is on display, either. LeBron James did not hide the fact that he wanted to be like the Griffeys and be in the same lineup as his son. That's why the Lakers drafted Bronny and that's why they put him on their opening night roster despite the fact that talent-wise, he's not an NBA player. After they played in that one game together, Bronny was demoted to the G League (which, frankly, is where he belongs).
We see it all the time in coaching, too. One of Bill Belichick's first hires at North Carolina was his son, Stephen. Plenty of people suspect that one of his conditions/reasons for taking the job was that they hire his son, as well. Whether that's true or not, the fact remains. Stephen Belichick likely wouldn't have been hired as an assistant coach at North Carolina if his father wasn't the head coach.
There are more examples than I can count in the coaching ranks! Rick Pitino's son, Richard, went from his father's Associate Head Coach to the head coach at Florida International, and is now at New Mexico. John & Jim Harbaugh's dad, Jack, is a legendary college coach. Father & son Mike & Kyle Shanahan have both coached their teams to multiple Super Bowls (with Mike winning two in Denver).
Regardless of how they started out, none of these coaches would've gotten head jobs if they weren't qualified for them. They certainly wouldn't have gotten multiple jobs and/or kept them this long if they didn't deserve them. Especially in a profession like coaching, a job where you know there's a very good chance you'll end up getting fired, it's merit based. If you can't cut it as a head coach, it doesn't matter who your dad is.
A few months ago, Emma Roberts did an interview where she acknowledged that being Julia Roberts' niece actually hasn't been easy. Yes, it's opened some doors for her. But there's also a certain weight of expectations and the extra pressure she's felt of constantly feeling like she has to prove herself. She wants her career to stand on its own. Which is exactly what these sportscasters/coaches want, as well.
That's why I think simply labeling these jobs as "nepotism" can be a copout. Is it sometimes warranted to say that? Absolutely! But not when the guy has proven time and again that he has the chops. Kenny Albert and Joe Buck have done that. Hence, they never get the nepotism talk anymore. And Noah Eagle shouldn't, either.
He's still young (only 28), so maybe in time, Noah Eagle will shed the "nepotism" label, too. Because, make no mistake, he's got a very long career ahead of him. And it's got nothing to do with the fact he's Ian Eagle's son. It's because Noah Eagle has quickly established himself as one of the best in the business. Already. And he's only gonna get better. That's all him.
Wednesday, January 15, 2025
When the Talent's There...
Sunday, January 12, 2025
It's Already Australian Open Time
I can still remember when the Australian Open final was on the same day as the Super Bowl! Now it starts on the same day as the Wild Card round. The finals are still the same time they've always been. It just seems so much earlier in relation to the NFL schedule. And the fact that the year starts, then there's immediately a Grand Slam tennis tournament will always catch you a bit off guard.
Anyway, we're here, and it's time for the 2025 Australian Open. The tournament has actually already started. And it's still the most unpredictable Grand Slam of the four. For a while, Novak Djokovic would just show up and win. Then last year, he lost to Jannik Sinner in the semifinals. Sinner would go on to win the title, and the US Open, and finish as the year-end No. 1. Djokovic, meanwhile, would go without a Grand Slam title for the first time 2017 (although, he did get the Olympic gold, which was the thing he most wanted in 2024).
As a result, Djokovic's ranking has slipped so far that he's only the No. 7 seed here. Not that anyone thinks that matters. As long as he's in Australia, he's among the favorites. Although, he's no longer the favorite. There are several other contenders capable of lifting the trophy. It's also weird that, with Nadal and Murray now officially joining Federer in retirement, the 37-year-old Djokovic is suddenly the "old" guy.
He's an "old" guy who's still got plenty left in the tank, though. Djokovic plays less now (another reason why his ranking has dropped) and focuses primarily on the Grand Slams. He's still sitting on 24 Grand Slams, which is tied for the all-time record, and 99 career titles. It would only be fitting for him to reach both milestones by winning the tournament where he's had his most success for an 11th time.
With all that being said, it won't be an easy road for Djokovic. So, if he's going to win an 11th Australian Open title, he'll have to earn it. If the seedings hold, Djokovic and Carlos Alcaraz would meet in the quarterfinals, with the winner then facing Alexander Zverev (the Tokyo Olympic gold medalist and the best player on Tour yet to win a Slam).
It's not like things on the other side of the draw are much easier, either. Sure, we avoided the possibility of a Djokovic-Sinner semifinal rematch (or a potential quarterfinal matchup). Instead, we could get a rematch of last year's final between Sinner and Daniil Medvedev. Sinner came back from two sets down to win that one for his first career Grand Slam title. Medvedev's won a US Open and been to the final of both hardcourt Slams multiple times, so you know he's a very capable hardcourt player. And he's a very legitimate contender for the title.
So, this isn't your typical Australian Open where Djokovic just shows up and wins the tournament. I can really see any of those five winning, which isn't something I'm used to saying about the Australian Open on the men's side. And, while I don't necessarily consider them "favorites" on the same level as the others, a run by US Open finalist Taylor Fritz or top Aussie Alex de Minaur wouldn't surprise me. Really, this is the most unpredictable men's Australian Open in quite a while.
Ultimately, though, I think Sinner and Djokovic are the two best hardcourt players in the world right now. It would be great to see them go head-to-head in a rematch of last year's semifinal, this time in the final. And I'm not counting Djokovic out. He's actually got a bit of a chip on his shoulder this year, which is dangerous for everyone else. He wins Australian Open No. 11, Grand Slam No. 25 and tournament No. 100 of his brilliant career.
On the women's side, there's no debate about who's the best hardcourt player in the world. It's Aryna Sabalenka, and it isn't even close. She's the two-time defending champion and also won the US Open last year. Sabalenka is now No. 1 in the world, as well, which makes her the clear favorite.
If not Sabalenka, who else then? How about Zheng Qinwen? She lost to Sabalenka in the final last year, then went on to win Olympic gold and make the quarterfinals at the US Open. Zheng is seeded fifth here. Although, she did get a bit of a bad draw with Sabalenka in her quarter. The winner of that match is a good bet to win the title.
Both of the top Americans, Coco Gauff and Jessica Pegula, are in the other quarter on that side of the draw. Gauff was a semifinalist here and Pegula was a finalist at the US Open last year. They've definitely both got a shot. But they're also in a very difficult section that also includes Naomi Osaka and Paula Badosa. I really can see any of the four taking on the Sabalenka-Zheng winner.
Most of the threats on the women's side are on the top half of the draw. Someone on the bottom half obviously has to make the final, though, and if there's an upset somewhere along the way, who knows what can happen? And the bottom half does have both Iga Swiatek and Vika Azarenka, so I wouldn't say nobody has a chance. I just think it's far less likely. And there's always that random women's semifinalist, which I think the bottom half of the draw will provide us with.
After her dominant run at the top of the women's game for several years, Swiatek has been overtaken by Sabalenka for the No. 1 ranking. She hasn't always played the best in Melbourne, either. Outside of a semifinal appearance in 2022, she hasn't been past the fourth round in five other trips. Azarenka won her only two Grand Slam titles in Australia, but that was more than a decade ago and she's 35 years old. Although, she's always been an outstanding hardcourt player, and this wouldn't be the first time she's made an unexpected deep run.
There are a few others to keep an eye on. Elena Rybakina is the 6-seed and she was a finalist here in 2023. Jasmine Paolini had a career year last year, starting with a fourth-round run here. How will she follow it up? That's a lot of points to defend. Ons Jabeur, meanwhile, saw her ranking drop when she had to end her 2024 season early due to injury. This is her first tournament back. If she's healthy, she's not a bad sleeper pick.
Who are we kidding, though? It's Sabalenka's tournament to lose. As long as she gets by Zheng (which she should), her path to a third straight Australian Open title is pretty smooth. She gets it done against Rybakina in the final, further cementing her hold both on No. 1 and on her status as the best women's hardcourt player in the world.
Saturday, January 11, 2025
NFL 2024-25 (Wild Card)
Fans of teams that just miss the playoffs complaining about why and how they got screwed is just as much of a right of January as fans of bad teams complaining about the win that cost them the No. 1 pick in the NFL Draft. This season, it was Bengals and Seahawks fans' turn to whine. For Cincinnati, it's the Chiefs' fault because of their completely not caring at all against Denver last week. That had nothing to do with Kansas City having already clinched the 1-seed in the AFC and wanting to rest their starters. It was entirely because they didn't want the Bengals in the playoffs. Obviously!
Seahawks fans, meanwhile, were "screwed" by the NFL's strength of victory tiebreaker, which allowed the Rams to clinch the division before the two teams met each other in Week 18. Seattle won to finish 10-7, the same record as the Rams, and the first four tiebreakers (head-to-head, division record, common opponents, conference record) were all even, so it came down to strength of victory. I'm still not entirely sure how a team could get screwed by a preexisting tiebreaker, yet somehow Seahawks fans think they were. Of course, if they had just, you know, beaten the Giants at home, they wouldn't have had this problem! (Ditto with the Bengals. If they wanted to be in the playoffs, maybe they shouldn't have started 1-4 and lost to the Patriots!)
Instead, Cincinnati and Seattle are at home watching the playoffs. And Wild Card Weekend is giving us some intriguing matchups. Two of the NFC games are Week 1 rematches. The third is a rematch of the Vikings' only loss this season to a team other than the Lions. Then in the AFC, you've got hated division rivals meeting for the second time in less than a month and two AFC West teams back in the postseason as wild card teams.
No. 1 seeds Detroit and Kansas City also get to watch Wild Card Weekend from home. With their bye already wrapped up, the Chiefs didn't care last week and it showed. The Lions, meanwhile, knew they needed the bye and they played like it last week. Frankly, they look like the best team in football. I'll be very surprised if they don't finally make it to the Super Bowl for the first time in franchise history.
Chargers (11-6) at Texans (10-7): Chargers-Death, taxes, and the Texans hosting the Saturday afternoon Wild Card Game. That's just another one of those crazy stats. Houston has made the playoffs eight times. Eight times they's played the Saturday 4:30 game. I'm not sure why they're complaining, though. They're 5-2 all-time in their previous Saturday afternoon home Wild Card Games. Getting to 6-2 will be difficult against a Chargers team that has proven its plenty capable of winning on the road.
Of course, the Chargers enter with some playoff demons from their last appearance when they blew a 27-0 lead against Jacksonville two years ago. This Chargers team is better than that one, and Jim Harbaugh is now their coach. That's the biggest difference between these Chargers and the 2022 Chargers. Houston obviously has the benefit of playing at home. The Chargers are the better team, though, so they're the pick.
Steelers (10-7) at Ravens (12-5): Baltimore-When these two met on a Saturday in Week 16 (they're each playing on Saturday for the third time in four weeks), it was the Steelers who had the inside track to the division title. The Ravens won that game handily, then really took it to Houston on Christmas before beating Cleveland to clinch the division. Pittsburgh, meanwhile, enters the playoffs on a four-game losing streak that saw them fall from the 3-seed in the AFC to the 6-seed. Worse, it sent them on the road to face their rival.
Even though the Ravens had already clinched, Pittsburgh went all out against Cincinnati since they wanted the 5-seed. That, of course, didn't happen, and the Steelers are stuck with the matchup they tried to avoid. And they didn't want to avoid it just because of the familiarity. They wanted to avoid it because the Ravens are a legitimate Super Bowl contender. (Someone posted a graphic the other day pointing out that their Super Bowl titles came 12 years apart with a 31-year-old quarterback each time. It's been 12 years since they last won, and Lamar Jackson is 31.) Baltimore has been playing like it for the past month, too.
Broncos (10-7) at Bills (13-4): Buffalo-Denver's last playoff game was Super Bowl 50. The MVP of that game? Von Miller...who now plays for the Buffalo Bills! So, yeah, it's been a while. But it's great to have the Broncos back! It took Sean Payton a year, but he put it all together in Year 2 to finally end the Broncos' playoff drought. And, say what you want about the Chiefs' effort last week, but the Broncos knew that was a must-win and brought that mentality. There was no way they were losing.
Unfortunately, their return to the playoffs will likely end in Buffalo. It's funny how everyone was up in arms about Kansas City's lack of intensity in Week 18, yet not a peep about the Bills doing exactly the same thing in a season-ending loss to the Patriots. Of course, for the Bills, it made even more sense since they knew they were playing this week. The Patriots game was out of their minds even before New England fired Jerod Mayo. There will be no hangover and Buffalo will advance to the Divisional Playoffs for the fifth straight season.
Packers (11-6) at Eagles (14-3): Philadelphia-If there's one NFC team I can see beating the Lions, it's Philadelphia. The Eagles have been one of the best teams in football all season, and they showed it again last week when they sat their starters and still beat the Giants. They used the opportunity to rest some players, which was important with the number of injuries they've been dealing with. Now they open the playoffs with a rematch of their opening game in Brazil against the Packers.
Prior to last week, Green Bay's only losses this season were to the Eagles, Lions (twice) and Vikings (twice). Yet, their 11-6 record was only good enough for the 7-seed in the playoffs. They're an incredibly dangerous 7-seed, though. They were also the 7-seed last year, when they went into Dallas and completely dominated the Cowboys before almost winning in San Francisco a week later. Don't think the Eagles aren't aware of that little factoid. Philadelphia knows this one will be a dogfight. In the end, though, the Eagles' offensive firepower should win out.
Commanders (12-5) at Buccaneers (10-7): Washington-I'm still not entirely sure why this one is the Sunday night game (I figured it'd be Ravens-Steelers), but here we are. A rematch of Week 1, when Tampa Bay came away with a 37-20 victory. The Commanders are a much different team now, however. They've won five in a row, and Jayden Daniels really has that offense clicking. What a difference a year has made in Washington!
The last time Washington made the playoffs in 2020, they played Tampa Bay in a Wild Card Game, and it was the start of the Bucs' run of three road wins before playing and winning a home Super Bowl. Tampa Bay has won the NFC South every year since then and is meeting an NFC East team in a Wild Card Game for the fifth straight time. Getting the 3-seed meant they avoided playing the Vikings. I'm not sure playing the Commanders instead was much of a consolation prize. Because I see Washington getting its first playoff win in 19 years, when they beat...Tampa Bay (this is the third playoff meeting between these two since 2005, and Washington has had a different team name each time).
Vikings (14-3) vs Rams (10-7): Rams-There's absolutely no chance they would've been able to play this game at SoFi Stadium with the situation in Los Angeles right now. So, moving the game and moving it when they did was 100 percent the right call. Although, the Rams are certainly hurt by the venue change much more than the Vikings benefit from it. Gone is their home field advantage. Instead, this is a neutral-site contest against a team that had four more regular season wins than they did.
Ultimately, though, I'm not sure it matters. The Rams beat the Vikings in the regular season and have gotten all of their main weapons back. They look primed for a playoff run. Minnesota lost to Detroit and ended up as a wild card team, then drew the Rams instead what, for them, must've been a more favorable matchup against Tampa Bay. The Rams are obviously playing for a lot more than just themselves, too. They win it for all of LA on Monday night.
Last Week: 10-6
Overall: 177-95
Thursday, January 9, 2025
The 1980 Boycott
As all the tributes came in for President Carter in the days between his death and his funeral, there was a lot of talk about his legacy. There's one particular thing about President Carter's legacy that stands out, and it's a decision that he ultimately regretted. It's something that he'd had a chance to do it again, he wouldn't have. I'm, of course, talking about the American-led boycott of the 1980 Summer Olympics in Moscow.
While the actual "reason" for the boycott was the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, it was really just a result of Cold War tensions between the United States and Soviet Union. Carter gave the Soviets a deadline for withdrawing their troops from Afghanistan, then when they didn't meet it, he called for a boycott of the Moscow Olympics. He also pushed U.S. allies to join the boycott, which many did. In all 67 countries joined the boycott completely, while several others that supported the boycott (mostly in Europe) allowed their athletes to compete under the Olympic flag while not officially sending a delegation.
Even though he was the President, Carter didn't actually have the authority to prevent the U.S. Olympic Team from going to Moscow. Neither could Congress, who overwhelmingly backed him. Only the USOC could do that. But they weren't going to go against the President's wishes, so they officially authorized the boycott. The Olympics would go on as scheduled, but the United States and most other Western nations would not attend.
We all know what happened as a result. Without Western competition, athletes from the Soviet Union and East Germany dominated the Moscow Games. Then, four years later when the Olympics were in Los Angeles, the Soviets returned the favor with a boycott of their own and 13 of their Eastern Bloc allies and satellite states joined them. Which led to the United States having a record medal haul at the 1984 Games.
Despite the fact they wouldn't actually compete in Moscow, the U.S. still held Olympic Trials and announced a Summer Olympic team in 1980. Carter even honored the team at a White House reception. A gesture that I'm sure offered little consolation to those athletes whose only opportunity to be an Olympian would've been 45 years ago in Moscow. (Officially, they are not considered Olympians.)
Boycotting the Moscow Games seemed like the right idea at the time. History tells us that it was not. Forcing the USSR to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan was the main objective. That didn't happen until a decade later. And, of course, one boycott led to another. Two straight Olympics where Cold War politics had a direct impact (and a full 12 years without all of the major players together at an Olympic Games). Geopolitics have been a part of the Olympics ever since. (Russia's current ban from international sport is a prime example of that.)
Ask the members of the 1980 Olympic team if they think it was a good idea, though. They can only imagine how they would've done in Moscow. They never got the chance to find out. And, again, for some of these athletes, 1980 represented their only chance. A chance that was taken away not by injury and not because they didn't qualify. Because the President decided the team shouldn't go.
That weighed heavily on Carter. It's likely one of the reasons why he came to regret his decision years later. He would eventually admit it was a "bad decision." Which is hardly any consolation to the affected athletes. Some had been Olympians before. Some would be again. For others, 1980 was their one and only chance.
The 1980 boycott is a part of Jimmy Carter's legacy. There's also no denying the impact it had on Olympic history. In the West, the 1980 Summer Games are basically forgotten. Nothing more than a footnote between the 1976 Games in Montreal and the 1984 Games in LA. And the American success at those 1984 Olympics was a direct result of the Soviet Union's counter boycott.
Athletes from nearly 100 countries were caught in the middle of Cold War political posturing at those two Olympics. And those are just the athletes who couldn't compete. Those who did went against vastly different fields than they otherwise would have. Some took advantage of that opportunity and won medals that likely would've gone to athletes from a boycotting country. So, really, every athlete was impacted. Those who boycotted and those who didn't.
In fact, it was the entire world that was forced to pay the price of the Olympic boycotts. The 1980 Olympics were a show for the Soviets and East Germans. The 1984 Olympics were a show for those who missed out in 1980. Neither featured all of the world's best athletes competing together against each other. How would the Americans have done in 1980 or the Soviets in 1984? We'll never know. That's perhaps the biggest shame of it all.
There was, of course, still an Olympics in 1980 that featured an American team. The 1980 Winter Games in Lake Placid were held amid the threat of the Summer Olympic boycott that would become a reality a few months later. And those 1980 Winter Games produced one of the most famous moments not just in Olympic history, but in sports history. The Miracle On Ice. (Even if the U.S. had gone to the Summer Olympics that year, nothing they would've done in Moscow would've had any chance of topping that.)
But it was the decision not to participate later that year in Moscow for which Jimmy Carter will always be remembered in Olympic circles. For all of the foreign policy successes (the Camp David Accords) and failures (the Iran hostage crisis) during his Presidency and all of the tremendous good he did during his four-decade post-Presidency, the 1980 boycott is one of the first things people think of regarding Jimmy Carter. And it's to his great credit that he realized it was a bad call and later came to regret it.
Was Jimmy Carter trying to screw American athletes in the summer of 1980? Of course not! He made a decision as President that was ultimately backed by the U.S. Olympic Committee. Had the boycott achieved his objectives, history would view it far more favorably. It obviously didn't work out that way, though. And the fact that Carter ultimately recognized it was a mistake and took responsibility for it speaks volumes about his character.
Wednesday, January 8, 2025
Stanko Strong
When the 2022 World Cup roster was announced and it was clear that Matt Turner would be the starting keeper for the U.S. National Team, an embarrassing video of Turner started making the rounds on YouTube. It was from when he was in college at Fairfield and gave up an absolutely terrible own goal at Iona. And every time that video played, Jon Stanko, my buddy who worked at Iona at the time, would excitedly go, "I shot that video!"
He was a student at Iona when he was the camera operator for the Matt Turner "highlight." Stanko (who I always referred to only by last name) was then hired as a full-time member of the Athletic Department staff at Iona, and, despite working at rival schools, we were friendly colleagues always ready to help the other out for years. Even after he left Iona to take a job at Barstool, we'd still work Iona games together.
Last year, Stanko received the horrible news no one ever wants to get. He had cancer and it was terminal. It was as shocking as it was devastating. They gave him, at best, 14 months. Unfortunately, he didn't make it that long. A young, vibrant 32-year-old with such a zest for life has been taken from us, leaving behind a wife who he had only just married a few months ago.
Like most others, I learned of Stanko's diagnosis through his blog, Stanko's Stance. He wanted to people to know and to tell his story his way. Stanko was determined to beat it, no matter how improbable the odds, and document everything, including how he was feeling. It was one of the most courageous things I've ever seen.
Here was somebody who had to be angry, upset, scared, wondering "why me?" Someone who had every right to his privacy as he fought a losing battle for his life. Yet Stanko did none of that. He shared his story with the world. Every last painful detail. He told everyone all about his cancer journey. The good. The bad. And how he really felt about all of it. You couldn't help but admire everything about it.
Stanko isn't the first person I've known who we lost to cancer (it's how both my parents died), but he's by far the youngest. A cruel reminder of just how devastating a disease it is. Cancer can take anybody at any time. And sometimes it can happen quickly. Someone can go from engaged and looking forward to the rest of his life to gone in less than a year. If that sounds incredibly unfair, that's because it is.
I got the news in the afternoon before attending the Rangers-Stars game later that night. Coincidentally enough, it was Hockey Fights Cancer Night at Madison Square Garden. Just as I thought about my parents the whole night while I was at the World Series (which was MLB's annual Stand Up to Cancer game), I spent a good portion of the hockey game thinking about Stanko. The life he lived and the rest of it that was cut short.
There are others who knew him better. No matter how well you knew Jon Stanko, though, your opinion of him was probably the same. His taste in baseball teams might've been somewhat questionable (although, if you're from Connecticut, I guess there's always a chance you'll become a Red Sux fan), but his class never was. Stanko was one of those people who nobody could say anything bad about him.
His versatility was impressive. Our profession is one where you need to wear many hats. His hat depended on the day. He might be doing PA one day then producing the broadcast the next. Doing the broadcast on air or handling social media clips. Truly a jack of all trades!
If you think Stanko was just a sports guy, that couldn't be further from the truth. One time I tried to make fun of Taylor Swift before he informed me that he was an unapologetic Swiftie. He was also one of the biggest movie buffs I knew. Before it became a personal diary of his cancer battle (and even sometimes after), his blog was full of movie reviews, rankings, Oscar predictions, etc. And that movie selection was diverse to say the least!
It wasn't just movies, either. He was an avid fan of The Bachelor, and the blog also included reviews of that show. During COVID when I was home all the time and had nothing else to do, I watched the spin-off season The Bachelor Presents: Listen to Your Heart where they were all musicians. Stanko was the one other person who I knew would be watching, so he was the recipient of any and all texts with my random thoughts about the show.
Of course, sports were also mixed in with the movies and the TV shows and the health updates. He even had it all arranged by category. A blog that's far more organized than this one will ever be! In fact, simply calling it a "blog" doesn't do it justice. It was a full-on website! More than that, it was a slice of Jon Stanko's life that he was so willing to share. And, with the Super Bowl and the Oscars coming up and a new season of The Bachelor starting soon, you know he would've had a lot to say about all of them!
Above all, Jon Stanko was a friend. I'm just one of many who had the privilege of calling him that. Whether he considered me a friend or not, I don't know, but it really doesn't matter. I considered him one regardless. He was somebody I'd go help out at the last minute because I knew he'd do the same for me. He was somebody I could have a stupid conversation about nothing via text with.
While we were very different, Jon Stanko and I were the same in a lot of ways. Maybe that's why we got along so well! I can only aspire to be half the man Jon Stanko was, though. Rest in peace, my friend. You're gone far too soon.
Sunday, January 5, 2025
A Reset Year
Can you believe it's been five years since COVID upended all of our lives?! Crazy, isn't it? Anyway, after all the COVID cancellations/postponements and the reshuffling of schedules that they caused, we're almost back to normal. By the end of 2025, we will be there. Which is why I'm calling this year a "reset year." Come 2026, the sports calendar will finally be back on its pre-COVID schedule.
It's true that the Olympics and Euro got back on schedule in 2024 after the 2020 editions of those events were delayed. However, they were on an abbreviated three-year cycle instead of the typical four. Now they're at the beginning of a new four-year cycle. Not five. Not three. Like I said, it's a reset to what the schedule is supposed to be like. Not jammed into three years without the off year in the cycle.
In most Olympic sports, there's a World Championships every other year in the odd years. Since the 2020 Olympics were delayed a year, so were all of the 2021 World Championships. Then they 2023 World Championships were held as scheduled prior to the 2024 Olympics. Which means this year is five years in a row with a major global competition.
Then there are the quadrennial events that were scheduled for 2021 that also had to be moved back a year. This year, it's their turn to have the abbreviated three-year cycle before their four-year clock resets. This applies mainly to European women's soccer players. Between Women's Euro 2021-22, the 2023 Women's World Cup, last year's Olympics and now the 2025 Women's Euro, it'll be four years in a row for them.
The World Indoor Championships in track & field typically take place in even years. The 2020 edition, scheduled to take place in Nanjing, China, was one of the first events postponed because of COVID. They were originally rescheduled for 2021 before being postponed again. There have been two regularly-scheduled World Indoor Championships since then. Finally, Nanjing will host World Indoors this March, five years later than planned. There will be another edition next year, as well, but after three straight years with World Indoors, the meet won't be held in 2027 and they'll finally be fully back on schedule.
Swimming's World Championships also get back on schedule this year after the chaos created by COVID. This will actually be the fourth straight year with a Swimming World Championships! For reasons I still don't quite understand, there was a World Championships last February in Doha, just eight months after the 2023 World Championships and only five months before the Paris Olympics. This year, they head to Singapore before finally taking a World Championships break in 2026.
Perhaps the most important thing for Olympic sports, though, is that they can finally reset their budgets. Some of the smaller international federations rely on the funds they receive from the IOC to pay their expenses, and their balance sheets were heavily impacted by having to wait an extra year. Now they're back to being able to budget and plan over a four-year period from 2025-28.
We'll also see a new event debut this year. For the first time, FIFA has expanded the Club World Cup to a 32-team tournament that will serve as a test event for the following year's World Cup. There's been plenty of criticism of the expanded Club World Cup and reasonable questioning of whether it's even actually a good idea. FIFA wants to do it regardless, though, so it's happening. It'll be in June and July in many of the NFL stadiums that'll be used at the 2026 World Cup.
Another event makes its debut this year in preparation for the NHL's Olympic return in 2026. Instead of an All*Star Game, the NHL will hold the Four Nations Face-Off, featuring NHL players from the United States, Canada, Finland and Sweden representing their home countries. The tournament is set for February in Montreal and Boston, with the NHL carving out a break in its schedule, just as it will next year when NHL players will participate in the Olympics for the first time since 2014.
Also set for 2026 is the next edition of the World Baseball Classic. COVID really screwed up the schedule with that tournament, causing a six-year wait from 2017-23 before a three-year wait ahead of the 2026 tournament (when the cycle will presumably become four years). So, with the full tournament being played in 2026, that means we'll get qualifying during Spring Training this year.
Women's basketball was one of the hottest sports out there in 2024, and 2025 will be another big year for the sport. The WNBA added an expansion team, the Golden State Valkyries, and extended the regular season to 44 games. The WNBA Finals have also finally been made a best-of-seven series. That's not all, though. The stars of the WNBA have banded together to create a new three-on-three league, Unrivaled, that will debut in a few weeks and play during the WNBA offseason.
NFL international games are a permanent part of the schedule now. Next season, the number of international games increases to as many as eight. In addition to the traditional slate in London, Berlin and Madrid will host NFL games for the first time. The MLB season will start in Tokyo with two games between the Dodgers and Cubs, and there's a game between the Braves and Reds set for Bristol Motor Speedway in August.
Meanwhile, hockey isn't the only sport gearing up for the 2026 Olympics. It's only 13 months until the Opening Ceremony in Milan, and Olympic qualification in winter sports has already gotten underway in earnest. The 2024-25 winter sports season ends early in the year, and some spots should be awarded at the various World Championships. Then, come November-December, it'll really heat up, and we should know most, if not all of the U.S. team headed to Italy before the calendar flips to 2026.
Those are just some of the highlights. There's plenty to look forward to on the 2025 sports calendar. Some of these events are annual. Some are getting back on their normal cycle after having their schedule knocked out of whack by COVID. Which is why 2025 will be a year to reset.
Saturday, January 4, 2025
NFL 2024-25 (Week 18)
When the NFL went to an all-division-games schedule in the final week of the season, this is what they had in mind. Game 272 is the first regular season game between two 14-win teams in league history! And the craziest part about that is either the Vikings or Lions will be a 14-win wild card team! The winner is the 1-seed, the loser has to go on the road in the playoffs. Everything's at stake. This is exactly what NFL fans want to see!
While NFC's 1-seed is yet to be clinched, there are plenty of playoff spots already locked in, which will definitely have an impact on this week's games...and the playoff races. It's disappointing that Saquon Barkley won't go for the rushing record, but I get why the Eagles are sitting him. We also know that Kansas City's sitting starters and the Bills likely will, too. I'm curious to see what the other playoff teams will do, though.
Browns (3-13) at Ravens (11-5): Baltimore-During that three-games-in-11-days stretch, Baltimore went 3-0 and Pittsburgh went 0-3. As a result, it's now the Ravens who are in control of the AFC North. They clinch the division and 3-seed with a win in their finale, and they drew the Browns at home, the far more beatable of the two Ohio opponents. And, yes, I say this knowing full well that Cleveland won the first meeting between the two this season (the Browns also beat the Steelers this year). All the more reason why I think Lamar & Co. get themselves another home game next week.
Bengals (8-8) at Steelers (10-6): Pittsburgh-This is where it gets interesting. If the Ravens win, the Steelers are locked into a wild card. But I think they play to win anyway for two reasons. For one, they've lost three straight and don't want to go into the playoffs on a four-game losing streak. More importantly, if they lose, they're guaranteed to play the Ravens in Baltimore next week. They'd much rather go to Houston. Eliminating the Bengals would be an added bonus.
Panthers (4-12) at Falcons (8-8): Atlanta-Atlanta was a popular preseason pick to win the NFC South. Even in the middle of the season, you would've liked the Falcons' chances. Instead, they're looking up at Tampa Bay and know they only get in with a win and a Bucs loss. They'll do their part against a Carolina team that had actually been playing some pretty good football before last week's shellacking in Tampa.
Commanders (11-5) at Cowboys (7-9): Washington-What a difference this season has been in Washington! Jayden Daniels wrapped up Offensive Rookie of the Year last week, as the Commanders clinched their first playoff berth since 2020. The fact that they did it with a week to go and don't need to rely on winning in Dallas was huge, too. Now the pressure's off. Although, if they win, they avoid playing the Eagles again. That and beating the Cowboys should be enough motivation for playoff-bound Washington.
Bears (4-12) at Packers (11-5): Green Bay-Green Bay is 0-5 against the Lions, Vikings and Eagles (combined record: 41-7) and 11-0 against the rest of the NFL. And all it will get them is either the 6- or 7-seed in the NFC playoffs. And, if Washington beats Dallas, who will they end up playing? Philadelphia! There's nothing the Packers can do about that. But you know that finishing the regular season by beating the archrival Bears at Lambeau will be a good way to head into the postseason.
Jaguars (4-12) at Colts (7-9): Indianapolis-Indianapolis had perhaps the easiest path to the playoffs of the four teams still in contention for the last AFC wild card after last week. Beat the Giants and beat the Jaguars. So, of course, they not only lose to the Giants, they get 45 points dropped on them! Which makes this game totally meaningless. I'm not sure the degree to which the Colts will care, so a Jaguars win wouldn't shock me. I'll stick with Indianapolis, though.
Bills (13-3) at Patriots (3-13): Buffalo-Both the Ravens and Bengals need to win this week. Which means Lamar Jackson and Joe Burrow will both play the whole game and boost their stats. Josh Allen likely won't. The Bills can do whatever they want, and the decision to sit (or at least limit) him this week makes complete sense. I just hope it doesn't negatively impact his MVP chances (personally, I think he should be the runaway favorite). As for the team, a win doesn't change anything, but a franchise record for victories and an undefeated record in the division are nice things to play for.
Giants (3-13) at Eagles (13-3): Philadelphia-Entering last week, the Giants had the inside track at the No. 1 overall pick in the draft. After beating the Colts, their chances at getting it are significantly slimmer. Although, I don't necessarily think that's a terrible thing since there won't be a franchise quarterback available. And, knowing the Giants, they'll go into Philadelphia for a meaningless game and upset the Eagles. Seeing Saquon setting the rushing record against the team that decided they don't want him anymore would've been some sort of poetic irony, but, alas, he won't play. He'll just have to settle for the satisfaction of seeing the Giants finish with the worst record in the league.
Saints (5-11) at Buccaneers (9-7): Tampa Bay-With a win or a Falcons loss, Tampa Bay is back in the playoffs once again. They actually have a chance of moving up to the No. 3 seed, too, which means hosting the Commanders or Packers instead of the 14-win Vikings or Lions. (Although, Tampa Bay has beaten Detroit this season.) Baker Mayfield has been proving his doubters wrong ever since he came to Tampa and took over for Tom Brady. That won't change against a Saints team that's been mailing it in under the interim coach. The Bucs return to the playoffs.
Texans (9-7) at Titans (3-13): Houston-That embarrassment on Christmas locked the Texans into the No. 4 seed, but also left Houston knowing it had a lot of work to do. They played two teams they'll potentially meet again in the playoffs and, after holding their own in Kansas City, were outclassed in every facet by Baltimore. So, even though nothing will change for them seeding-wise against the Titans, Houston may want to use this one to work on getting things right before the games that really matter next week.
49ers (6-10) at Cardinals (7-9): Arizona-It really is remarkable the streak that San Francisco is on. The 49ers either make the NFC Championship Game or miss the playoffs entirely. This season, they went with Option B. Too many injuries and too many close losses to overcome. The Cardinals, meanwhile, have put together a nice season. Sure, they're gonna end up below .500 and out of the playoffs, but there have really been some encouraging signs. And 8-9 looks a whole lot better than 7-10!
Chiefs (15-1) at Broncos (9-7): Denver-The Dolphins and Bengals can't be too happy about Kansas City's decision to sit its starters. Because they need a Broncos loss to have any hope at getting into the playoffs. But with the Chiefs' starters sitting, the likelihood of Denver getting that win it needs have gone up exponentially. After all, the Broncos would've beaten them in Kansas City if not for that blocked kick at the end of the game. Of course, they'd already be in if they hadn't lost their last two games. But that's the benefit of having a cushion. The Broncos clinch the 7-seed and head to Buffalo.
Chargers (10-6) at Raiders (4-12): Chargers-I know I'm stating the obvious here, but Jim Harbaugh is a pretty good coach. After missing the playoffs last season, the Chargers clinched a wild card with one week to go by dominating the Patriots last week. This after their comeback win to beat the Broncos on Thursday night in Week 16. Now they can put a bow on the regular season by beating the Raiders in Las Vegas.
Seahawks (9-7) at Rams (10-6): Rams-Thanks to the strength of victory tiebreaker, the Rams have already clinched the NFC West. Which is a bit of a shame since it deprived us of this one being for the division title. Either way, the Rams would've been my pick. I just wish we still had that drama. It's been quite a turnaround after that 1-4 start. And they clinch the 3-seed with a win, which means avoiding the NFC North teams in both the wild card and divisional rounds. Don't think that's an unimportant detail.
Dolphins (8-8) at Jets (4-12): Miami-Aaron Rodgers "accepts" that this might be the final game of his career. Either way, it's his last game as a Jet. That two-year experiment sure didn't work out, and his voluntary benching last week in Buffalo spoke volumes. (Note to the Jets, don't sign anymore old, disgruntled future Hall of Fame Packers quarterbacks!) Anyway, all the Dolphins can do is win and hope the Chiefs care enough to beat the Broncos. Otherwise, great job to finish above .500. But that 2-6 start was a season killer.
Vikings (14-2) at Lions (14-2): Detroit-As soon as the Vikings beat the Packers, we all knew this would be Game 272. Yet the NFL made us wait until the end of last week's SNF game to announce it (which I get, but was still annoying). The Vikings have turned winning close games into an art. The Lions have made an art of winning in so many different ways. Detroit might be the best, most complete team in the NFL. They need the 1-seed, but not because it'll give them home field advantage. They need the bye. They haven't been off since Week 5!
Last Week: 12-4
Overall: 167-89