Bleacher Report - Articles by Randy Ratliff

Divas in Professional Sports: Why They Are Ruining the Game

Randy Ratliff — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 20:12:35 -0400

Imagine that you are a football player for the Miami Dolphins.

You get up early for team workouts. You train your butt off all day as you help your teammates try and turn around the leagues worst team.

Then, you turn on a TV and see your teammate dancing around on ABC trying to get his face out in Hollywood, even though he is getting paid millions of dollars to be practicing and playing with his teammates.

This is what is wrong with professional sports—the athletes forget that they are getting paid to play.

I don't get why so many athletes are infatuated with becoming actors, musicians, or anything other than being an athlete. It really cheapens the game. Can't Jason Taylor wait until he is done playing football to pursue acting?

The Dolphins have paid him a lot of money to be at training camp with his teammates. Any respectable man would feel an obligation to show up and do what he can to improve the franchise.

I don't think Jason Taylor cares about his teammates or his franchise. His only agenda is money and fame. His teammates, and the Miami Dolphins' franchise, come in a distant second.

These types of athletes are in pretty much every sport.

If you listen to LeBron James speak, it is obvious he has a pretty large god-complex. You don't even have to walk into his house and see the statues he has had made of himself lining his entryway. Or, see his two-story 3,600 square-foot closet to know that he has an ego.

When asked what his goals are, he says he would like to be the richest athlete in the world. He wants to be the first athlete/billionaire. You'll hear nothing about basketball, winning championships, or being a good teammate.

The egos of athletes have extended far beyond the playing field. It seems like it is a contest of who can get their face in the most places. Players who make $10-15 million a year complain about their contracts. They even hold out and refuse to practice because another player is making more money than them.

For example, Chad Johnson said that he wouldn't play for the Bengals, even though he was under contract. He then took every interview he could get, and he made no sense at all with any of the random comments he made.

When Roger Clemens put the Red Sox, Yankees, and Astros into a bidding war halfway through the season, one couldn't help but to feel disgusted. He showed his team that he would put in the time it took to win when he flew off to play golf during some of his team's away games.

As long as he wasn't pitching, he didn't need to be there. It's not like he could give the young pitchers on the team any insight or knowledge during the game. He's only getting paid twenty million dollars.

I am pretty sure that it will just get worse in the years to come. As salaries skyrocket and the fame of athletes rises, commercialization will take over all of the old values and morals that shaped sports. Sitting down for a game will be nothing more than watching an over-glamorized TV show.

Determining the Future of the Sacramento Kings

Randy Ratliff — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 22:21:15 -0400

The NBA's Western Conference was loaded with talent this season. It will take a lot of work for the Sacramento Kings to get back into the thick of it

I personally think that the Maloof' made a major mistake in firing Rick Adelman. Adelman had deal with a rebuilding franchise on the fly. While doing so, he managed to give the eventual NBA Champion Spurs a run for their money in the first round, taking the series to six games. But as it often happends, coaches are blamed for most of the problems with the team.

But the Kings made a good decision in hiring Reggie Theus. Though he did not have a lot of coaching experience, he led the Kings to a somewhat respectable record, despite the injuries the team suffered during the regular season.

The Kings' two leading scorers, Kevin Martin and Ron Artest, missed more than twenty games apiece. Francisco Garcia put up good numbers in limited minutes. He can be a spark off of the bench for the Kings in years to come.

Kevin Martin was a consistent scoring threat for the Kings. But he needs to find a way to increase his assists if he wants to be the true leader of the team. I don't think that two and a half assists a game will cut it. If he could get his average up to about four or five assists a night, it will help him to emerge as the go-to guy—someone who can score and create opportunities for his teammates.

Ron Artest has the talent to be a franchise player. With his extreme ability on the defensive end coupled with his solid scoring numbers, you can usually count on him to put up about 20 points a game—if his head was there.

Artest could be one of the premier players in the league. He is very similar to Rasheed Wallace. Both are extremely talented players who just can't buckle down and give a consistent effort night in and night out. That is the reason for all of the trade rumors constantly surrounding Artest.

The Kings do need to address some glaring weaknesses. They obviously need to improve the point-guard position after trading Mike Bibby to the Hawks. With the Western Conference already loaded with young, talented point guards such as Chris Paul, Daron Williams, Baron Davis, and Brandon Roy, the Kings need to either draft a point guard in the first round or pick one up in free agency.

Their best bet would probably be in the draft, which is ripe with talented point guards. There are a couple of very talented point guards in the draft that could drop to the Kings. With Derrick Rose most likely being off the board. the Kings should have a choice of either DJ Augustin out of Texas or Russell Westbrook out of UCLA.

I personally think that Augustin would be the better pick for the Kings, as he seems to be the more polished player, averaging more points and assists than Westbrook. He also seems to be more of a true point guard.

Augustin is a leader on the court. He would look great holding the reigns for the Sacramento Kings. Westbrook would be more of a work in progress. The Kings need someone who can come in and make an immediate impact. Augustin is that player.

If Joey Dorsey falls to them in the second round, he can really help them out on the defensive end. A lot of scouts compare his play to that of Ben Wallace. He could turn out to be one of the steals of the 2008 draft. If he falls to the Kings and pans out, it could mean great things for Sacramento in the future.

If the Kings can also add a dominant presence in the post—someone to take some of the load off of Brad Miller—I believe they will be in the middle of the playoff hunt in a year or two. Elton Brand will be a free agent. He would look great in a Kings uniform. It is all just a matter of how all the pieces fit together.

A lot of responsibility will fall on the shoulders of Reggie Theus. His coaching ability will be tested over the next couple of years as the Kings will surely make some changes.

But Sacramento is headed in the right direction. I am looking forward to the beginning of next season, and seeing the pieces the Kings have added. In my opinion, they are off to a good start. If they can make the right decisions, and add some depth in the point guard and forward-center positions, I think they will be poised to make a run in the West.

Open Mic: Greatest Disappointments and Accomplishments

Randy Ratliff — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 20:29:19 -0400

As an avid sports fan. I have seen some pretty amazing feats in my lifetime. With my favorite football, basketball, and baseball teams being the Raiders, the Kings, and the Red Sox, I have seen my teams perform greatly and very poorly.

Nothing comes close to seeing the Red Sox come back from a 3-0 deficit to beat the New York Yankees in seven games. In my mind, that is the most impressive feat I have ever seen.

It had everything. First of all, Red Sox-Yankees is probably the most heated rivalry in sports. Plus, the Red Sox hadn't won a World Series since 1918, and no baseball team had ever come back from a 3-0 deficit to win a series.

That's not to mention how exciting the games were, with Game 4 going into extra innings, and the Red Sox winning four consecutive elimination games. Nothing can top that in my mind.

As far as the biggest disappointments I have seen, a few immediately come to mind. One is the Patriots going undefeated in the regular season and then losing in the Super Bowl.

However, it is hard to determine whether something is a disappointment for one team, or a great accomplishment for the other team. You can give the Giants just as much credit as you can take away from the Patriots.

Another disappointment that comes to mind is the Mavericks winning 67 games in the regular season and then losing in five games in the first round of the playoffs. That is not as much of an upset as the Patriots losing.

I believe the Mavericks were just outcoached. Avery Johnson tried to use the same plays he learned from Don Nelson. His inability to come up with his own game plan allowed Don Nelson to pick apart the Mavericks.

It was the second consecutive year the Mavericks severely underachieved. They lost the finals the year before in six games, after winning the first two games of the series.

Then there are the disappointments that really hit home for me, such as the Sacramento Kings losing to the Los Angeles Lakers in 2002. Now people are saying that Game Six was fixed. When you look at it, it's pretty obvious.

The Lakers shot 27 free throws in the fourth quarter. I have never seen that kind of disparity in foul shooting.

If the Lakers would have kept that pace the entire game they would have shot over 100 free throws. Every time I see highlights of that game I get sick to my stomach. I truly believe that a championship was taken away from my team.

Then, there is the infamous "tuck rule" game between the Raiders and the Patriots, a game in which the officials made a terrible call that cost the Raiders a chance at the Super Bowl.

As far as individual records are concerned. I have witnessed some huge milestones, like Cal Ripken Jr. breaking Lou Gehrig's consecutive games played record.

There are also some records that I am sad to see broken because they were not legitimately broken. These include Barry Bonds' single season and career home run records; and Roger Clemens winning 20 games and a Cy Young award after he turned 40. Also, a lot of his 350-plus wins were also affected. I don't think he would have won 350 games if he wouldn't have used steroids.

The two records I would like to see broken the most are Joe DiMaggio's 56-game hit streak, because no one has really come close to it; and someone scoring 100 points in an NBA game, because that would be an amazing sight to see.

I can't really say that there are any records that I wouldn't like to see broken. When athletes start to approach certain milestones, it creates a lot of excitement, and makes the games even more worthwhile to watch. Records allow players to gauge their talent and ability in relation to the all-time greats.

Who knows what records will be broken in the near future? That is what's great about sports. You never know.

Oakland Raiders: Darren McFadden's Impact

Randy Ratliff — Thu, 15 May 2008 21:59:56 -0400

I have to admit. I was hoping that the Raiders were going to draft Glen Dorsey. I just knew he could be the missing link to the Raiders' shoddy run defense.

Though I have no problem with the Raiders drafting Darren McFadden. He is the gamebreaker their offense has really been missing. He can do great things for the Raiders if they utilize him correctly.

From what I have heard, they are planning on using him like the Saints use Reggie Bush, and not like the Vikings have used Adrian Peterson. A lot of people may not understand the logic of the Raiders doing this. If you could choose between Adrian Peterson and Reggie Bush, who would you take?

I would most certainly take Adrian Peterson. The main reason the Saints use Bush so sparingly is because of his inability to be a full-time back. That is why he split carries with Lendale White in college. But McFadden has proven he can be a full-time back. In his final college season he had over 320 carries.

The main reason the Raiders are planning on using McFadden as a complimentary back are because of their depth at running back. They must also find carries for Michael Bush and Justin Fargas. I am sure that McFadden and Bush will receive the majority of the carries, while Justin Fargas gets the short end of the deal.

I just don't think his running style is conducive to the NFL. He runs too high, and he doesn't have a low center of gravity, which is essential to being a running back. Once he makes contact, he just gets knocked back. He needs to put his head down so he can fight for the yards.

Darren McFadden and Michael Bush will be a great one-two punch for Oakland this year. Bush has the size and power to move the chains, but he is also deceptively fast, and very coordinated for someone his size. Plus, he is completely healthy for the first time since the beginning of his junior year of college. Many believe he would have been a first-round pick if he had not have gotten hurt.

I am thinking that Michael Bush will probably get a majority of the carries, as the Raiders will take advantage of McFadden's versatility. They can line him up as a wide receiver, or he can line up under center and take the snap, as he did with Arkansas.

I think the mere presence of McFadden will make JaMarcus Russell's second-year transition that much easier. He will keep the defenses honest and on their toes, as they know he can break one for fifty or sixty at any time. It will surely give Russell more time in the pocket to make more intelligent decisions with the ball, and also provide him someone to toss a quick swing pass to when he is being blitzed.

I don't think that McFadden's contributions to the team will really show up when you look at his numbers. You will have to look at how much easier he will make the game for the rest of the offense to truly understand his role with the team. He will be a great fit in Oakland, and add another well-needed piece to the Raiders' championship puzzle.

Pedro Martinez: Most Talented Pitcher of All Time?

Randy Ratliff — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 20:37:04 -0400

In my personal opinion, Pedro Martinez is the most talented pitcher ever to play Major League Baseball.

I know some people may think that statement a little naive, ignorant even, because obviously I have not seen every pitcher who has ever played.

I have, however, had the chance to research some of the great pitchers from the past. An important stat to take into consideration is how good teams were offensively, and how many runs per game were scored on average while a certain pitcher played.

That is one of the main reasons I think Pedro holds an edge over some of the great pitchers in history—Pedro pitched in the highest offensive period in league history. And, he still put up numbers that would have been considered great in any pitcher's generation.

In 2000 Pedro's E.R.A was 1.74. Another stat to take into consideration is that Roger Clemens had the second best E.R.A in the league that year at 3.70. Pedro's E.R.A was less than half that of Roger Clemens. That might be the most dominating stat I have ever seen.

Let's compare that kind of domination, and put it into a different context. The best power hitter in the league over the last few years has probably been Alex Rodriguez.

For him to dominate in the same manner as Pedro did, he would have to double the amount of home runs hit by the second place hitter. Home Run leaders usually hit about 50 home runs per season. A Rod would have to hit over 100 home runs in a season to dominate like Pedro—which I don't think will ever happen.

Pedro's numbers become that much more impressive when you consider how much Major League Baseball has improved offensively over the last six to seven decades. It's like Bud Selig forgot to give Pedro the memo that this is supposed to be a hitters' league.

If Pedro would have pitched in the dead ball era, I don't think you would be able to calculate his E.R.A.—because he probably would not have allowed a run.

Another reason I consider Pedro to be the most talented pitcher of all time is his variety of pitches.

Early in his career, his fastball was clocked at 95-99 mph. Most pitchers who throw heat like that can only throw heat. Pedro was different. His fastball, change-up, curve-ball, and circle change-up were as good or better than anyone's in the league.

I couple that with his extraordinary killer instinct, and will to win. A strong indication of his tenacious desire to win came in the 1999 playoffs against the Cleveland Indians.

He was forced out of game one after four shutout innings due to a strained back. The Red Sox ended up losing the game 3-2.

The series ended up tied at two games apiece going into the fifth and final game of the series. Through three innings of game five the score was tied at eight runs apiece, as neither team's starting pitching was effective.

The Red Sox put Pedro in as an emergency relief option to stabilize the game. He pitched six innings, struck out eight batters, and didn't allow a run—despite not being able to throw his fastball or his change-up due to his back and relying completely on his curve-ball.

As the Red Sox won the game 12-8, I can't think of any baseball player with more pure killer instinct—he would not let his team lose.

Pedro is easily the one pitcher I would want to pitch one game if I could take anyone.

There are a lot of people who would choose to take quantity over quality—as is the case with Roger Clemens. I'm not saying that Roger Clemens was not a great pitcher. It is just that his numbers are inflated due to the amount of time he spent in the league.

If you take Pedro's average numbers and multiply them by the number of years that Roger Clemens played. Pedro's numbers would dwarf Roger Clemens.

Also Pedro has never once been accused of taking steroids—you can tell by looking at a picture of him in his rookie year and comparing it to a picture of him this year. When you do the same with Roger Clemens, you can tell the difference in body shape and body mass.

Watching Pedro pitch recently is like watching Greg Maddux or Tom Glavine. A complete finesse pitcher.

Due to injuries he has lost most of the heat on his fastball—it usually tops out in the high 80s.

But his numbers are still comparable to the numbers he put up in his prime.

Even though he's had to completely change his game, relying now on his intelligence and variety of pitches to strike batters out. He has proved he can throw heat like Roger Clemens, and he can also strike you out without even topping 90 on the radar gun. Take away Clemens' fastball, and he would be mediocre at best.

Pedro had no weaknesses pitching-wise. When I compare him to other pitchers in their primes, he is the only one in my mind that does not have a single weakness on the mound.

He has all the intangibles, and has gotten everything out of them that he possibly could. In my mind, that is what determines true greatness.

What is wrong with the Oakland Raiders? How can they fix it?

Randy Ratliff — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 20:07:17 -0400

What is wrong with the Oakland Raiders? The reason for the last few extremely disappointing seasons starts with Jon Gruden. I'm not saying that Jon Gruden is a bad coach. I think he is a great coach. I loved how he turned the Raiders around. It is just that his plan for the raiders was to build to win over a one to two year period. He loaded the team with aging stars who wanted one last shot at the super bowl. He almost got them there. I'm positive the Raiders would have won the super bowl if he would have stayed. And I still think that we should have beat the patriots in the infamous tuck rule game.

After Gruden left, the freefall began. Their aging stars got older and less effective, combine that with the terrible string of coaching hires. And their inability to motivate and unite the team created the leagues largest laughing stock. Bill Callahan took them to the super bowl by using Jon Grudens playbook word for word. He didn't bother to change anything when he faced gruden in the super bowl. Coach Gruden knew every single play the raiders ran, and promptly ran them into the ground. The Raiders have not recovered since then.

They brought Norv Turner in to change things. With his reserved, laid back style of coaching he failed to change things in Oakland. I don't think it was completely his fault. He was just in the wrong situation. Take a look at the job he is doing in San Diego. It just goes to show that when a team hires a coach, they need to make sure he is a good fit with the system they run. In the Raiders case, they needed a coach to come in and from day one change the way things were ran. Someone who could motivate players, and get them to work as a team and believe they could win games. Norv Turner just sat back and let things continue to crumble in his two years. Turner was then fired.

The next year brought in Art Shell. A former raiders lineman and hall of famer. He proved that the NFL was a young mans game. It was obvious that he had lost touch of the game. He also decided to bring in offensive coordinator Tom Walsh. Who had been out of football for even longer. He had been running a bed and breakfast the last seven years. The offense subsequently suffered. As they failed to utilize Randy Moss, the best receiver in the game. Art Shell also tried to be an old school, "drill Sargent" type of coach. He treated the players like children, and created an atmosphere in which the players did not want to win for him. The raiders finished with the worst record in the league at 2-14. Everyone in Raider Nation was embarrassed by the team Al Davis had put on the field.

But in my opinion the team has made significant strides in the last year. Al Davis went back to what he does best. Developing young coaches. He hired Lane Kiffin out of USC. I think he made a great choice. It was obvious the attitude around the team has changed drastically. The players look like they are excited to play. They know a winning franchise is in the works. The raiders have also done a great job in the draft the last couple of years. We have our quarterback of the future in Jamarcus Russell. As opposed to some of the articles written on this topic. I think Russell is the real deal. First of all he can throw the ball eighty yards off of his back foot. But I know that being a great quarterback is about more than just being able to throw a football through a brick wall. I think he possesses the poise, the brains, and the ability to stay cool under pressure and make intelligent decisions in the clutch. I remember watching the bowl game against Notre Dame. I watched him thoroughly outplay fellow first rounder Brady Quinn by throwing four touchdown passes. I believe that game skyrocketed him to the number one pick.

The addition of McFadden in this years draft will pay huge dividends, as the Raiders finally get the gamebreaker they have been lacking. He will make JaMarcus' job that much easier. I think he will win two or three games for us on his own this year. I know we were stockpiled with running backs. But none of them are as good as Darren McFadden. Hopefully we can trade a couple of them and get something decent in return.

The Raiders put a ton of money into injured free agents in the offseason. The biggest question marks will be Javon Walker and Tommy Kelley. If Walker stays healthy, we will finally have a true #1 receiver to team with Zach Miller, who was Russells favorite target in his first start. If Tommy Kelley can play at the level Warren Sapp told the Raiders he can, it will allow Rob Ryan to let out a sigh of relief in the Raiders weak run defense. I still think they need to add a stopper on the defensive line. It would be nice to see the Raiders make a trade for Jason Taylor, as it seems he will no longer be with Miami. But that might be a little far fetched.

All in all. I think the Raiders have had a productive offseason. The question is, will all the pieces fit? Taking a look at the Raiders schedule. They should be at least 8-8 by seasons end. If not, then they have no one to blame but themselves.