Bleacher Report - Articles by Ben Gunby

Atlanta: Not As Bad a Sports Town As You Think

Ben Gunby — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 21:00:16 -0500

The city of Atlanta is a major transplant city, and that is a huge reason you don't have the number of supposed die-hard fans of these sports teams. Sure, New York is also a transplant city, but they also boast many, many, many, MANY more people, of which more than enough are native New Yorkers. The state of Georgia as a whole does a fine job of supporting the local sports teams; the problem is though that those fans aren't readily able to attend the games in person. Within the confines of the city itself there is a void when it comes to those die-hard fans, and there are a couple of reasons as to why that is as well.

These "transplant" fans have their favorite teams from previous hometowns that they will live and die with. However, they become Atlanta fans by default, if Atlanta teams are winning. While they follow their favorite teams and support them through thick and thin, they only follow and support the Atlanta teams when it's the chic thing to do; in other words, when the teams are winning. Since they aren't passionately devoted to these local teams, they are only willing to fork over dough for tickets and really get involved in the teams when they are winning. Again, this problem isn't near as rampant in other areas of the state.

When winning though, the teams draw big crowds and garner plenty of support. When the Falcons are winning, the Georgia Dome is as raucous and loud a place to play as any in the NFL. Atlanta Fulton County Stadium was rocking nightly in the early 90s when the Braves were winning there. The Thrashers fans were quite vocal during the playoffs, even if their efforts were in vain. Lastly, you have to remember the largest crowd to watch an NBA game took place in Atlanta, and during the years of Dominique Wilkins, Mookie Blaylock and Steve Smith, the Hawks drew fairly well and were annually in the playoffs.

If these sports teams played their home games 40 minutes away from downtown, in most any direction, I think you'd see attendance numbers increase, regardless of performance. For example, I spent the first 12 years of my life in Gwinnett County Public Schools, living in a suburb just miles north of Atlanta. Few of my peers were fans of all the Atlanta teams. Everyone was a Braves fan, but not many were Falcons fans. A few more were Hawks fans, since at the time the Hawks were consistently a playoff team, but the trend was obvious.

I then moved an hour east of Atlanta, to the country, and suddenly discovered that all the sports fans there, if they had a favorite pro team, pulled for Atlanta. Maybe not all, but a great deal of them. As I've ventured to other parts of the state and created relationships with people, I've found this to be the case quite often. There are people and families who are Georgian all the way through, and they are some pretty ardent fans. The problem is, however, those people and families aren't within a close proximity to Atlanta.

Another reason for the lack of a strong fan base is tradition and history. There are fan bases in cities like Cincinnati, Cleveland, Chicago, and Boston who root for those teams and passionately support them win or lose. There is also a lot of tradition in those places. These Atlanta teams are relatively young, as none of them were in the city prior to the late 1960s. The Atlanta teams aren't able to benefit from having a long history, storied or not. They haven't had decades and decades of a sports team for fans to pass on their love of these teams to the next generation.

The media may also be to blame. For instance, fans of teams back in the first half of the 20th century could only follow their team. There was no ESPN and no nationally televised game of the week. There was no Extra Innings or NFL Sunday Ticket. The only team you could follow was your local team. Even if your team was awful, there was no other team you could support because you simply couldn't follow them. Thus, being the only team you could really pay a lot of attention to, your home team, by default, was YOUR team. Today, if your team stinks, it's easy to jump on the bandwagon of another as you have just as much access to their games and their news as you do your home team.

The fact that Atlanta teams didn't experience immediate success, or the Falcons couldn't sustain the success in the early 1980s helped with this issue as well. Had those teams experienced more immediate success, this problem might have been avoided. Alas, that wasn't the case. As a result, fans quickly tuned them out and latched on to the bandwagons of teams all around the country. Now, years in which Atlanta teams succeed, fans will pull for them, though not as feverishly as true die-hard fans.

So, considering the lack of immediate success, the lack of tradition, and the number of people living in Atlanta who are not originally from Atlanta, it's no wonder the fan support within the city and its surrounding areas isn't as strong as you may find in other places. This doesn't make Atlanta a bad sports town. It's actually one of the greatest sports towns in the entire country. The number of sports fans in Atlanta is very high, the interest is high, and there is quite a variety of fans, flags, and team colors you see driving along the highway. This makes for great sports conversation and some unique sports watching experiences at different sports bars around the city.

Maybe the interest in the local teams isn't quite as high as one would like, at least not within the city, but it's a situation that can't really be helped. The city supports its teams well enough, as does the state, and when they win the fans can be as great as anywhere in the country. It is unfortunate though that we don't have the die-hard types that other cities have to keep the teams up when their performance is down, but this doesn't make the city the worst sports town in the country. Now, performance wise, you might have an argument, but from a fan's perspective, I don't think so.

College Basketball: Faults at the Top

Ben Gunby — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:06:28 -0500

San Antonio may very will wind up covered in blue when the NCAA tournament concludes this season. Memphis, UCLA, North Carolina, Duke, and Kansas—four of the nation's top five teams—have the color in common. However, blue might actually be a more accurate description of the way some of these teams will feel as March concludes. None of the nation's top teams are without faults.

In fact, the top two—Duke and Memphis—have such glaring weaknesses that it would be hard to say they are really even favorites to be cutting down the nets in San Antonio.

You would think that championship caliber basketball teams don't miss 20 free throws in one single game, but Memphis did against UTEP earlier this season. You would think championship caliber teams would be able to easily put away an opponent when holding a double digit lead in the game's final minutes, but, if the Memphis Tigers are indeed a true championship caliber basketball team, you would be wrong.

No Memphis lead is safe thanks to the opportunity their dreadful free throw shooting provieds opponents. This will certainly be the case in March. Inevitably, their pourous free throw shooting will catch up to them. As good as the Tigers are on the defensive end, from beyong the arc, and on the boards, it's their inability to execute one of the most fundamental aspects of basketball that will be their undoing.

Take their most recent tilt with Houston for example. The Tigers won by nine points, a margin that should have been much larger. However, when you go to the free throw line 32 times and miss 13 of those shots, you're leaving a lot of points at the door for your opponent to take advantage of.

Thus far, nobody has been able to fully walk through the numerous doors left open by the Tigers, but you've got to think it's coming. By the time we hit March and some of the nation's top teams (which are not found in Conference USA, by the way) are playing at their best, somebody will be ready to capitalize on the Tigers' major shortcomings.

Only one Tiger is shooting above 70 percent from the charity stripe. Memphis can't even put a couple of reliable guys on the floor late in games to keep the ball in their hands and help ice away basketball games.

John Calipari will face quite a few major decisions late in games about which five guys to put on the floor. Leading rebounder Joey Dorsey shoots below 40 percent from the line. Can you afford to have that kind of liability out there? At the same time, don't you want your best rebounder on the court at the close of games to prevent opponents from getting multiple shots per possession?

The Tigers leading scorer, Chris Douglas-Roberts, and primary ball handler, Derrick Rose, both shoot below 70 percent as well. Factor in that Rose is a freshman and you've got to wonder how the Tigers are going to handle late game situations.

Memphis is as talented as any team in America. They are great defensively, in transition, and in the half court. However, their free throw woes are just too much of an eyesore to really buy a lot of stock in this team. These free throw problems don't seem to be very correctable either.

The Duke Blue Devils are the other of the nation's top two teams and, while their flaw may not be as egregious as the one Memphis boasts, their style of play doesn't bode well for a deep run in March. It might seem odd to suggest a team that has lost only once all year doesn't play a style conducive to winning six straight games in March, but upon closer examination it makes sense.

Duke and Coach K have adopted a rather new identity. The days of Elton Brand, Carlos Boozer, and Josh McRoberts are gone. These Devils like to run and shoot, and a lot of that shooting takes place from beyond the three point line.While that lends to an extremely exciting style of play, one made for big runs to put teams away or to bring themselves back into games they were seemingly out of, a reliance on this style of play can also lead to an early exit in March.

In March the defenses will be better and the number of open shots will decrease. Five Dukies currently nail three pointers at a clip of 39 percent or better, a most impressive feat. However, nobody on the roster averages more than one block or six rebounds per game. It takes balance to win national titles, something Duke is seriously lacking.

What happens when their shooters go cold? What happens when their opponent is able to dictate the pace of play by protecting the basketball and making it a half court game? Does Duke have the ability to win such a battle? If the game gets physical, do the Devils have the ability to scrap their way to wins if their shooters aren't carrying the day?These are questions the Devils hope to be able to answer yes to, but they've still got a lot to prove.

There is no question that Memphis and Duke are two of the most talented teams in college basketball, if not the most talented. However, it would be foolish to go ahead and pronounce them Final Four combatants. While both certainly have the ability to make it to San Antonio, both also have flaws that are pronounced enough to cast doubt on their ability to get past the second weekend.

Forgotten Greatness: The 1999 St. Louis Rams

Ben Gunby — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 10:44:02 -0500

On a certain network’s morning radio show, the two co-hosts were dissecting a list compiled by another major media outlet of the NFL's ten all-time greatest single season teams in league history. I’m not here to address the make-up of the list, or the validity of it. I’m here to address the response to one of the teams on this particular list. I'm here to debunk this myth that the 1999 St. Louis Rams were just some offensive juggernaut who have no place among the great NFL champions of years past. I’m not here to go on a case by case study of where exactly those Rams should fall on such a list, but rather that their inclusion is not as absurd as was implied.

Offensively, nobody in their right mind could question anyone’s inclusion of the “Greatest Show on Turf” as among the greatest offensive units the game of football has ever seen. While there have been many other teams with great duos (Montana and Rice), trios (Aikman, Irvin, Smith) and quartets (Bradshaw, Stallworth, Swann, Harris), perhaps no team had the number of truly explosive playmakers this Rams team possessed. Kurt Warner and Marshal Faulk’s 1999 seasons were among the greatest ever by a player at their respective positions, and they so came from two teammates in the same season. Furthermore, unlike great statistical seasons put together by quarterback/receiver duos (Brady and Moss, Montana and Rice), this was a running back/quarterback duo in which case the statistics of one don’t directly affect the stats of the others. Granted, Faulk’s 1,000 plus yards receiving certainly come in large part due to Kurt Warner, however, much of what Faulk did as a receiver was more the product of the system, the play calling, and Faulk’s incredible skills with the ball in his hands.

Warner’s impact was obviously felt with the incredible numbers put up via the pass catchers for the Rams during that 1999 campaign. Az-Zahir Hakim battled Ricky Proehl and tight end Roland Williams for the role of fourth option in this passing offense. A testament to how deadly this offense truly was is the fact that despite being option number four, Hakim still caught eight touchdown passes, only two more than Williams.

These Rams though weren’t just blessed with perhaps the greatest overall complement of skill players the NFL has ever seen, they were blessed with talented players up front. Adam Timmerman and Tom Nutten were both more than a solid choice on the offensive front, but the line’s anchor, Orlando Pace, will go down in history as one of the greatest offensive linemen to ever strap up a chinstrap.

On offense alone, the Rams were as great as any team ever. Whether that’s from a production, statistical, or talent standpoint. Additionally, being a great team of such elite greatness requires the other side of the ball to carry it’s weight, and this is where most misconceptions of the Rams exist. For some reason, people seem to assume this Rams team was mediocre, or slightly above average, at best, on defense. Where these assumptions are derived from is beyond me, and beyond anyone else who bothered to actually pay attention to this team.

People seem quick to forget, overlook, or ignore, the fact that no team in the NFL allowed fewer points than the Rams, and no team allowed fewer overall yards than the Rams. They were 9^th in turnover differential as well. Only five times all season did a team rush for more than 75 yards against the Rams defense, and only three had more than 350 yards of offense in a single game (conversely, the Rams reached that mark 11 times)

This was a defense that was good enough to have future all-pros Dre Bly and Leonard Little used primarily as reserves or in specialist roles. Todd Lyght and Dexter McCleon combined for ten interceptions at the cornerback positions. London Fletcher had 90 tackles at linebacker and Mike Jones provided equal quality of a player. Defensive lineman Grant Wistrom and D’Marco Farr combined for 15 sacks, while Kevin Carter had 17 on his own.

Jeff Wilkens was a solid kicker, and Tony Horne and the aforementioned Akim ran back a combined three kickoffs and punts for touchdowns, meaning the scoring wasn’t limited to just the offense. Their special teams coverage units weren’t top notch in the NFL, but you would be hard pressed to call them a liability.

In addition to the incredible amount of talent dispersed through all phases of the game, the Rams had another earmark of a great team. They had a great head coach. Dick Vermeil’s place may not be on the Mt. Rushmore of NFL coaches, but he certainly hashed out a very good NFL career in a variety of places.

The Rams proved they could win by whatever means necessary. They needed lots of points to get out of their first playoff game, and they got them (49 against the Vikings). In their ensuing two they had to rely on defense, and they did, allowing a combined 22 points to the Buccaneers and Titans as they closed their Super Bowl run. Nobody scored more points, allowed fewer, gained more yards, allowed fewer, or won more games in 1999 than the St. Louis Rams. They won 12 games over the course of the season by 16 points or more. What more does a team have to do to be mentioned among the greats of all-time? Perhaps the more appropriate question is just what more CAN a team do?

Crank 'Em Up: NASCAR Set for Preseason Thunder

Ben Gunby — Sun, 06 Jan 2008 10:12:37 -0500

Quick pop quiz: What happens tomorrow, January 7th, that should captivate the sports world? No, I'm not talking about the mythical national championship game between LSU and Ohio State. I'm talking about the beginning of "Preseason Thunder" down at Daytona, as NASCAR gets ready to crank out a new season.

No offseason in any sport, besides perhaps golf, is as short as the one NASCAR drivers and teams get—and no season, again, besides golf, is as long and grueling as the one teams on the Nextel Sprint Cup Series face. The grind begins tomorrow afternoon, with roughly half of the teams that plan to field a car in the Daytona 500 taking to the track for the first time this winter in preparation for the 50th running of The Great American Race.

Preseason testing usually doesn't tell you much about the upcoming season; it's really only a gauge for who you can expect to contend for the pole for the Daytona 500. With qualifying and race trim so drastically different at Daytona, it doesn't do a lot usually to tell you who is going to contend for the victory in the race either. There are of course the drafting sessions to give you an idea—but even then, if you don't actually watch the testing session and rely instead solely on a speed chart, you can't tell a whole lot.

What the testing does do is give fans a good tease, as it tantalizes them with the roar of engines and the sights of the machines on the track. It also gives teams a chance to work out some of the rust from the offseason. Most importantly, it gives teams who experienced change in the offseason—and boy were there a lot of them—a chance to work together and start developing chemistry, which is crucial in this sport.

So, okay, maybe my first paragraph was a slight exaggeration...but that doesn't diminish the excitement and anticipation with which NASCAR fans await each new season. There are plenty of storylines to follow this year, which I'll touch on more as things progress. The big news, for now, is that it's time to see cars on the track—and they will be tomorrow afternoon down at the World Center of Racing. It's about time.

ACC: America's Conference of Comedy

Ben Gunby — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 15:50:31 -0500

Is there a worse BCS conference in America than the Atlantic Coast Conference? You'd be hard pressed to prove that one comes close.

Yes, I know, Wake Forest beat UConn, supposedly the second best team in the Big East, but at this point in the season, an argument can be made that Wake just might be the third or so best team in the ACC, so it's not like an ACC lightweight (and I use that term relatively here) beat a Big East heavyweight.

Take into account the ACC hasn't won a BCS bowl since Florida State's win in the Sugar Bowl in 2000, following the 1999 season. No ACC team besides Florida State has won one of the big bowls, which I'll include the Cotton, at least thru 1994, as a part of, since Clemson won the 1982 Orange Bowl. Granted, this could be somewhat skewered by the fact that the 1990 National Champion Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets played in the Citrus Bowl while Virginia accepted an early invite to the Sugar. Even so, it's been over 25 years since a team from the ACC not named Florida State has won a BCS bowl. Can you be any more putrid than that?

So why does the ACC have an automatic berth in the BCS? What has the league done to deserve it? The only bit of credibility the ACC has on the football stage no longer exists, that credibility being the Florida State Seminoles. The Seminoles descent to mediocrity, and ascension into a program full of off-field scandals has the ACC with absolutely no program to hang their hat on. It's not bad enough that for the duration of the 90's and the early part of this decade they were a one team league, now they've become a zero team league.

When the ACC snatched Miami, Virginia Tech, and Boston College away from the Big East it was supposed to signify the ACC's coming of age, and becoming a power conference. These additions were supposed to drastically alter the landscape of college football. Well, those additions did alter the landscape of college football, but certainly not in the manner the ACC and it's presidents and its schools had hoped. While the Big East has won a BCS game in each of the past three years (beating the SEC, ACC, and Big XII champions in doing so) the ACC is still searching for it's first BCS win since January 4, 2000. Just imagine how bad this league would be without Boston College and Virginia Tech. Who would have been ACC champions this year? Clemson? Wake Forest again?

While Wake Forest was a nice story last year, there is a reason you don't see many stories like that in college football. It's that in the majority of major conferences, for the majority of seasons, the play within the conference is at too high of a level for such a team to shock everyone and win the conference. While they may pull off a shocker or two over the course of the year, being able to do so over the course of an entire season just proves too difficult. Take Kentucky in the SEC for example. They had a team very much like Wake Forest last year, but yet, in each of the last two seasons they've played in second or third tier bowls because of the level of play of the conference they call home. Were they in the ACC, they'd probably have been to Jacksonville at least once in the past two seasons.

So while West Virginia was off thumping the Big XII champion in the Fiesta Bowl, Virginia Tech was losing to a team who didn't even qualify for the Big XII championship game. While the final score of that game said the Hokies lost by just three points, Kansas really dominated that football game. Just as Louisville dominated Wake Forest the year before.

The ACC champion hasn't finished the year ranked higher than 10th since Florida State was in the top 5 following their loss to Oklahoma in the national championship game following the 2000 season. That was the last time an ACC team finished in the top 5.

So why does this league have an automatic berth in the BCS? What have they done to deserve it? The league champion of the ACC time and time again comes up short in comparisons to the champions of the other BCS conferences, so why do they deserve to have this champion guaranteed a spot among the nation's elite bowl games? It's clear that the ACC champion isn't among the nation's elite teams.

Something else to think about is this: Florida State's win in that Sugar Bowl came against Virginia Tech, now a member of the ACC. Just a bit of irony that only adds to the gloom and doom that is ACC football.