Bleacher Report - Articles by Stephen Noffke

Home Field Advantage for the World Series

Stephen Noffke — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 17:26:00 -0400

Home Field Advantage

Alright so I am sure you’ve heard it before, but why should MLB’s All-Star determine home field advantage in the World Series. I say, why not, it’s as good as anything else out there. I know most of you are probably thinking, what is he talking about? Well I’ll get into all the pros and cons of using the All-Star game as well as show you that there really is no good way to determine home field advantage.

Current Format

Winner of All-Star Game Gets Home Field Advantage.

Sounds simple enough, whatever league’s best players are better gets to have their league host the World Series. Well, as we all know there is a major flaw in this, not all of the league’s best players make the All-Star game. With fan voting and every team needing an All-Star (Full disclosure, I like every team being represented and hate fan voting) some inferior players make the All-Star team. Also, the game is an exhibition and the game is still treated that way.

No manager is going to throw Roy Halladay for nine innings in an All-Star game to guarantee home field advantage. At most I expect to see a pitcher only pitch three innings tonight. Also, all the All-stars get rotated out in situations they normally wouldn’t. Would Manuel really bench Albert Pujols in a real game the way he is hitting right now? No. but because it’s an exhibition they will.

So clearly the current format has flaws. Let’s look at other ways they’ve used to determine home field advantage.

Team with Most Wins Gets Home Field Advantage.

Another plan that sounds simple enough. This is how the reward home field advantage in every other major professional sport’s playoffs, including MLB until the World Series. There is a flaw though. Without getting into the debate of which brand of baseball is better or which league of baseball is better, but there are some years where the AL is better then the NL and years when the NL is better then the AL.

With the recent dominance of the AL in both the All-Star game and Inter-league play we can assume the AL is better. So would it be fair to give the Dodgers home field advantage over the Red Sox? The Dodgers might have more wins then the Red Sox at the end of the season, but they did so beating inferior teams while the Red Sox had to play a more difficult schedule. So should number of wins be used? Again it is flawed.

Home Field Advantage Switches Every Year.

To avoid dilemma just mentioned, MLB used to just switch off who hosted World Series. At this time, outside of the All-Star game, this is the only time the NL and the AL would go head to head. There was no real way to determine which league was better and made number of wins tougher to compare.

So what did baseball do? 1 year AL hosted, the next year NL hosted. Now this might sound dumb, but it might actually be the most fair in the long run. Yes an AL would be upset when an NL team hosted an vice versa, but that same AL team would not be complaining if it was an AL year. Again another flawed way to determine home field advantage, but as I am sure you are starting to see, they all are.

So these have been done in the past, what other ways could be used to determine home field advantage. These are suggestions that I have heard.

Team with the Better Inter League Record Gets Home Field Advantage.

One team is better against the other league so they should get home field. This is again flawed. What happens if both teams go 10-5? Do they then use margin of victory? If they do that, then they are turning into College Football and saying the two wins are not equal?

Another way it’s flawed is the regional match ups. Is it fair that the Yankees and Mets, two recently traditionally good teams play each other six times in inter league play while the Cardinals and the Royals, with the Cardinals being traditionally good and as of late the Royals have not, play six times? Of course not, no two inter league schedule are the same.

League with Better Inter League Record Gets Home Field Advantage.

This has a much lower probability of ties and significantly reduces the advantages and disadvantages from regional play. This would create even more ratings for inter league, especially on the last weekend in a close race. This also is a better representation of which league is better during that season then the All-Star game. But there are some issues with this as well. Let’s use the Baltimore and Washington series as an example. This year, neither is likely to have much of a chance in the World Series race.

This can be a pro, because even though this game is pretty meaningless to both teams playoffs hopes, it means something for their leagues playoffs hopes. The con though is, why should these two teams effect what happens to contenders for the World Series?

Neutral Location/2-2-1-1-Nuetral Location

So this got a lot of headlines last year with the weather delays in Philadelphia. MLB trying to create a Super Bowl type atmosphere at a neutral location. The big problem with this is it takes at least one week to play the World Series. Are fans going to be able to take that much time off to make the trip? Can they afford a week of hotels? Can the fans of the clubs get the time off and get the hotels on such quick notice? I do not think so. So the event will be just like the Super Bowl, very corporate and very dead in the crowd. The fun of being a fan is seeing your own team play in it’s own ball park in front of it’s own fans. This can not be done with a full neutral location.

Instead of doing a full neutral location, what about make game seven neutral? This would be a much better alternative for the neutral location suggestion cause both teams can play in front of their own crowds and then have a big event at the end to determine the winner. A few problems though, how do you determine who gets games one, two and five at home? I personally would like to see games one, two and five at home, but others might find it better to have three, four and six. So how do you decided this? This then leads to the debate of possibilities of everything that has already been discussed and now we are going in circles.

Clearly, every suggestion for home field advantage is flawed, some more so then others. I personally think the simplest is the most fair; Alternate years. Even though I know I’d be pissed if the White Sox made it to the World Series that happened to be in an NL year, but overall I think it is the least flawed suggestion. I think the most fun World Series would come from the 2-2-1-1-Nutral Location suggestion if we could determine which games are played where.

I am sure there are millions of opinions out there, so what do you think? Let me know.

Ode to College Football

Stephen Noffke — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:14:00 -0400

I Love College Football.

I love Marching Bands and Fight Songs

I Love Howard’s Rock and Running Down the Hill

I love hating the Men of Troy and watching the University of Troy

I love the Mad Scientist

I love Hurricanes that are Golden or found in Miami

I love War Eagle and Smurf Turf

I love Bucky and Brutus

I love Go Blue and Roll Tide

I love Uga and Mike the Tiger

I love the Swamp, The Rock and the Big House

I love Joe Pa and his Glasses

I love Free Shoes University

I love every Death Valley and every Memorial Stadium

I love Tailgaiting in the Grove and Tailgaiting in the 5th quarter

I love dotting the I at the Horseshoe

I love the World’s Biggest Drum

I love the Triple Option and Spread HD

I love the Orange of Syracuse and the Orange Bowl

I love the Mean Green and Green Wave

I love Locker Rooms that are Pink

I love Herbie the Husker

I love the Holy War, the Boarder War and the Civil War

I love The Egg Cup and the Apple Cup

I love Country Roads and Jump Around

I love the World’s Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party

I love the Sooner Schooner and Chief Oscela

I love The Iron Bowl and the Black and Blue Bowl

I love the Fremont Cannon and Iron Skillet.

I love drinking on the Tennessee River and Lake Washington

I love the Battle of I-10, I-25 and I-75 and the War on I-4

I love “In Heaven There is No Beer”

I love College Game Day and Corso’s Hats

I love Duel in the Desert and the Friends of Coal Bowl

I love the Third Saturday in September and the Third Saturday in October

I love “We Are Penn State”

I love the Beehive Boot and the Bronze Boot

I love the Red River Shootout and the River City Rivalry

I love the Hiesman

I love the Blackshirts and Scarlet Knights

I love Boomer Sooners and Rock Chalk Jayhawk

I love Stewart Mandel and his Mailbag

I love the Back Yard Brawl and Clean Old Fashion Hate

I love the Golden Dome and Touchdown Jesus

I love Rocky Top and Running through the T

I love Yell Practice and the 12th Man

I love Cadets and the Midshipmen

I love Bevo and Ralphie

I love Aztecs, Illini and Utes

I love the Platypus Trophy and The Peace Pipe

I love Hail to the Victors and the Notre Dame Victory March

I love Dixie and the Battle Hymm

I love all of Oregon’s different Jerseys

I love the Keg of Nails and the Milk Can

I love Smelling Roses

I love Hawai’i starting at 12 PM ET

I love the Steel tire and all the Victory Bells

I love the Old Oaken Bucket and Paul Buyan’s Ax

And who cares if it’s imperfect: I love the BCS

The Other Bears Offensive Captain Is...

Stephen Noffke — Mon, 18 May 2009 10:11:33 -0400

Now that the draft has come and gone, I have been starting to think more and more about the upcoming Bears season. I started thinking about the Bears captains and I am pretty sure who all of them will be, except for one that stumped me.

I started with the Defense. Brian Urlacher has been wearing the C on his chest since they started that trend. The other one is most likely going to be Adewale Ogunleye who has been filling the role off and on depending on Mike Brown’s Health. So he is a likely candidate to take that over on a full time basis.

Patrick Mannelly was special teams captain last year and is back for another year. He is still one of the best long snappers in the league (if you’ve never been there, check out his website at www.longsnapper.com) and I see no reason why he wouldn’t resume his duties this year.

That brings us to offense. Like Urlacher, Kruetz has been wearing the C on his chest since the NFL started wearing them. Also from what I heard, Kruetz runs the team in the locker room. So he is another lock for the C.

So who is going to be the other captain? Last season it was Captain Neck Beard, but he is gone now, so let’s look at the possible candidates and then I will rank them in order from most likely to least likely in my opinion.

QBs

Quarterbacks are always a logical place to look. They are always called leaders on the field and regardless if they are or not, they are the ones telling everyone what to do in the huddle. Also, QBs are traditionally some of the smartest players on the field. So it makes logical since that a lot of quarterbacks are captains around the league.

Jay Cutler was a captain last season in Denver, so he has experience with the responsibilities. This is his first year with the team and it is yet to be seen how he will gel with the teammates.

It’s not that I predict them to not get along, but more about will he come in and assert himself as a leader immediately or will he go in and take a more laid back role; let the already established locker room leaders continue to lead with him self just being a part of the whole?

RBs

Matt Forte seems like a great locker room guy and did all the right things last year as a rookie. In his second year is he really ready to step up and take the leadership role and become a captain.

Even though my friend Ryan disagrees, I am still concerned he might have a sophomore slump, I am just hoping not as bad as A-Train, and if he does he might have to figure things out for himself. I feel like he could do it, but I don’t think the team will select a sophomore to be captain.

WRs

Well the Bears have a lot of these to choose from. However, honestly is there any wide receiver in the bunch you see as a possible candidate? I don’t see Hester nor Davis as captain material quite yet. If you disagree feel free to let me know, but I’m moving on.

TEs

The Bears arguably have the best TE’s in football and when I was discussing who was going to be the Bears’ Offensive captain with my bride-to-be Jamie, we found this to be an intriguing position. Greg Olson is the best pass catching tight end in the group and has a lot of natural leadership abilities. I honestly believe he is captain material but only going into his third year, I don’t see him getting the honor.

Desmond Clark is the best all around TE of the group and has always done whatever the Bears have asked him to do. After the Super Bowl season, everyone was trying to find out where the Bears needed to improve after such a solid year. One spot that kept coming up was the TE position.

Des Clark heard all this talk during the off-season and didn’t make a fuss about it. The Bears then drafted Olson, which meant less playing time and catches for Clark. Again Clark did what he was told because he knew it was the best for the team. Clark is very outgoing and has a great relationship with the fans and media, he even co-host a talk show on ESPN1000.

I feel that Des Clark would be an excellent choice, but the question is can a TE really be a captain. With more and more teams spreading out the field, TEs are on the field less and less. I honestly don’t think this matters, and there are two captains on the field for a reason.

O-Line

The biggest reason I see the other captain spot not going to an o-lineman is because Kreutz is already a captain. I always heard that Kreutz and Fred Miller (when he was still around) ran the locker room, however Miller was never named captain. There is no rule that two players from the same position can’t be captains and there are two other good choices on the O-line.

The first is Orlando Pace. He can provide the veteran leadership that is needed on every team and his credentials of countless pro bowls give him credibility when dealing with teammates, coaches, and refs.

As mentioned with Cutler, this is his first year on the team and it is yet to be seen what kind of role he is going to take on. However, he has played in the league longer then Cutler and his experience might make him better captain material.

The other choice would be Roberto Garza. Roberto has been playing next to Kreutz for the last couple of season and has established himself with solid play and work ethic. I don’t see Garza being a vocal leader like Ed Reed or Ray Lewis, but more of a lead by example. Lead by doing the extra work required to make the team better. Plus, he was a Madden cover boy last year, that has to count for something right?

So who is going to be the Bears other captain? Here is my list from most likely to least likely:

Jay Cutler
Orlando Pace
Roberto Garza
Desmond Clark
Greg Olson
Matt Forte
Devin Hester

I personally would like the captain’s C to go to Clark and if not Clark then Pace. Not that I don’t love Jay Cutler, because I do, but I’d like to have him have a solid transition year before making this team his next year and hopefully many years to come.

Who do you want to see as captain? Did I forget anybody? Let me know below.

This article can also be found at armchairsuperstar.blogspot.com

Derrick Rose: Why Everyone Should Love Him

Stephen Noffke — Fri, 08 May 2009 11:19:00 -0400

Derrick Rose put the Bulls back on the map this season.

The first-overall pick won Rookie of the Year, and played a fantastic first-round series that went all the way to a Game Seven against the defending champs.

Some are calling it the best first-round series ever. (I can live with that, although I would prefer calling it the greatest best-of-seven first round series ever.)

But these are just some of Rose's accomplishments in his rookie year.

However, all his accomplishments pale in comparison to the first day after his rookie season. The day after the Chicago Bulls' 2008-2009 season ended, Derrick Rose was back in Chicago—practicing at the Berto Center!

Why is this a big deal, you ask? Well, it’s what we always ask our athletes to do—care and continue to work hard to improve their game.

It would have been very easy for Derrick to take some time off. And honestly, who could blame him?

He went from a University of Memphis team that played 40 games the year before to a season where he played 89 games. That’s more than double.

Also, when you include the fact that NBA games are eight minutes longer than the college game, the additional minutes on the body start to add up.

So Derrick had every reason to be tired and to take a few days off—but he didn’t. He very easily could have followed the path of Bulls teammate Joakim Noah, and went back to college for a few days (which didn’t work out to well for Mr. Noah). But he did not—he went back to work.

He knows he needs to work on his jump shot and that’s what he’s doing. Too often we hear the bad stories, like Noah’s, in sports and don’t praise athletes enough for doing what we as fans want, and expect our favorite players to do.

I for one love the fact that Derrick Rose is back in the gym—and for that reason, I will always be a fan of his.

Letter to David Stern: NBA Needs to Make up for Refs Mistakes

Stephen Noffke — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:24:00 -0400

This is an actual letter I sent to David Stern:

David Stern

First off I would like to say how much I have enjoyed watching the Boston Celtics and Chicago Bulls playoff series.

I consider myself a casual NBA fan at best. However after last night’s games I am questioning whether I will ever watch, none the less attend, another NBA game again. I know this isn’t the reason the Bulls lost the game but Rajon Rondo’s foul at the end of the game was a blatant shot at Brad Miller’s head making no play on the ball. I understand that it’s a fast game and the refs have little time to react, but with time to look at the tape, if the NBA does not have some kind of punishment on Rondo I will never watch an NBA game again.

Then on top of that foul, I saw highlights of the Philadelphia 76ers and Orlando Magic game where Dwight Howard also gets away with a flagrant foul makes me question the legitimacy of NBA reffing.

Seeing two calls like this makes me think that Tim Donaghy isn’t the only ref with a hidden agenda. These types of calls make it look like the NBA is allowing their referees to dictate the NBA’s preferred match ups of Boston vs. Orlando, Boston vs. LA, Cleveland vs. LA, and Boston vs. Cleveland to improve their ratings. Well I know if these fouls go unpunished, there will be one household that will not be tuned in to any of these match ups.

Stephen Noffke

Double Headers: Day-Night or Back to Back, Which Is Better?

Stephen Noffke — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 14:44:00 -0400

Today the Chicago White Sox and Seattle Mariners are competing in an event that has become rare.

The two teams will be playing a back to back doubleheader with game two starting 30 minutes after game one. I know I have heard a lot of people complain that this doesn’t happen as much as it should anymore, and that doubleheaders are a great part of the sport.

I also have heard about some of my friends and talking heads on the radio and TV complaining about how long back to back doubleheaders are and how they didn’t stay for all of the games. So which side is right on the debate; day night or back to back?

Well let’s take a look a the pros and cons of each.

The number one reason a team elects to do a day-night doubleheader is cash. The day—night double header allows two games to be played in one day with the team still receiving two gates worth of cash. This is not possible in a back to back game since all the fans remain in the ball park during the break.

Along with the gate, some of the fans won’t go to both the day and night games. This means that a whole new group of people will be coming into the stadium to buy merchandise and food from stadium vendors. This is good for the team, but bad for the fans.

I’m sure you have seen many articles about the topic over the course of the year, especially with the economy. Yes, it is expensive to attend games today and having to pay twice in one day is something most fans do not want to do.

The best reason for the back to back games is for fans is it’s a buy one, get one free scenario.

Fans will pay the price for one game and get two. Teams will be bothered by the loss of gate, but there is still down time between games where the fans have nothing better to do then walk around the ball park and spend cash. This overlap could account for some gains in the loss of the gate.

There is also a theory that says if fans were to receive free tickets they would more likely to be willing to spend extra money on parking and concessions. The same situation occurs here since fans are getting two games for one.

Along with cash, the length is more ideal. Both the MLB and NCAA have looked into ways to shorten baseball games. The reason is they feel that games are too long to hold the attention of an average fan for the course of a three hour event.

If MLB and the NCAA think 1 game is too long, how do they view two games?

Two games back to back is a long time to sit and watch baseball in the stadium or at home. At home it’s convenient to just change the channel, but if you are at the stadium that means the fans would have to arrive late or leave early neither of which MLB teams want.

Now even though the back to back situation may take too long, fans are happy that they at least have the option of staying or going. A fan who is planning on staying and watching both games doesn’t have to leave and come back, while the fan who only wants to watch one game can watch whatever game they please and leave when they want.

Beside MLB teams caring about their fans, they are also concerned about their players. Even though four to eight hours of rest isn’t the same as a good nights rest, it allows players to rest more. This can allow them to get injuries looked at, stretch out more, and prevent them from pushing to hard by playing through an injury and making it worse.

However, in the back to back scenario players are already stretched out and warmed up. By continuing play it can prevent them from tightening up. Also the rest is beneficial for bullpen pitchers, there is a chance that a pitcher will need to throw in both games. Managers might hesitate to bring in their best set up man in game two if he already pitched in the first game three hours earlier.

As you can see there are some advantages and disadvantages of the day-night doubleheader, the back to back also has good aspects as well bad aspects. So which one is better?

For me, I have to say I would prefer the back to back. I know this might have negative effects on my team. I know that it is a long time to go and watch a game. If I have the time for it, I would love to do so; and if I don’t have the time for it, as discussed before, I can leave when I want.

Very few things sound better then sitting outside on a sunny day enjoying baseball for hours on end.

I do see and understand the reasons behind having a day-night doubleheader and I can’t disagree with them. One of my friends went to Sox Park for a day night double header and made it there for first pitch for game one. When the game ended he headed outside to his car where he spent the down time tailgaiting. Once game two was about to start, he packed up and headed back in to enjoy the second game.

He told me it was one of his best times at the ballpark. That sounds like an awesome time to me. I am not sure if they let you stay in the parking lot between games anymore, but if they do, that situation sounds just as appealing as the first.

So what do you think? What would you rather attend? I’m sure there are plenty of other good reason for and against each situation so let me know what you think.

Indiana Univeristy's Memorial Stadium Update

Stephen Noffke — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 11:56:00 -0400

So a friend of mine passed on this link to me today. It’s a video tour of how the construction of the north end zone at Memorial Stadium is progressing. It is coming along nicely and the exterior is expected to be finished by the start of the 2009 football season.

Now a lot of people out there have questioned, “Why should Indiana University expand its stadium? They don’t sell out games anyway.”

I was one of these people. When I heard first word of the potential idea of connecting the east and west parts of the stadium together during my freshman year (2003), my friend Tim and I would joke constantly about how the powers that be wanted IU to have a horseshoe to be just like Ohio State and its horseshoe.

Even with all the comments about the extra seats not being used. The major purpose of building this extension was not for the exterior seating. It was for the internal facilities to better prepare the team and bring in better recruits.

Among the new interior features that will appeal to recruits will be a new 24,000-square-foot weight room along with space for more classrooms/team meeting rooms as well as an auditorium, which can be used for film study and chalkboard instruction. Also, the expansion will house football administrators, including new offices for the coaching staff. (This and more information can be found here)

Well now that I’ve seen it progress, I have to say it is looking good and it does make the stadium look more stunning and pleasing to the eye.

Along with the improved look of the stadium, the new seats will serve a purpose. I am sure a good portion of those new seats will go unused for many games. However, any time Purdue, Ohio State, or Michigan comes to town, those seats will be sold out, even if it is to the opposing team’s fans. As bad as it might be to have the stadium filled with opposing teams' fans, it is still extra revenue for the athletic department, which it needs, and is a lot better then asking the students for an athletic fee.

All in all, I am exited for the new addition to be completed and think it will provide an excellent stepping stone for Indiana football going forward.

Let me know what you guys think of the new stadium.

Annual Cubs-Sox Wagers

Stephen Noffke — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:38:00 -0400

It’s time for an annual tradition: The Cubs-Sox Wagers! This is our fifth year doing it, which I believe has gone two for the White Sox, one for the Cubs, and one undecided (see below for reason).

So here’s the setup. To make the season a little more interesting, my friend Tim and I choose seven categories where we each pick the team or players from either the Cubs (Tim) or the Sox (Steve) for those categories. Whoever wins a majority of the categories wins. We do have a small prize but its more for the bragging rights.

Tim and I have had a discussion and here is a summary of what transpired.

Category 1

Steve: Alright, let’s do the easy one first. Season Series with runs as the tie-breaker.
Tim: Yup just like always.

CATEGORY 1: HEAD TO HEAD GAMES (RUNS AS TIEBREAKER)

STEVE HAS: WHITE SOX
TIM HAS: CUBS

Category 2

T: Home Runs. 2 Players.

S: This is a little bit of a tough one. I know I want Carlos Quentin, but the question is who I want going with him. I don’t trust Jermaine Dye even though he was pretty good last year. So it’s got to be Paulee or Thome.

T: Thome seems to be a solid pick despite his age, but you know he is slated for at least one DL trip. Once he has a back injury we all know that it never goes away.

S: Yeah, Just ask Mr. Joe Crede. But Thome is the DH, which I think helps his chances of avoiding injury. Plus Paulee’s thumb might give him trouble. Alright, I am going with Carlos and Thome.

T: I will choose Aramis Ramirez.

S: No surprise there.

T: The next one is kind of tough.

S: I was thinking you were going Soriano

T: Bradley has some power and Soriano’s a frontrunner.

S: Plus Bradley will have a little more protection then Soriano in the 1 hole.

T: D-Lee is out, and Soto won’t put up HR hitter numbers.

S: What, the 12 HRs he hit from June to the end of the year doesn’t impress you?

T: Not really, the 4 HR after the All-Star break is bad for a hitter like him. I am going to go with Soriano.

CATEGORY 2: MOST HOME RUNS BETWEEN 2 PLAYER

STEVE HAS: CARLOS QUENTIN & JIM THOME
TIM HAS: ARAMIS RAMIEREZ & ALFONSO SORIANO

Category 3

S: Three Pitchers. Wins.

T: Yup sounds good.

S: Mine are easy. Danks, Floyd, and Buehrle.

T: No hesitations there.

S: Nope put it in the books.

T: I think I’m going to go with Zambrano, Dempster, and Lilly.

S: Worried about Harden’s health?

T: I can’t count on Harden even though he has ace stuff. Marshall is still a 5th starter. Lilly has been solid for the Cubs and pitches well in big games. He went 9-0 two season ago after a loss. He also won 17 last year.

CATEGORY 3: MOST WINS BETWEEN 3 PITCHERS

STEVE HAS: JOHN DANKS, GAVIN FLOYD AND MARK BUEHRLE
TIM HAS: CARLOS ZAMBRANO, RYAN DEMPSTER AND TED LILLY

Category 4

S: Now that the staples are out of the way, what should the next ones be?

T: Saves, holds, errors, assists, steals: any of those tickle your fancy? (yes he actually said that)

S: Neither of us picked our 1B for home runs, so how about 1B triple crown stats?

T: I like that one.

S: Looking at this I would say Paulee has an advantage in home runs, but D. Lee has an advantage in Avg. So RBI’s will be key.

T: Yeah, done.

CATEGORY 4: 1B TRIPLE CROWN STATS (BEST 2 OF 3)

STEVE HAS: PAUL KONERKO
TIM HAS: DERREK LEE

Category 5

S: Saves?

T: That’s fine.

S: Gregg vs Jenks or something else?

T: Up to you.

S: I'll take it straight up, I’m not the team with the closer battle during spring training. Saying that, Jenks missed like 2-3 months last summer.

T: I think it will stay with Gregg, Lou likes to use Marmol in tight situations in the 7th and 8th.

S: Sounds good putting it in the books.

CATEGORY 5: SAVES (CHOOSE 1 PLAYER)

STEVE HAS: BOBBY JENKS
TIM HAS: KEVIN GREGG

Category 6

S: I'd like a defensive one. How about Brian Anderson vs Fukudome putouts?

T: Fukudome won’t play everyday.

S: BA probably won’t either, so probably not a good one.

T: Yeah. Do they keep track of double plays turned?

S: I am sure they do, they keep track of everything. Would we know where to find it?

T: No.

S: How about putouts by SS?

T: That’s Fine. The Riot vs Alexei.

CATEGORY 6: PUTOUTS BY SHORTSTOP

STEVE HAS: ALEXEI RAMIREZ
TIM HAS: RYAN THERIOT

Category 7

S: How about we do manager suspensions and ejections?

T: Sounds good.

S: In the spirit of the category, whoever’s team’s manager has more suspension or ejections wins.

T: Agreed

CATEGORY 7: TOTAL NUMBER OF EJECTIONS AND DAYS SUSPENDED FOR EACH TEAM’S MANAGER

STEVE HAS: OZZIE GUILLEN
TIM HAS: LOU PINELLA

Now, these bets are not finalized until the first pitch of opening day. So if anybody out there has a better idea for a category please leave a comment below. If it’s a good one, we are willing to call the audible to change or add one.

Also, if you don’t agree with any of our player choices for the categories, let’s hear about them.

So, I am sure you have been waiting through the entire article to hear why we were undecided in our Cubs-Sox bets.

Well, the first reason is because we forgot to write down our bets. We couldn’t remember who Tim selected last year in our category that was highest total of holds and saves for three bullpen pitchers. Depending on who he picked, he would have won or he would have lost.

Also, we had a minor controversy around Jim Thome’s home run against the Twins in the one game playoff for the division crown. MLB tracks the stat as part of the regular season, but Tim and I couldn’t agree upon if it should count for the bet. That home run would have pushed the category from a Tim win to a tie—that’s how close we were.

How To Pick a Bracket

Stephen Noffke — Sun, 15 Mar 2009 13:38:00 -0400

All right, we’ve all seen the crazy gimmicks of how to pick your brackets. My personal favorite is choosing which team has the shortest name. This is particularly useful in years when Duke and UCLA (yes, if I chose longest names, UCLA would be come University of California in Los Angeles; they can be useful either way) are good. I also like the dominant mascot way of picking, mainly for the logic and reasoning of the picks. A Hoosier is probably a farmer, and a razorback is basically a pig, and farmers take care of pigs, so clearly the farmer wins! Funny how you can set up a mascot fight and have the team you want to win come out on top of it, right?

But even though we always try to replicate the random logic some people use. We know someone’s cousin Emily will pick based on her favorite color, somehow predict George Mason reaching the Final Four, and then win the pool.

Speaking of George Mason, I will always claim some credit with them. I picked Michigan State to beat them in the first game. However, I had Michigan State beating exactly every team they beat on their way to the final four. That’s got to count for something, right? Right?

Fear no more, armchairsuperstar.blogspot.com is here to help!

What is the key to winning the bracket? Getting teams into the Final Four! Regardless of scoring, those teams get you points each and every round they are right and even more points when they have reached the Final Four.

I actually have done some statistical analysis on the Final Four every year since 1985 (the year it expanded to 64 teams) and have noticed two trends.

First Trend: Two teams from one conference make it to the Final Four.

Of the past 24 tournaments, two teams from one conference have made the Final Four 17 times (1985 the Big East had three teams that made it). That’s 71 percent of the time.

Now, you might be thinking, OK great, two teams from one conference. Well, how many conferences are there? Agreed, it may seem difficult to pick which conference it is going to be. But as of writing, ESPN Bracketology expert Joe Lundardi (who, by the way, went 65 for 65 in 2008) has only 10 conferences with multiple bids. So that narrows down your field quite a bit.

Now, you also have to think that the conferences with only two or three teams will most likely not be able to have two of them making the Final Four. So now we are only talking about six conferences to choose from. That’s not that bad.

Looking at the potential teams this year, I think the best options of having multiple teams make the Final Four are the Big East (with potentially three No. 1s) and the ACC. Big Ten fans might be screaming that they have more teams in the tournament, so should they be considered. Yes, they have a bunch of good teams, but I don’t feel like they have two elite teams that could make it to the Final Four.

Second Trend: A team from last year's Final Four will return to the Final Four.

Of the past 24 tournaments, 15 times a team from the previous year's Final Four has made it back to the Final Four (In 1991 and 2007, two teams returned to the Final Four). That’s 63 percent of the time. Again, I know, not a super high number.

Think of it this way. If you knew nothing about basketball besides the last year's final four, there is a 15 percent chance you get one right. That’s blindly picking. What if you watch college basketball and know stuff about teams. Like last year, UCLA was a No. 1 seed and was likely to make it again.

Looking at the potential teams this year (Kansas, Memphis, North Carolina, and UCLA), I feel like UNC has the best chance of getting back. They have the point guard play that is needed to get through the tournament, as well as a more than sufficient inside game with Psycho T.

Memphis still scares me with their relatively weak schedule this year. I was starting to like Kansas again until the loss to Baylor. UCLA could be another potential team that could do it, but I am not as confident in them as I am in UNC.

So what are the odds that both two teams from one conference and a return team happen in the same year? Well, these odds are a lot lower. Only 10 times in the past 24 years has this occurred. That's 41 percent. Now that's not a bad percentage, but probably not as high as you would like.

Now you might be asking, OK these odds are really not that overwhelming, why should I pick my bracket this way? Well, either two teams from one conference or a repeat team returning to the final four has occurred 23 of 24 times! Only one year has neither trend occurred. That is why you should consider picking your brackets this way.

Here is a year by year breakdown of the two trends.

Two from One Con (Y/N) Return Teams (#) Both (Y/N)

2008 No 1 No
2007 No 2 No
2006 Yes 0 No
2005 Yes 0 No
2004 Yes 0 No
2003 Yes 1 Yes
2002 Yes 1 Yes
2001 Yes 1 Yes
2000 Yes 1 Yes
1999 Yes 0 No
1998 No 1 No
1997 No 1 No
1996 Yes 0 Yes
1995 No 1 No
1994 Yes 0 Yes
1993 No 1 No
1992 Yes 1 Yes
1991 Yes 2 Yes
1990 Yes 1 Yes
1989 Yes 1 Yes
1988 Yes 0 No
1987 Yes 0 No
1986 No 0 No
1985 Yes 1 Yes

Now, I am not saying that these will guarantee success or even to use them. But just something to think about while you're picking your bracket.

I have just one small disclaimer that makes me sound like a Wall-Street analyst. Past performance does not indicate future earnings. So take this information with a grain of salt.

The point of doing the brackets is to have fun. So have fun and enjoy March Madness!

One last side note: Since there is a lot of which conference is better then every other conference trash talk going on nowadays, here’s a breakdown of how many times each conference has had multiple Final Four teams.

Big Ten - Five

ACC - Four

SEC - Three

Big XII (Big 8) - Three

Big East - Two

Sports Stigmas

Stephen Noffke — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 16:52:00 -0400

Disclaimer: This is just a commentary on the landscape of sports and is no way supposed to be taken as an attack on any individual or group of individuals. This is supposed to be a sociological view on the world of sports.

This article is going to look at two stigmas that are prevalent in sports today. The first stigma is that white players play with more heart while black players are more athletic. The second stigma is why certain sports are less racially diverse then other sports.

So a few weeks back my fellow armchairsuperstar.blogspot.com writer Mark Fodor wrote a quick piece on Michael Jordan. In this article he linked this article written by Michael Lewis for the NY Times. If you have not read it yet, it is a fantastic article for anyone to read, not just NBA fans. You might recognize the name Michael Lewis from the book Moneyball which he wrote with Oakland A’s GM Billy Beane, another fantastic read.

In the piece he made a very thought provoking comment, “Is it a coincidence that many of the things a player does in white basketball to prove his character—take a charge, scramble for a loose ball—are more pleasantly done on a polished wooden floor than they are on inner-city asphalt?”

It is a very good point when you think about it and I would like to take it a step further. How come we look at reigning NCAA player of the year Tyler Hansbrough (white player) as a player who plays with more heart and intensity on the court then anybody else? Why is it that we look at his teammate Ty Lawson (black player) and everybody raves about how fast he can get down the lane and how high he can jump? Are these two players really that different?

Does Hansbrough really try that much harder then Lawson? Are we saying that Lawson doesn’t’ try as hard or work as hard to be at the top of his game compared to Hansbrough? Is Lawson really that much more athletic than Hansbrough?

This stigma’s are not just in college basketball, they also appear in all collegiate and pro sports. If you watched the NCAA College Football National Title game, you noticed the love fest around Tim Tebow. He is another player who plays with heart and intensity and passion unmatched by any of his teammates. The other star player on UF’s title team was Percy Harvin. He was commonly talked about being insanely fast and their most athletic player.

Again I ask, is Tebow really that un-athletic? Does he really try that much harder then Percy Harvin? Does Percy Harvin not have to try because he’s so athletic, or is it that he’s so athletic because he tries harder?

How did this stigma’s get attached to white and black players?

Are all white people bad athletes? Well even though I’ve ripped him before, the “Greatest Olympian Ever,” Michael Phelps is white. Doesn’t it take athletics to compete in the Olympics?

Are there any black athletes that are play with heart? What separates Tiger Woods and Michael Jordan from the Phil Michelsons and Charles Barkleys of the world? The extreme passion they have for the game and their unwillingness to loose; isn’t that the same as playing with heart?

Along with the stigma that white players play with more heart and black athletes are more at athletic is the stigma about certain sports being less racially diverse. For example, basketball is that the league is all black? Why is that?

Well we do know that yes there is a much higher percentage of black basketball players than white basketball players. To help answer this question I think we should look at another one of the big four sports that is dominated by one side, Hockey. Why does hockey have so many more white players then black players?

Here’s my theory on why these two sports have the racial makeup that they do. It all comes down to kids and money. Kids don’t have a lot of money to spend and yet they want to be active. So the kids get active by playing sports.

In the warmer parts of America or warmer countries (traditionally with higher black populations) would it be cheaper to have a kid play hockey or to play basketball? Hockey would require an indoor facility that has a frozen surface and colder air, which is not cheap to do. Transportation to and from the facility is also required. In contrast, basketball only requires a court, which can typically be found by most playgrounds (or even driveways), and a ball. Since it’s cheaper, a higher percentage of kids will be playing basketball and learning the basic skills needed to eventually excel at higher levels.

In the cold weather parts of America or cold weather countries (traditionally with high white populations) would it be cheaper to play hockey or to play basketball? Basketball would require the manual labor of shoveling the court as well as playing in big winter jackets that can restrict and hinder the shooting motion. Another, more expensive, alternative to this is to have an indoor facility that is heated. Again transportation to and from the facility is also required. On the other hand, it makes sense to play hockey in big winter coats, giving an extra layer of padding, that are often required to be outside in the cold weather. Frozen ponds, lakes and rivers are much more common so all that is required to play is a pair of skates, a stick, some kind of puck and some kind of goal (trash cans work well). Again since it’s cheaper, a higher percentage of kids will be playing hockey and learning the basic skills needed to eventually excel at higher levels.

Kids like playing what they know and if they are started at a young age could become pretty good at their sport by the time it starts becoming organized competition.

Are there exceptions to my theory? Of course, there are hundreds of exceptions.

Do I have all answers to why these stigmas exist? No, of course not. It is just something to think about next time you hear what great hustlers Tebow and Hansbrough are or the next time you hear that the NBA is a “thug league” and too black. Stigmas are what people make them. Changing stigmas are never easy but just because a stigma is attached to a player or a sport does not make it true.

Please leave your comments below if you agree or disagree with what I said in this article.

Andre Smith, What Are You Thinking?

Stephen Noffke — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:58:21 -0500

Andre Smith had a phenomenal year at Alabama last season. I loved watching him play, as he always completely dominated the D-lineman across from him throughout the game.

Heck, when I asked SI writer Stewart Mandel which non-QB, RB, or WR should win the Heisman Trophy, guess who he picked? (Scroll to the bottom, and yes, that is actually me in that question. You should read Stewart’s book. It’s a fantastic read, and also explains why I worded my question the way I did.)

So the best player on many experts’ draft boards and potential first overall pick Andre Smith has had a heck of a 2009.

First, he got himself suspended from the Sugar Bowl because of illegal contact with a sports agent. He then watched his Alabama team, which was ranked No. 1 for most of the year, get taken to the woodshed by Utah, a non-BCS team.

Now he has shown up to the combine in Indianapolis out of shape, weighing a supposed 340 pounds. He is not going to work out at all at the combine.

This could potentially cost him millions of dollars. Jake Long was the first pick last year and was also an offensive tackle.

He signed a contract that included $30 million in guaranteed money. Smith was looking like a top-five pick, one who could get similar amounts of money.

Now there are talks he could fall to the late teens or early 20s. He went into the most important week of his life basically unprepared.

This shows a lack of motivation and drive, and NFL teams will frown on his approach. He better have a spectacular pro day or he could be in trouble.

Saying all that, would I want the Bears to draft him if he fell to them? You bet I would.

Getting a top-five talent and essentially bookending their line with him and Chris Williams for the next decade looks great. I want the Bears to take a tackle in the first round anyways, for this reason.

Get him under the wing of some of our more savvy veterans like Olin Kreutz and Roberto Garza, and he might be able to find his way.

The Bears have taken risks before and it has worked out great. Just look at Alex Brown.

He was a fourth round pick out of Florida, a guy with first round talent but character issues out of college, who is now a team leader.

I know that the first round and the fourth round are worlds away from each other, but each player was a risk.

I hope for Andre’s sake, he turns around his 2009, because I loved watching him play at 'Bama.

There is nothing I’d rather see then solid O-line play and he was the best in college football last year.

I would love to see him fall in the Bears lap, but I doubt it will happen. Maybe I should hold out hope for Crabtree, like some other people!