For the love of all that is holy people...Think before you speak

Now then, before I go into my little rant and before I get a bunch of responses about freedom of speech and entitlement to one’s opinion, let me state that everyone is entitled to their opinion.  All I am imploring is some thought into the formation of said opinion.   Think about the situation unbiasedly for two seconds before spewing forth the vitriol that comes forth from sport’s fans mouths and fingers.

I have come to the realization that the vast majority of sports fans are lazy.  No, not physically, though that is often the case as well.  I mean mentally.  They look for the easiest target for their woe and unleash their hate upon that person or persons.  While this is true of sports fans across the board, it seems especially true in the St. Louis area, which I call home.  Sam Bradford is a good example.

The Rams quarterback is not and may never be a top 5 QB.  However he is talented and capable of winning a game on his talents alone.  Yet according to the vocal antagonists, he has no talent, can’t hit receivers, can’t scramble, can’t win games etc. and so on.  Very few want to look at the intangibles that lead to those situations.  Bradford went through a different Offensive Coordinator each of his first few seasons.  If you include his college years, he had to learn four different offensive systems and plays.  I challenge anyone to learn the complexity of NFL offensive schemes and terminology that many times.

However, now to the heart of my argument (and I apologize to my journalism teachers for burying the lead).  The goaltending situation for the St. Louis Blues has to bring the biggest section of fools out of the woodwork and has for years, if not decades.  Not since the days of Curtis Joseph and then Grant Fuhr have the Blues had what many fans would consider a “franchise” goaltender and there are probably some that would even argue against those two. 

Having been a goaltender in hockey and goalkeeper in soccer, I have always known that the position inherently brings blame with it.  It is the laziness of sports fans to simply blame the one person who let the goal in, regardless of the situation that led to the shot being taken in the first place.  Now don’t get me wrong, there are plenty of times that the netminder could have done something different or let in a softy.  It comes with the territory.  It is difficult to maintain the mental focus to be in the exact right position at the exact time needed to make a save every time.  However, sports fans (Blues fans in particular) are quick to heap fault on the goalies.

Jaroslav Halak has borne the brunt of this.  After almost singlehandedly leading the Montreal Canadiens to the Eastern Conference Finals in 2010, he came to St. Louis with high hopes and lofty expectations that following summer.  Once the team failed to make the playoffs that season, the laziness went into overdrive and many have failed to recover.  Even during the season where he and Brian Elliot won the Jennings Trophy as the goaltender tandem that allowed the fewest goals during the season, Halak never enjoyed much comfort from the vocal mass.  Even then there were calls for Elliot to be given the reigns.  Halak was the starter in the playoffs that season, and though I don’t know if goaltending would’ve made any difference the way the L.A. Kings took out the Blues, it would have been nice to see Halak not get taken out by his own defenseman in the previous series.

The next season, which was half a season due to the greed of both players and owners, the fools were given more ammunition due to a series of injuries for Halak.  Despite the fact that all goalies get hurt throughout a year and Halak hasn’t had all that many during his career, the vocal mass turned it into the idea that he is always hurt and not durable enough to lead the team.  Elliot’s stellar play that season did not help Halak’s cause.  Halak was still injured come the playoffs, but many say he was no longer the choice of coach Ken Hitchcock because he was on the bench and in their minds fit to play.  There is a difference between fit to start and fit to play if absolutely needed.  The Blues only had Halak on the bench because they were more comfortable in the playoffs using him if absolutely necessary than using an unproven Jake Allen, if Elliot went down to injury.

Even the media is prone to this lazy thinking and bias in regard to goaltending.  In the last two games, the Blues have lost to the Kings and Anaheim.  Both Halak and Elliot gave up goals that they should not have.  However after Halak’s loss, the announcers all but blamed him for the goals.  After Elliot’s loss, the post-game broadcaster said that despite the soft goal, he made several great saves to keep his team in the contest.  This was true of Halak only two nights before, yet the same consideration was not given.

I am, unashamedly, a supporter of Halak and that is most likely very clear in my positioning in this article.  I take nothing away from Brian Elliot and his great play since arriving in St. Louis.  He is a solid goaltender which to fall back on.  However, I feel he has proven that when he is given the reigns by himself with no challenger, he has faltered.  It was the case in Ottawa and Colorado and was the case in St. Louis when Halak was injured and the team did not know the talent level of Allen.  Halak has proven, in the playoffs, he can carry a team.  The Canadiens that year were not as talented as the Blues of the last two.  Yet, Halak (with the help of Carey Price) led his team past some of the giants of the East in Washington and Pittsburgh and within a game of defeating Philadelphia.  He has not been afforded the same opportunity in St. Louis, due to poor team play in 10-11 and injuries the following two years.

On the same token, if you take my own bias out of the situation, Blues fans’ ideas of a franchise goaltender are quite warped in most cases.  Their definition of a franchise netminder is essentially someone like Martin Brodeur.  Someone who will play 65-75 games out of 82.  Those days are gone my friends.  Starting goaltenders today play about 55% of the time.  A bit more if there is not a suitable backup.  Lazily, people blame the goaltending (Halak in particular, but also Elliot on rare occasion) for their playoff woe.  Really, in the Blues' case, there is only one instance when this is absolutely true and that is way back in the early 2000’s when Roman Turek was a main reason that talented squad did not go past the first round.  One could also make the case for Jon Casey being at fault in 97, but that is neither here nor there.

This vocal portion of Blues fans, much the same as Bradford haters, have unrealistic expectations.  Martin Brodeurs don’t just grow on trees.  Also, “franchise” goaltenders don’t always mean Stanley Cups.  Ryan Miller has no Cups.  Roberto Luongo has no Cups and has only been to one final.  No Cups and no finals for Henrik Lundquist.  Ed Belfour could not win with all those talented Blackhawk teams and only won late in his career with a different team.  Look at the Stanley Cup winners from the last decade and it’s about 50/50 whether the winner was a “franchise” goaltender.

2003 NJ Devils – Martin Brodeur:  Of course a franchise netminder.  Possibly one of the best ever.                                              

2004 Tampa Bay Lightning – Nikolai Khabibulin:  Quality goalie, but has bounced around three times since then.

2006 Carolina Hurricanes – Cam Ward:  Again quality.  Great when hot, but not “franchise” in Blues fans eyes I'd bet.

2007 Anaheim Ducks – JS Giguere:  Hot goaltender, was the reason they won.  All but disappeared in the league now.

2008 Detroit Redwings – Chris Osgood:  Yes Hasek was on the team, but Osgood won and Blues fans know all too well about Osgood.  Seemingly only capable of winning in Detroit.

2009 Pittsburgh Penguins – Marc-Andre Fleury:  Franchise goalie, yes, but also faces similar problems to Halak as fans are often clamoring for someone else to take over.

2010 Chicago Blackhawks – Anti Niemi:  Possible franchise, but not with the Hawks.  In San Jose now.

2011 Boston Bruins – Tim Thomas:  One can make the case either way.  I would lean toward him being a franchise goalie until his awkward “retirement”.

2012 LA Kings – Jonathan Quick:  Franchise.  Pure and simple.

2013 Blackhawks – Corey Crawford:  Possibly a franchise goalie, BUT one could argue he isn’t top 5 or top 10 in goalies you would pick if the league was blown up and everyone put in a draft.

What does all this mean?  It means that there is no science to winning a Cup and whether you need a goalie that will be there for years.  Again, if someone does not like one goalie or the other, that is not my business.  I will argue for my favorite and others may do the same.  I ask for fairness and to stop the lazy thinking behind some beliefs.  To blindly blame goaltending as the end all reason why the Blues have not won a Cup or even a game during a season, is ludicrous.  To say Halak gets all the blame but give Elliot credit when the situations game to game are so similar is just dumb.

Please, just think before you open your mouth the next time at the game.  Think before you write your post on Facebook.  Again, both Halak and Elliot have given their detractors plenty to hold on to for reasons they don’t believe in them.  But be fair about it when you sit and calm down and think about the situations clearly.  I still hold out hope for the day when Halak is given his time to shine for the Blues in the playoffs the way he did in Montreal.  Perhaps I will never see that day.  Perhaps Elliot will stay and Halak will go.  Perhaps both will go and Allen will be the man next year.  All these are possibilities that as fans, we thankfully, have no control over.  It will be as it will be.  But stop the laziness.  Quarterbacks that take you to the playoffs right out of the draft are rare.  Goalies that lead mediocre to decent teams all the way to championships are even rarer.  Bring expectations closer to reality.  Think.  See the game beyond the borders of your TV screen and realize that more happens than the singular instance you want to place your blame.  And as always realize that this is just my opinion and it may be different from yours…but I’m right.

Now, if you’ve managed to stick around through that rat’s nest of a thought process, here’s a few quick hits.

-         - The Tampa Bay Lightning’s radio announcer is a joke.  He makes Ken Wilson sound like he needed anti-depressants.  Ridiculous that he’s employed and I am not.

-          - Along the lines of my rant, Blues fans need to give up on Ryan Miller.  The Sabers would ask too much and his contract is too rich.  Ah, but these things don’t exist in those fans’ fantasy world.

-          - 1-7 will not suffice against California hockey teams.  The Blues have to find ways to summon the will to win right from the get go.

-          - I hate the Patriots.  That is why they will win…sigh

-          - I love the show ESPN FC, but their anti-MLS slant on everything is irritating.  If the football/soccer is so terrible then go back to England and cover the sport for them.

-          - I like that Michael Bradley has come back to MLS and the idea that his skills will deteriorate to dust because of the league is beyond stupid.

-          - The more I see of Andrew Wiggins and all the other great freshman in college basketball, the more I am convinced that both college basketball and the NBA would benefit from a rule change that allowed high schoolers to come out right away if they wish, but a player has to stay 2-3 years if they go to college.  There is so much development both physically and mentally that would occur during those years and the on-court product would be all the better for it.

- The more I get back into soccer, the more I’m ok with hockey going back to a system that allows ties.  Nobody likes them, but shootouts are kind of a joke.  Oh well.  Isn’t going to change.

Johnny Football Go Away

Oh how the times and a person's actions can change one's opinion.  When Johnny Manziel burst onto the scene, I was one of his biggest fans.  He reminded me a lot of Todd Reesing, a similarly undersized quarterback with similar attributes in regards to speed, elusiveness and pass accuracy.  Both were small for their position (Reesing was generously listed at 6' and probably well under that and the same could probably be said of Manziel who is listed at 6'1)  They both had a fire and passion and drive to do whatever it took to win.  That's why I rooted for Manziel.  He was getting the accolades that Reesing never could, mostly because my beloved Kansas just wasn't the place to receive media attention for football (and a tiny bit because we Jayhawks may have overvalued his talents).  Manziel broke all the preconceived notions that a freshman could/would never win the Heisman because he was the best player on the field and deserved it, so sports writers had no choice.  However, following the wild ride that is Johnny Football, perhaps we are learning why coach Kevin Sumlin would not give the media access to this kid.  Perhaps we also learn why no freshman had been awarded the Heisman and it may not have been because of stuffed shirt media types as many had presumed.

When I first read about all the goings on with Johnny Manziel (why is is name Johnny with an H when his full name is Jonathan?), I was willing to write it off as a kid being a kid.  Then as time went along and more came out about his things I became more aggravated.  What disturbs me more than just the actions of this 20 year old, are the reactions to it.  Every excuse on ESPN's message boards or Facebook posts seems to say, essentially, "leave the kid alone.  He's doing what any 20 year old would do."  Well, no he's not.  Not every 20 year old is getting smashed.  Yes, many do and it's been glorified to a point that I feel is unhealthy but that's my personal feelings on that topic.  However, most 20 year olds that I knew in college did not let their drinking habits overly affect their lives.  They did not go to rival universities and crash a Fraternity party.  Most 20 year olds weren't saying they could not wait to get out of college and most 20 year old athletes aren't saying they can't go to class because there is too much attention.  I went to school with some of the biggest names in college basketball.  Even big names like Peyton Manning, Andrew Luck or Cam Newton did not have to take online courses to avoid the attention of their fellow students.  (Whether they went to class in general is another matter)

Then comes the Outside the Lines piece and article about Manziel's family.  I was not given the opinion that some local sportscasters were, of Manziel's family taking advantage of his fame.  On the contrary, I think they were uncomfortable with it.  Rather, I was given the image that, though a caring family, they have been affected by money.  Or at least Johnny has.  No one can tell what Manziel has had to go through or fight to achieve or earn from one article.  However, I read into it a lack of discipline that is difficult to instill when someone comes from so much privilege.  This is not a blanket statement.  I have a friend whose wife comes from a family of money and their family all seem like hard working people that just live a different lifestyle than your average person.  However, Manziel, through his ongoing actions, just comes off as that spoiled rich kid that never learned proper lessons and though his father loves him, perhaps never learned how to be a father to him as opposed to trying to be a friend.

The last incident, most recently reported by ESPN, has been the final straw for me.  While $7500 isn't a huge sum of money in the grand scheme, it just begs the question of how foolish is this kid or at the very least how stupid are the people he is surrounding himself with.  His personal friend/business manager is reportedly the one that began telling autograph seekers Manziel would no longer sign without compensation.  If this is true, what in the world could they be thinking?  Are they that naive to think no one would become irritated at this and report any under the table funding that had or could have gone on?  The simple fact alone that they were seeking to get paid reeks of stupidity or at the very least no common sense of judgment.  One can argue for weeks and months on the merits of the NCAA's definition of amateur and compensation for players, but as the current system stands you simply are not allowed to accept money for anything even remotely related to playing your sport.

Not only does his poor judgement irk me, but the kid doesn't even need the money.  D'Marco Farr, former Ram and co-host on 101 ESPN in St. Louis, said it and I agree.  You can at least make the case for kids who are trying to get money to support their families or came from poorer upbringings and want the funds for some spending money.  Manziel was traveling the country over the summer, presumably on his parents' dime.  He had court-side seats for an NBA finals game.  This does not seem to me like someone that needs to be compensated, especially not in the numbers that have been reported.  To make matters worse, and I usually let people spend their money how they will, Manziel is reportedly on tape saying he was going to spend the $7,500 on rims for his car.  Not even touching the idea that there are rims that expensive, could we get any more trivial?  I'd like a hockey mask with a certain paint scheme on it.  Doesn't mean I'm going to go buy it as soon as I receive my first paycheck when I start my career.

Manziel may get drafted into the NFL and he may have the drive to succeed in the league.  However, I see a rude awakening for this young man coming and fast.  He consistently says he's going to live his life the way he wants and that's fine.  He needs to come to grips with the fact that there are consequences for every action we do in life, no matter how insignificant.  And fans need to stop the excuses.  Not every 20 year old is doing or would do the things he is.  Not every 20 year old is under the scrutiny or pressure he is either.  However, there are many, in the sports world in particular, that are and have made much better decisions when faced with similar circumstances.  I wish the best to this guy and hopefully he turns it around.  But for now he needs to go away.  Stay out of the light for awhile, get back to playing football if the NCAA will allow and just shut up.

As always, this is just my opinion...but I'm right.

Well people will never accuse me of striking while the iron is hot, but it's time to discuss this topic.  The idea of University of South Carolina defensive lineman, Jadeveon Clowney sitting out a year to prepare for the NFL Draft was proposed by a writer for Sports Illustrated.  The idea is that he would avoid injury that would be possible by playing his junior year at USC.  This, unexpectedly, sparked a debate that has more holes in it than a doughnut store.

To start with, barring any unforeseen changes, Clowney has already stated that he fully intends to play next year.  Having said that, the argument that he should not play is just ridiculous.  It goes against almost anything we argue about in sports, yet there were several people who argued that it might not be a bad idea and that someone in the future will eventually go through with the idea.  Their argument is that these kids have a right to protect themselves and their potential earnings and some even argued that the NFL three year out of high school rule is unjust.

To me, the NFL's rule is perfect and should be followed by more sports.  The NBA would be a perfect example, but that's an argument for another day.  Most people have conceded the point that nobody is ready for the NFL out of high school or even after one year of college football.  That point has been made mostly on a physical level.  I would argue that the three year rule is good also on a mental level.  There is no perfect age, but nobody can convince me that they or anyone else would be able to handle the pressures of professional sports in America and the money and exposure that comes along with it at age 18.  ESPN analysts were saying that kids should have a right to protect their future earnings and if he's injured he won't earn anything.  I argue that if he doesn't spend time in college learning about life, then he could be awarded a huge contract and end up no different than the other stories of pro athletes that go broke.

While there is no pattern for why those athletes lost their money, lack of financial awareness is one of the more prevalent reasons.  Even the most mature 18 or 19 year old is unlikely to not spend untold riches if just handed money like it grows on trees.  I consider myself thrifty and intelligent when it comes to spending, but even I wish I had some of the money back that I wasted during those years.  Then, to compound their foolish argument, they go further to say that people with the talent should be allowed to enter the workforce whenever they choose.

Why?  Why do we treat talent in sports so different than other professions.  Outside of perhaps singers, athletics is probably the only profession where the majority of the workforce did not have to go to school, learn their craft and hone it while not being compensated.  I find it rather interesting that the very people making the argument fit into my example.  Most any sports writer or journalist was an intern at one point.  Very few, if any, places pay interns any more.  Yet, those people went through the process because it was what they wanted to do.  Why can athletes not do the same?  I know just in my own experience -- people who know me know I'm not boastful or brag -- that I am a better broadcaster than several people who have jobs.  Yet, I'm still trying to get my break while they get paid and have less talent.  Sometimes, that's just how life is.  Why are athletes different?

Some will say it is because they have a far smaller window of opportunity to use that talent as a profession.  I will concede that.  However, the risk of injury is there in training the same as it is during a game.  Even professional athletes get hurt in practice.  The odds are greater during a physical contest, yes, but you can just as easily drop a weight on your foot or hyper-extend a knee while running or pull a muscle as you can get injured during competition.  Those are the risks associated with athletics.  Similar to the risks we take when we seek out a profession.  We do not know if we will succeed or not.  If we fail, we have to find something else to do with our lives.  Athletes are too often given a pass because they have a talent that entertains us.

While I'll be the first to admit that I want my teams, especially collegiate, to win I often wonder why we give so much leniency to athletes.  Not even just in college but in many high schools.  Why does the star quarterback not have to do homework?  Why does the 6'4 basketball player with a great shot and slick dribbling skills not have to study for the test?   Because our society has coddled them and taught them that it's ok to be nothing more than a ball player.  How do we know that Jadeveon Clowney doesn't aspire to be more than a football player?  And should we not encourage him to be more.  Perhaps not.

An example of it not being ok to be more would be Myron Rolle.  Instead of going directly into the NFL Draft, he accepted a prestigious Rhodes Scholarship.  Even people who aren't very academic have usually heard of those and know they are hard to achieve.  Yet, Rolle was criticized by some within football for taking any time away from the game.  Eventually he was drafted in the sixth round when he returned to the US to try his hand at pro football.  Many suggested he would have gone higher if he did not take time away from the game.  Yet they blow that argument out of the water by suggesting that Clowney should take a year off the game to protect himself from injury.

Why does it make sense to those people to not play for a year to avoid injury, but not playing while studying at prestigious universities abroad is a bad idea?  Also, even we as fans often wonder if time off is good for our players/teams.  Many wonder if getting a bye week is bad because you lose momentum.  People who are injured never come back at the exact same level because of their time away from game situations.  So why would it make sense for Clowney to take a full year away from competitive football and then expect to be the player he was right out of the gate?  A year of weights and sprints is going to prepare him better than a year playing in the SEC?  You've got to be kidding.  Also, what of the teammates?

I speak not only of the college teammates a player making such a decision would abandon, but their potential future NFL teammates.  If someone could so easily leave their teammates in college for a potential payday, if they could so easily leave a chance for a divisional, conference or even national title because they feared injury then why would NFL players trust them?  How can one tell their brothers in the locker room that they are willing to make the sacrifices necessary to win the Lombardi trophy when they made no sacrifice to stand with their brothers in college?  Perhaps I'm being naive.  I just hope that athletic spirit and competitiveness never die just for a chance at money.  I hope that Clowney will not be the last to laugh such suggestions off and keep playing.  Only time will tell.

QUICK THOUGHTS

- LeBron is not/nor ever will be MJ.  When I thought about it, Jordan was often compared to Dr. J and much like LeBron just shrugged it off and played his game.  So, most of the difference would be media driven since we live in such a 24/7 news cycle now.  Saying that, I want to like LeBron because he is talented and does seem pretty humble.  However, he is not Jordan and won't be.  I would compare him more to Magic quite frankly with his ability to play multiple positions and facilitate others' offense.

- When are the Blackhawks going to lose for goodness sake?  They're a heck of a team, and as a Blues fan it pains me to say that, but c'mon.  Crawford and Emery aren't what most people envisioned as Stanley Cup goalies, but so far they're looking like it.  Guess we'll see...and hopefully St. Louis ends their streak on Thursday haha.

- In the category of this is why they play the games, see the AC Milan vs. Barcelona match.  Everything leading up to the first leg of the UEFA Champions League contest said that Milan was overmatched and unlikely to even manage must of a fight against such a superteam as Barca.  Milan proceeded to win 2-0.  While Barca is talented enough to win 3-0 or 4-1 in the second leg, it puts enormous pressure on them and proves even the mightiest can be slain with good game-planning and execution.

- Headshots in hockey need to go the way of highsticking and hits to the helmet in football.  I think it has gotten to the point now, and Chris Kerber of the St. Louis Blues' announce team agreed, that it needs to be a penalty whether intentional or not.  If we really care about the safety of players then it should not matter whether there was intent, which to think any one can judge is laughable.  I could spend another entire blog on that and perhaps I will at another point, but I'll leave you with that.

- On a similar point, what's going on with the lack of respect in hockey?  We're to the point where top line players are taking cheap shots at third and fourth line guys (see Taylor Hall's blatant check to the knee of Cal Clutterbuck).  It's a sad state and all because we have tried to legislate out physical play and fighting instead of letting players police themselves.  I do not wish for the days when the saying "I went so a fight and a hockey game broke out" was literally true, but there was a time when sticks did not hit players above the waist intentionally and a price was to be paid if you crossed a line.  Sadly that is not the case now.

That'll about do it for this blog.  Pretty sad that it's been over a year since I've done one.  Just have to find the time and mental willingness to get to it.  Make sure to check out my YouTube videos as well.  I'm going to try to do both much more often.  Leave me some feedback too.  I like sports discussions with intelligent folk.  Ciao for now and remember, it's just my opinion...but I'm right.

Sad and wrong end to a legend's era

I have a sportstalk vlog on youtube now, so I encourage people to check it out. I hope to post a new one there within a day or two. But for the purposes of this topic, I felt it would be more appropriate to discuss it in a written form. By now, most of you know or have heard at least something regarding coach Joe Paterno being fired from The Penn State University. If not, you must be living under a rock because ESPN and just about every other news show's coverage has been inundated with the topic.

First off, let me congratulate ESPN's Trevor Matich for standing up to the senseless coverage his employer has taken with this story. Mr. Matich played football at the NFL level and played for Brigham Young University as well, as much of a moral school as it gets in today's society. Yet Matich is the only one that thinks it unfair how Paterno was let go before all the facts are revealed. We are so quick to judge anymore, that it feels at times like we are one step away from returning to the era of stoning people. Paterno was wrong in not doing more with this scandal than he did, no doubt. But the vilification of such a good leader of young men is ridiculous.

As Matich said, the testimony in the grand jury report is not enough to justify the termination of the longtime coach based purely on what was said. Also, the testimony that is being taken for fact is the testimony of a man who not only did not go to the authorities himself, but waited a full 24 hours before even approaching Paterno with the information. As Matich also stated, we don't know the full extent of what was actually told to Paterno. Paterno only recalls vague statements of touching or horsing around. The then grad-assistant and now assistant coach, Mike McQueary, told the jury all the details. How are we to know that he told the full story to Paterno. And then we are to assume that no matter what Paterno was told, he should've picked up the phone and called the police right then and there based on something he didn't witness himself and on information that may not have been delivered as cut and dry as people want to make it out to be.

Nothing is being reported on the timeline. ESPN posted a crude timeline that stated Jerry Sandusky was fired in 1999, but allowed to stay as a consultant with access to facilities. The main incident happened in 2002 but then the grand jury did not come with their investigation until 2010. Someone went to them. Someone did turn in Sandusky. We don't know when, so how are we to know that the PSU administration did not present this to authorities and then the legal system drug its feet?

Also, why is it that this story is only revolving around coach Paterno? The only coverage has been about "what did he know?", "when did he know it?", "why didn't he do more?" Jerry Sandusky, the actual one accused of the heinous acts, has all but vanished onto the back pages. An afterthought in the wake of this embarrassment that has gone on at Penn State. All the coverage has centered on Paterno. Not only that, but many now question the very pillars that Paterno built his football program on and helped build within the entire university. For one mistake to wipe out all the good things this man has accomplished is beyond my comprehension. He never came under investigation in an era when almost every major coach and/or major program has been dirty in some form or fashion. He graduated his players at or near 90% in an era when 50% has become acceptable. All this vanishes because people want to vent their anger at the highest profile person? Ridiculous.

Why is Paterno fired and not McQueary? How can people justify the idea of getting rid of Paterno, who did not act on a watered down story, but the man who actually witnessed the act, did not act on it for an entire day or longer and then passed it on to someone else retains his job? He is just as responsible, if not more so. Yet he gets a pass in most public opinion. What is wrong with society that we have to vilify the highest profile person and push the others, who are more prominent in the story to the side?

Did Paterno do all he could in every sense? No. That's not the point I'm making. Paterno will have to go to whatever end a person chooses to believe in knowing the truth about what he could've done and will have to meet his maker with that information. We don't know the full truth, but are more than happy to judge anyway. Let us for one moment take this out of the world of sports. A rookie cop (McQueary) goes to his captain and gives him a vague story about the captain's longtime collegue. The captain deliberate's the information and goes to the Chief of Police. If the Chief of Police, i.e PSU's president, does nothing, would the precinct captain be just as responsible? Morally yes, but I highly doubt there would be as much furor calling for the job of the captain. There wouldn't be as much looking down the nose and saying all the good the captain had done for the community now meant nothing.

The man they call JoePa is not without responsibility in this, but Sandusky was the villain. He is the sick, twisted person that robbed these children of their identities. That is where the blame should rest. Why do we blame Paterno with such passion, but mothers of abused children get a pass when they let their husbands or boyfriends beat them near to death? Why is there not a news truck parked outside of the house of a parent who does not report the beating of their daughter who is with an abusive partner? The crimes are quite similar. Society is quick to toss blame at others with disregard for the victims actual needs and then hide behind saying they are thinking of the victims. Have any of them blamed him for not personally stopping Sandusky? Have any of the actual victims come out and said they feel better now that Paterno has been fired?

Ultimately it boils down to this. Paterno should have done more, if he knew all or most of the details. He did go to his superiors and though morally that may not have been enough, I do not feel he should have been forced out in such a rushed and unprofessional fashion. The man stood for good things and in the end, most people will only remember him for this ugly situation. The mere fact that it took eight years to get the case heard might be more the fault of the judicial system than Paterno himself. It is just a sad end to what was a great career of a fine coach and mentor.

As always, this is just one man's opinion...but I feel I'm right.

Two steps forward, one step back. Opposites attract?

Ok, so the title is a poor attempt at referencing a bad 90's song by Paula Abdul, with a cartoon cat. Yet, the overall idea is what I'm getting at in regards to the U.S. soccer team. After an uninspired group phase of the Gold Cup, the Americans seemed to get things rolling a little bit in the knockout round. Wins over Jamaica and Panama, though poorly played, seemed like the U.S. was getting things on track. Then the final against Mexico. Granted, these two are rivals on the same level as Kansas vs Missouri. They hate each other, the games are often chippy and sometimes downright overly physical, you can usually throw out the record books when they play each other and like Kansas/Missouri, despite the ferocity and passion of the rivalry, nobody outside of the rivalry thinks much of it.

In recent years, it seemed as though the U.S. had supplanted their southern neighbors as the top team in CONCACAF. The Americans were picking up wins against teams like Brazil and Spain in buildups to World Cups. The Americans were improving and making strides towards being an actual legitimate player on the world stage. The Mexicans were struggling to keep up amid aging players and a coaching carousel that reeked of low tier levels. Early on in the qualifying for the '10 World Cup, it was even a possibility that El Tri might miss the tournament. How quickly things can turn.

Despite an early setback of five top players being suspended from the team for testing positive for a banned substance (once again attributed to "tainted meat"), the Mexicans rallied themselves and pole-vaulted the Americans as the top team in the region. Not only the they recover from a 2-0 deficit in the Gold Cup final, they made it look as though the U.S. was the old man of the region. One too weak and feeble to match the speed and skill of a youth as it runs circles around its elder. Don't get me wrong, the U.S. had chances that it could not capitalize on. Clint Dempsey cracked a good shot off the crossbar. Goodson put a deflection just wide of the near post. Michael Bradley smashed a one timer that curled just wide of the upright. Yet despite all the good that came, there was double the bad.

The U.S. defense looked sluggish, slow, out of shape and unaware of their surroundings. Time and time again the Mexican attack found holes in behind the back line of the Americans. Injuries are a part of sports and though the loss of Steve Cherundolo was a serious blow, by this stage in the game, the U.S. has got to have more depth at every position to be able to absorb such a hit. Obviously this is not the case. Jonathan Bornstein is not a bad player, but you have to question his ability to be a national team player when he could not keep up with the speed of his marks. The U.S. defense was constantly sprinting towards their own goal. This cannot be the case as often as it was against Mexico.

Quite frankly, as poorly as the American defense played in the Gold Cup final, one wonders if the youth push came too quickly. Personally, I'd rather have an aged yet still speedy Frankie Hejduk guarding the flanks with his quickness and tenacity than the players I saw on the field today. What happened to the staple of the U.S. team? Defense and goaltending used to be the one thing the Americans didn't have to worry about. Marcelo Balboa and Alexi Lalas and Frankie Hejduk and Jeff Agoos and even defensive midfielders like Thomas Dooley didn't necessarily have the skill of today's players but they knew how to mark and knew how to defend their back third.

What's disappointing is that Mexico, as a team, is really not much better than the U.S. Individually, however, they have the skill that the Americans do and may always lack. While more and more U.S. born players are getting the opportunity to play overseas, they rarely see starting minutes on top clubs. Mexican players do. Chicharito plays significant minutes for Manchester United, one of if not the top club in Europe. Americans can't buy that kind of experience. The closest they get is Clint Dempsey, who is one of the EPL's leading scorers, but still often falters on the national stage. Mostly due to his fiery temper. The Americans lack the skill and creativity that foreign players seem to master.

Even the country's top players like Landon Donovan and Clint Dempsey don't really have the ball skills to take on players one-on-one. On the positive side, Freddy Adu does have those skills and showcased them against Mexico. One can only hope that he continues to grow and mature and stay on the national side, but that's still a 50/50 proposition. The problem may be that America's greatest strength is also its greatest weakness. Despite having the financial ability and numbers of athletes to produce some of the top teams in the world, Americans struggle to get their best athletes to focus on sports like soccer and hockey. For years we've heard that America's time is coming and that the next generation is going to put us over the top and get to that next level. Yet we still languish behind, looking up at the top tier. We outnumber Canadians nearly 10-1, but their top athletes go all out for hockey from early ages. The U.S. only gets certain numbers of top athletes from mostly northern and eastern states. We outnumber many European countries combined. But again, soccer, though growing, is still somewhat of a niche sport.

The United States has made great strides, but national team sports just take a back seat anymore. Even in sports we invented, like baseball and basketball, the U.S. is no longer head and shoulders above the rest and in some cases is not even close to the best anymore. With regards to soccer, the States have made giant leaps. Yet with every few steps forward they seem to always take a step or two backward. Alexi Lalas said it quite nicely following the American's loss on this day. The team has got to come to a point where they stop saying they can take lessons from these sorts of performances and actually learn from the lessons and not do it again. The U.S. has got to shore up its defensive line. They need speed and physicality from their back four. The midfield is still set with Donovan, Dempsey, Bradley, Jones and hopefully a rejuvenated Adu. A forward must emerge that is a legitimate threat to score every time they touch the pitch. Jozy Altidore could be that player, but there have been several forwards to take that "could be" mantle and fallen back into the shadows. Only time will tell. The team must find consistency though. If it wants to be taken seriously on the world level, it can no longer play to its opponent. The U.S. must learn to crush teams like Panama and Jamaica and Honduras and El Salvador and run through CONCACAF as though they were flies buzzing around the face of a giant. Only when we force our opponents to match the way we play can the U.S. truly move forward.

RANDOM THOUGHTS

- Again, Freddy Adu was a nice bright spot during his time played in the semi-final and final of the Gold Cup. Personally, I did not like the way he was brought up into the league and immediately deemed a superstar and thrust into the spotlight of stardom and fame with articles saying how he was America's Pele` and how the Brazilian star knew he would be great. (apologies for the run-on sentence there). Now that he's matured and grown and been humbled however, I root for his success. His footskills and vision are what we hoped for. If he can continue to grow as a player and stay humble AND stay in the good graces of whoever may be the national team coach, he could be a good offensive force for the American attack. The U.S. needs someone who can challenge defenders and break them down off the dribble.

- I dearly love my St. Louis Blues and I want to trust that the management is doing everything they can to improve the team and attempt to get back into the playoffs and push for their first Stanley Cup. They are making it difficult, however, with the constant talking out the side of the mouths. Before the trade deadline, we were told that the team would only be making player-for-player deals. No more player for draft picks. They were beyond that point. A week later there were two trades for draft picks. While the players given up weren't going to be the difference in a Cup run or not, it just seemed as though more could have been returned for their services. In the same manner, it was said by many that the Blues would almost certainly not use all their picks in the draft. They would be used to attain a veteran player. Again, I defer to the management team of John Davidson and Doug Armstrong. If no deals were available that would help our team, then so be it. But why the double speak? If it's a possibility that all your picks would be used on draftees or as was the case, one was traded for a prospect, then just use the old fallback line of "we're pursuing every avenue to improve the team." It's a long offseason and free agency still looms. One can only hope that the fortunes of the team turn around with perhaps a wise offseason acquisition and if we're very lucky, new ownership willing to keep the team on the upward trend.

- Why are NBA fans so defensive. I heard Dari Nowkhah, of ESPN, say on his radio show that this year's draft was boring. It was. By far the most uninteresting draft in recent memory. Yet the NBA fans were blasting him left and right. Why defend something when the person is not blasting the on-court product, but the talent level of this years crop of newcomers? Wackos, I say.

- Someone, and it pains me to say I forget who, made a fantastic point when it comes to the things wrong with pro sports. Major League Baseball and the NHL have far fewer legal battles and issues with draft prospects and the like because they have well established minor league systems. Basketball and football use the collegiate ranks as their minor league and are thus the most corruptible sports. While I'm sure there are not zero instances, I challenge someone to tell me of the last time a college hockey player or baseball player was in trouble for receiving improper benefits because they were so highly touted that every school in the country was drooling after them. It doesn't happen because, despite the fact that those recruits are still fought over amongst the coaches, there isn't the clamor by the "boosters" because there isn't the notoriety of possibly having the next big pro since even high draft picks in hockey or baseball will most likely spend at least a year in a minor league system. Despite this grand epiphany, it is highly unlikely that we will ever see any serious minor league implemented for either sport.

- Why is it so damned hard to get people to contact you back regarding broadcasting jobs? Sigh...I digress though.

- Gongrats to Markief Morris and his brother Marcus on being drafted into the NBA. A golf clap for Josh Selby on his second round selection *coughshould'vestayedinschoolcough* May your pro careers be long and productive. Rock Chalk.

That's about it for now. I think I've prattled on long enough for this post. Until next time, just remember: It's just an opinion...but I'm right.

Why does everything revolving around sports seem so sad?

There are several things lately that I've noticed that just make me sad about the state of sports and sports fandom (if that's even a word). The first would be the Albert Pujols contract situation. Yes, I am more likely to care about this because I am a St. Louisian. Yet I am upset at the foolishness that both sides present. I support neither Pujols nor the Cardinals because both have royally screwed this pooch. On the one side, the Cardinals have dragged their feet so far in the sand you would think they were trying to make a new Grand Canyon in the midwest. The team should have resigned Pujols before the Matt Holliday deal. They did not. They should have signed him during the season when there were plenty of opportunities to go to Albert and say "let's get this done so we can focus on building around you in the offseason." They did not. They had an entire offseason to negotiate and from all accounts, they gave the public impression that nothing was broached in earnest until the few days before Pujols deadline.

That brings me to this "deadline." I find the idea ridiculous. I understand why Pujols THINKS it is a good idea, but the reality is that it will keep absolutely no media member from asking him about his contract throughout the year. In fact, I would venture to say, it will increase the questions. Think of just about any scenario. Pujols is on fire. Reporters will ask if he thinks he's driving up his asking price come free agency. Pujols is ice-cold. Reporters will ask if not being offered his money by the Cardinals is weighing heavily on him. Everything is a contradiction with this deadline. Reporters will keep asking questions in every new city he goes to, yet he says the deadline was to prevent the circus he faced on his first day at camp. He wants to protect his teammates, yet they will be asked in just about any failing circumstance if it's because of Albert's contract. Pujols wants to focus on playing, yet he himself said that he doesn't have much if anything to do with the negotiations anyway. Every athlete talked to on sports radio has pretty much said the agent deals with the team and only reports what is absolutely necessary to the player to spare them any animosity that would affect their performance. So the idea that he can't have his agent talk to the team and still focus on playing is silly.

Then, as always, it comes down to money. While I would like to believe Mr. Pujols claim that he and ownership laughed at ESPN's reports on the length and financial compensation, I have to believe the money that will be involved in any deal for Albert will be astronomical. How any man can believe they are worth $300 million is beyond me. How any man can think they can perform, naturally, at the age of 42 the same as they did at 32 is beyond me. Yet that is the figure we as fans are left to digest. On the flip side, the Cardinals are reported to be low balling the best player in the game. Say what you will about liking Pujols or not, but offensively no player in history has put up his numbers to begin a career with the same consistancy and he's won gold gloves as well. Yet we are led to believe that St. Louis' offer would not even have made him one of the top 5 paid players. You can't tell me, regardless of being a midwestern city of a mid-market size, that this team hasn't saved up enough money to pay top salary to the best player. Does no one understand the definition of negotiation any more? It seems like everyone has the mentality of it's my way or the highway and if you don't like it they'll take their ball and go home. The Cardinals will survive without Pujols if that is their lot, but it would be sad for a man who could go down as a legend of the game to play in more than one uniform.

Speaking of negotiations being sad, the NFL and it's player's union seem to be locked in the same sort of stalemate. Again, there is little to no movement by either side. We're talking about billions of dollars here. Not millions. Not hundreds of millions. BILLIONS. And these fools want to squabble over how to slice it up. Now no good business man gives away profits, but when we're talking sums as large as the NFL sees, why does it make any sense to even hint at the possibility of labor unrest, let alone a lock-out when the NFL has pretty much taken over as America's true sport? It doesn't. That's why it makes the average fan so sad. As a fan, we can't even focus on our teams for next season because there may not be a season. As such, rosters are being trimmed. Free agency will not happen and the draft takes on a much different role as it will be used to fill spots instead of add depth. With both of these situations, there is always that faint glimmer of hope. That final straw that we can try to hold on to that each side will come to their senses. However, as I age and sports moves ever toward the side of business (if it ever wasn't 100% business) I begin to wonder if sports and sense even go together.

On that note a few briefer things that have saddened me recently in regards to sports. One is the St. Louis Blues. Yes, the team has been disappointing and I as well as many others expected a lot more out of this team. But, I am speaking to the fanbase that is so quick to turn their backs on people that if they were gunslingers, they would fit right in at the OK Corral. So many people have turned on Jaroslav Halak that it makes me wonder what those sort of people want in a goaltender. I write this, not as defense to Halak. He has not lived up to expectations in his short time with the Blues. That much is clear. Many fans, however are already wanting to ship him out of town. One customer at my work even made the asinine comment "yeah, maybe the Blues will win a few now that Halak is out." People need to realize that Halak is only 24. That is the same age as Ben Bishop, who has played the vast majority of his career in the minor leagues. People also need to realize what a difficult position it is. I have played inbetween the pipes in both hockey and soccer. It's a lot more difficult than the average person wants to believe to keep the opponents from scoring. Even the best, such as Patrick Roy or Glenn Hall or Marty Brodeur or Jaque Plante had bad streaks. Staying confident is the key. Whether I'm proven right or wrong, I personally believe what we saw of Halak in the playoffs last year is the true player. Until proven otherwise, I cannot believe someone who shut down both Pittsburgh and Washington and almost defeated Philadelphia (the three top offensive Eastern teams) is a fluke. He just needs to regain his confidence and continue to grow with this team. A team that consists of several defenseman that are in the same age bracket. The Blues cannot continue to swap goaltenders every few years.

Along the topic of St. Louis sports fans, another comment made by a different customer at my work just proved how big of a joke the idea that St. Louis sports fans are the greatest is. Now don't get me wrong. I love the city and will always associate myself with St. Louis and its teams. Outside of the Cardinals though, the Gateway city's teams have had on and off support at best. The comment that riled me up was "I hope the Rams do move away so maybe I can see some good games on Sunday." You don't want to support the Rams, that's your choice. But the NFL only has teams in 32 cities. Even the largest market west of the Mississippi doesn't have an NFL team. To me, that's a pretty big honor. To just throw it away because the team here hasn't been managed properly the last 8-10 years is like throwing the baby out with the bath water. For goodness sake people...support a team. Don't latch on to a winner and then cry about it when they're no good. Only one team wins the final game in every sport and the odds are against even the best.

Lastly, and I apologize for any rambling this post has taken on, but most importantly it saddens and sickens me the lack of perspective some people have. Earlier today, the NHL's facebook page posted a video of the Miracle on Ice game and asked for people's thoughts since it was 31 years ago today that the group of US college kids beat a Soviet team that had won four straight gold medals and not been defeated at all since 1968. The overriding thought is had any team defeated the Soviets, except perhaps Finland, it would have been almost as big a deal. It meant more to the United States at the time because we were not a hockey country except for small patches in the north and northeast. We were in an economic and political crisis. People began to question what it was to be American and then this ragtag team in a sport very few cared about, galvanized an entire nation. If we are to believe the stories, there were no USA chants during sporting events until that game against the Soviets. It was bigger than any one person involved and bigger than just a hockey game. Yet people, unfortunatly the majority were Canadian, had the audacity and gaul to put the game and the US down. Statements were made as dumb as "American vs. Canada rivalry. What rivalry we beat them every time he he," and ones talking about the US' economy today and another saying Ovechkin scoring 65 goals proves Russia is better and even one going on about how if Canada made a movie about every great game they played in, there would be a movie out every day. It honestly made my blood boil. I'm a patriot and a homer and a loyalist when it comes to my country and my sports teams, so I understand the idea of putting down a rival. But do it at the appropriate time. People today are so self-involved, so stupid, so jealous that it would not surprise me to find this sort of sickening dribble being posted even during something such as the death of a president. It makes me sad that people can't put down their differences for just a little while instead of wasting their time trying a dumb putdown that can so easily be crushed by someone with a brain on an online post that was meant to be a celebration of a gream moment in sports and in history.

Whew...I feel a tiny bit better.

Random Thoughts

- Congrats to the WWE on keeping the Rock's return a surprise. It was nice to not know what was coming for once. Too bad they pretty much screwed it all up with the 50th Undertaker return the Raw the following week.

- Why is it the Blues refuse to play for a full 60 minutes? Granted, their game has improved mightily since Oshie and McDonald returned and with the addition of Stewart and Shattenkirk, but there are still so many mistakes. 10 minutes. 10 minutes of poor play out of 60 cost the Blues a game against the Blackhawks. You just can't have that.

- Speaking of not playing consistantly, this year's Kansas basketball team has me fooled. They look like world beaters with talent and depth in one game and then in another it looks like nobody can shoot and they can be stopped by controlling one or two players. I believe they'll make a deep run, but given the lack of a dominant team or teams in college basketball this year it's going to be a stomach churning, nail biting tournament.

Well I figure that's enough rambling for this post. As always, remember it's just my opinion...but I'm right.

Hockey fans singing the Blues

It's been awhile since I've posted. I've been busy with work but it's time to write again. A topic that is near and dear to me is the St. Louis Blues. The team got off to a great start. They were unbeaten at home until late November. They were beating teams like Chicago and Pittsburgh and energizing the Scottrade Center with physcial play and a scrappy style that was really connecting with the fans. However, over the last few weeks the team has headed downhill.

There is good and bad to see in the Blues' semi-demise. The bad thing is that the team has done it as a team. They are failing at just about every aspect of the game. They are not getting timely goals. They are not playing good defense and having solid marking in their zone. They are not getting the quality of goaltending they need on a consistant basis based on the rest of the team's play either. While this sounds quite horrifying to Blues fans, and it is discouraging, there is a bright side.

The silver lining is that their mistakes are not those of an absolutely bad team. Instead of having a team that absolutely can not score, Blues fans need to realize that their team is merely struggling. One good streak can turn it all around. Instead of having a horrendous defensive team, the Blues merely need to clean up some mistakes that will come with the youth of players like Erik Johnson, Alex Pietrangelo and the other young core. Instead of having goaltenders who were shaky at best or ran hot and cold period to period, the Blues' goaltending is merely going through a streak of bad luck. The bottom line is all of this is correctable. Hope is not lost.

From my own perspective, as a fan who bleeds blue, the disappointing thing is that two players have taken the scoring with them as they headed to the Injured Reserve list. David Perron and T.J. Oshie are highly talented players, with great motivation to play hard just about every shift. They are deserving of being fan favorites due to their skill and heart. Yet, there is other talent on this team. It was known heading into the season that this would not be an offensive juggernaut, but not only has the scoring lagged without these two stars, the offensive style itself has hit a standstill. Repeatedly during broadcasts and postgame comments we are told that coach Davis Payne is telling his team to get to the middle and take shots from high percentage scoring areas. However, the Blues seem tentative and indecisive. Trying to cycle around too much. Waiting too many extra seconds to make that pass that could have led to a scoring opportunity and instead getting intercepted or passing to a covered man.

There is still hope. A couple days off now gives the Blues some needed practice time. This team has to gel at the core so that when players come up from the Perioa Rivermen, it is easier to integrate them into a whole as opposed to another piece of an unfinished puzzle. Much of sports boils down to talent and luck. The Blues are not untalented and have hit a rough patch of luck. Much like their baseball counterparts, the Cardinals, the Blues have not found the complete package that they had early in the year. They may score, but not get good D or goaltending. They might play better on the backside but get shutout or only score one. But in the end, anyone willing to blame Jaroslav Halak is a fool.

No, Halak has not played up to his capabilities, but he is a solid goaltender that will back this team when they need it the most. Every netminder hits a patch where the goals just seem to slip through that crack that you thought was well covered. But the quality ones rebound. Halak will do so. He is only in his mid twenties. There are still tweaks to be made to Halak's game. Heck, even superstars like Brodeur and Roy needed coaching from time to time. The biggest difference, I feel, from this goalie to the previous problems the Blues have had is this. In the past the Blues goaltending has cost them victories. Right now, Halak and to an extent Conklin, simply aren't winning the games for St. Louis. That is what they must do. Until the time comes when Perron and Polak return, Halak must start to win games for this team. He is more than capable of that. He led a Montreal team through the playoffs when they probably should have been swept in the first round if you look solely at the talent.

What the Blues need right now is a win. Not even a streak. Just a win. Much the same way that the long win streak and good start at the beginning of the year gave them a cushion for when the tough times came, the Blues need a few W's so that they do not dig themselves a hole that would need a gigantic run back to the playoffs. Nevertheless, I still see hope. I believe in this team. Pieces still need to be added in the years to come, but they have the core of a good team. Take heart St. Louis fans. The clouds in the sky are only the changing weather and not the precursor of doom for this hockey season.

Random Thoughts

- I was very disappointed in the NHL Network crew on their NHL On The Fly show following David Perron's concussion. While they changed their tune later, it was ridiculous that they accused Perron of faking the injury to get a longer powerplay. Clearly they are eating their words now as David has not played since that game.

- In addition to my disappointment that a country smaller than Connecticut won the 2022 World Cup instead of the U.S., I was quite taken aback by P.T.I.'s discussion of the matter. Mr. Kornheiser and Wilbon argued that it is no big deal that America did not get awarded the World Cup because soccer is "a distant 5th place" in terms of interest in this country. Not only does this argument come from old men who still emrace dead sports such as horse racing and boxing, but it is as foolish as someone making the argument that the U.S. should not care to ever host an Olympics again because sports like figure skating or swimming aren't the number one sports here either. The '94 World Cup was a spectacular event. If they would have gotten their heads out of a certain dark and perhaps smelly place, perhaps they could have taken notice.

- Just a random thought from the fan side of me...I hope Oklahoma crushes Nebraska in the Big 12 championship. I have no love for the Sooners, but to send the arrogant 'Husker fans to the Big 10 licking their wounds would be justice in my opinion. The only thing worse than the Cornhuskers winning in their final season would be Mizzou winning it ever.

- Not a big fan of the NAHL scheduling. As a broadcaster, it is hard to keep a flow going when there are long gaps between home games and such a gap is approaching. The games I call this weekend will be the final ones until January 7th I believe. A month of doing nothing stinks. At least there will be good company for Christmas as I will spend it with my girlfriend and family.

Hopefully this will not be the last post that I write before the holidays, as I would like to get back into the habit of writting. But if it is, then I wish you all a very safe holiday season, a Merry Christmas and a happy New Year. And as always remember that it may just be an opinion...but I'm right.