EPL Week 4 - Spurs vs. WBA

Only four weeks into the EPL season and the injury bug has already bitten Spurs. This isn't just a typical mosquito bite. More like a mosquito carrying malaria. Shortly after finding out Jermain Defoe would be lost for the next three months, and Michael Dawson for about eight weeks, manager Harry Redknapp saw Luka Modric go down soon after scoring Spurs' only goal in the 27th minute.
Modric went down clutching his leg after a challenge, and needed crutches to make his way off the field. The ways things have gone, it wouldn't be surprising if Modric misses a considerable amount of time.
Injuries couldn't have come at a worse time, as Spurs prepare for their first Champions League match this Tuesday at Werder Bremen.
West Brom would answer in the 41st when Chris Brunt headed the ball home for the 50th league goal of his career. I admittedly didn't see the first half because I wasn't able to find an online stream, but from what I've read, Spurs were dominant in the early going.
The tide shifted in the second half, as West Brom consistently put pressure on the defense, especially in the last 15 minutes. Spurs were lucky to hold off a flurry of strikes and corners to come away with the draw.
While Modric's injury grabbed headlines, this game also marked the debuts of William Gallas and Rafael van der Vaart.
With all of the injuries, the play of Gallas and van der Vaart will be crucial through out the next few months. Gallas looked good today. I thought he looked sharp and made some smart defensive decisions. Van der Vaart apparently played a good first half, which I unfortunately didn't see. He looked a little tired in the second half. Hopefully with increased play, he'll be able to shoulder more playing time.
While it would have been nice to come away with a victory from The Hawthorns, putting things into perspective, this was a decent result. Without our best striker and defender, and in the midst of incorporating new players into the lineup, it may be necessary to just "hang around" for a few months. As long as Tottenham doesn't start losing games, the team should be fine. I can live with a draw on the road, even if it's against a lesser opponent.
Spurs will face Werder Bremen on Tuesday, which I believe will be the most important match in determining if they can advance into the knockout round.

Team USA's Top Five Players

Any stock broker, single guy at the bar, or college quarterback can tell you it's good to have options. Such was the case for this post. The beginning of the NFL season and the end of the FIBA World Championship have provided an endless amount of things to talk about. In fact, I narrowed it down to a few ideas:
1) The amount of times Fran Frashcilla said "feast or famine" in one broadcast. I can imagine a broadcast journalism professor shouting at the TV, "Redundancy, Redundancy!"
2) The Cold War 2.0: How much the US and Russia still hate each other. The US gets mad when Russia takes credit for the 1972 Olympic gold medal in basketball. Russia gets mad when the US takes credit for Carly Patterson's 2004 Olympic All Around Gold Medal. There's still monkeys up in space somewhere. When will it all end?
3) Russian national team coach David Blatt's facial contortions. Furthering my point that international basketball not only has the strangest looking players of any sport, but coaches as well.
4) They say the camera adds ten pounds. Does HD add five years to Brett Favre's appearance?
Ok, so I like lists. A lot. I also was talking about options earlier. Team USA has 11 first or second options on their respective NBA teams, and one third option (sorry Tyson Chandler). So in an effort to tie all of this together, if I had the option, here are the top five players on Team USA I would take to build my team around.

Number 5: Rudy Gay - Before this tournament I would have said Danny Granger, but what Gay has done in this tournament is undeniable. So much so, that Granger has been relegated to the end of the bench. Gay gets overshadowed in Memphis because Zach Randolph helps with the scoring load. He also happens to be overlooked in FIBA play because he's playing behind Durant.
Here's what I love best about Gay's tournament: he's shooting 58 percent from the field, compared to his career 45 percent in the NBA. If there's one knock on Gay is that he needs to develop a more consistent outside shot. He's shown he can do that in FIBA play, let's see if it translates to the NBA. If it does, Gay will average 20 points a game and battle for one of the last All-Star spots in the West.

Number 4: Andre Iguodala - Iguodala may be the best player the casual NBA fan has never heard of. He averaged 17/6/5 last year. He's just a notch below the elite guard-forward guys such like Wade, LeBron, and Kobe.
What has hurt Iguodala through out his career is that he's never played with a playmaking point guard that can create opportunities for him. Louis Williams, Allen Iverson, Andre Miller were all shoot first point guards. Jrue Holliday will be handed the reigns this year, but he seems to be pretty offensive minded as well. Too often Iguodala has been isolated and forced to create his own shot, which has led to some bad shots, and a not-so-impressive shooting percentage. The talent is there, he just needs to be surrounded by players that can bring it out.
I also love Iguodala's durability. He's played all 82 games in five of his six NBA seasons. If I'm building a team, I want a guy I can count on to be out there every night.

Number 3: Russell Westbrook - I admit, I'm placing Westbrook this high based off potential. While he still needs work on his shot and needs to his limit his turnovers, he's entering his third NBA season and will turn 22 later this year.
Westbrook fits the new mold of point guards. He's big, fast, athletic, and has ability to get to the basket at will. If he continues to improve it's not inconceivable to see him developing into a Chris Paul type of point guard that is an elite player on both ends of the floor.
The big difference right now is that Westbrook is nowhere near the shooter Paul is. He's entering his third year, which is normally around the time guys start to improve their shot. Derrick Rose improved his shooting considerably from his second to third year.
The good thing is that with Durant around, Westbrook will never be expected to carry the scoring load.

Number 2: Derrick Rose - Is Rose this high on the list because he plays for the Bulls? Yes. But I mean that in a objective way and not a homer-pick kind of way. The fact that I've been able to see about 85 percent of Derrick Rose's NBA games allows me to comment on the types of things that don't show up in the stat book.
For instance, what's the biggest knock on Rose? He only averages 6 assists a game. The line of thinking as that the elite point guards average around 10 or more assists per game. And if a point guard doesn't average his 10 then he's either not elite, or a dreaded "score-first point guard."
While his stats may suggest otherwise, Rose is in fact an elite, "true" point guard. His lack of assists have more to do with the incompetence of his teammates than anything he's done. Rose's game is penetrating and then either kicking it out to a teammate or finishing the drive. He's also improved his shot to the point where teams can't play off him like they did in his first two seasons.
Team USA's style of play doesn't utilize is skill set and he has still managed to play very well. At this point, he has better body control and his a better finisher at the rim than Westbrook. They both have a similar skill set.
Rose also has the experience of putting an entire team on his back early in his NBA career and carrying them to the playoffs. Last year's Bulls team had no business being in the playoffs, and the 2008 Bulls had no business taking the Celtics to 7 games. Replace Rose with any other point guard besides D-Will, Paul, or Nash, and the 2009 team doesn't make the playoffs, and the 2008 team is eliminated in 5 games.

Number 1: Kevin Durant - Everything that needs to be said about Kevin Durant has already been said. He's the best scorer in the game at age 22. He should have been drafted before Greg Oden. He's a humble and hardworking guy. The only thing left for him to do is win a couple of MVP awards and NBA Finals trophies.
Here's my attempt at a fresh take on Kevin Durant and the number 3 player on this list, Russell Westbrook. Durant (2nd overall) and Westbrook (4th overall) were drafted in the 2007 and 2008 drafts, respectively. Very rarely do teams get back to back top 5 picks, and when they do (Bulls, Grizzlies, Clippers, T'Wolves) they fuck at least one of the picks up. The selections of Durant and Westbrook will be only the 4th successful back to back top 5 picks for a team in the last 20 years, and the first since 1992-93. Here's the 3 other duos:
1990-91 - Derrick Coleman (1st overall) and Kenny Anderson (2nd overall). During their 4 years together Coleman average 20 points and 10 rebounds for the last three years with the Nets that were not marred by injuries. Anderson averaged 17 points and 9 assists a game. The Nets would never make it out of the first round of the playoffs.
1991-92 - Larry Johnson (1st overall) and Alonzo Mourning (2nd overall). During their 3 years together Johnson averaged 18 points and 9 rebounds and Mourning averaged 21 points and 10 rebounds a game. The farthest Charlotte would get is to the second round of the playoffs.
1992-93 - Shaquille O'Neal (1st overall) and Penny Hardaway (3rd overall, drafted by Golden State and traded to the Magic). During their 3 years together, Shaq averaged 27 points and 12 rebounds a game, while Penny averaged 19 points and 7 assists a game. The Magic would be the the most successful of the duos, reaching the 1995 NBA Finals, and the 1996 Eastern Conference Finals.
It's hard to imagine Durant and Westbrook matching the play of O'Neal and Hardaway. The Magic duo was one of the greatest of all-time. However, you'll notice a pattern amongst these three duos. The Magic were the only duo unaffected by injuries, and consequently advanced the furthest in the playoffs (Penny's string of injuries would begin the year after Shaq bolted to LA).These duos also spent no more than four years with each other, not enough time to build a championship winning chemistry.
If Durant and Westbrook and can stay healthy and remain in Oklahoma City, they may experience something none of these duos experienced, an NBA Championship together.

Defoe and Dawson Go Down, My Blood Pressure Goes Up

As an American watching international soccer, there's many things to adjust to. I've commented on some of these things, such as the announcing, fans, and now, most notably, the way injuries are dealt with. Two Tottenham players, Michael Dawson and Jermain Defoe have went down with injuries in consecutive qualifying games.
Dawson will miss the next six to eight weeks after suffering ligament damage in his left knee and ankle during England's opening match against Bulgaria. Defoe injured his ankle or knee (he's not sure), one game after recording a hat trick against Bulgaria.
Defoe was originally scheduled to have surgery on his groin a few weeks ago, but then postponed the surgery because he wanted to help Spurs qualify for the Champions League group stage. After Spurs secured a 4-0 victory over Young Boys to advance, most expected Defoe to have the surgery.
Turns out, he postponed it again to play for his country. So which is it, Jermain? Your club team or your country?

Therein lies the problem. Which is more important, a player's club, or his country's international games? In American sports the line is clearly drawn. Your club team trumps all else. In many cases, as we're seeing in the FIBA basketball tournament, many teams aren't allowing their players to participate because the tournament poses a serious injury risk.

As an American this line of thinking makes sense to me. It's the club that is investing millions of dollars into their players. They should have the right to withhold them from international competition. FIFA doesn't insure any of these players, yet makes billions of dollars off of them, and in the case of an injury, at the expense of a club team.
But as Americans, we often fail to understand the spirit of international competition. Except of course, when the Olympics roll around. Many of our NBA players were eligible to compete in the FIBA tournament and refused.
You don't see that in soccer. Every one of these players (except maybe a few Frenchmen) would kill for an opportunity to play for their country. It's amazing to see Defoe continue to risk injury just so he can play some games for an English side that could easily qualify for the World Cup without him.
We don't even let our NBA and NFL player play an entire season if it means we can rest them for the playoffs.
So what's the point? The English created soccer and no longer dominate the game they invented. They want to take every opportunity to try and prove that they are the best at the game they created.
America doesn't have this problem in basketball. Not yet, at least. The gap between our talent and the rest of the world as closed considerably in the last ten years. It's not until we aren't the favorites anymore that the best players will be clamoring to prove themselves.
That's why the English Premier League takes a back seat to international play. Premier League players know that the biggest stage is international soccer. It's why players like Defoe risk their Premier League season to showcase their skills on their country's team.
This isn't the case in basketball. The best players are all in the NBA. An NBA championship is a basketball player's greatest team accomplishment. In ten years, that all could change.
Here's to crossing my fingers and hoping that all ligaments, ankles, and groins remain intact and are functioning properly a month from now.

We Need More Of These Boise St. - Va. Tech Type Games

We've all been in the situation where we get together with a group of friends we haven't seen in a while. Maybe you were a bit apprehensive at first, but after hanging out for a while, you start to remember old times and really enjoy each other's company.
There's the one friend, who on average has consumed two more drinks than everyone, and on average has ten less friends.  Then towards the end of the night, he breaks the silence by saying, "Guys, this is so much fun. Why don't we do this more often?"
This is the type of feeling I had while watching Boise State defeat Virginia Tech 33-30 on Monday night. Except I was by myself, and the party was hosted by the NCAA. No, I was not paid to attend.
I got to thinking, and realized that there's no reason why two top 10 nationally ranked teams shouldn't face off on Labor Day every year. This almost makes too much sense.
First, let's take a look at the last five Labor Day night games:
2005: (14) Florida State vs. (9) Miami (FL)
2006: (11) Florida State vs. (12) Miami (FL)
2007: Clemson vs. (19) Florida State
2008: UCLA vs. (18) Tennessee
2009: Miami (FL) vs. (18) Florida State
Here's the first two things I notice about this list: Too much Florida, and the lack of a match up that pits two national championship contenders against each other.
Florida State and Miami are great. Both programs are on the rise and close to recreating the dominance they once exhibited in the late 90s into the early 2000s. However, there's no reason they should have been playing on this big of a stage for the last five years.
Sure, it's a rivalry game. A rivalry game that no one outside the state of Florida cares about. Their rivalry doesn't transcend sports, and therefore, shouldn't be the slotted in week one's marquee spot.
What made the Boise State - Virginia Tech game great is the fact that both teams were in the preseason national championship discussion. A loss in the first week would likely eliminate either of them from that discussion immediately. Couple that with the added bonus of Boise State being the highest ranked non-BCS school ever and we had ourselves a potential classic.
This game and games like it are good for college football. It would make sense for the BCS to get involved and schedule a top 10 match up the first week of every season. I realize there's more that goes into it than that.
Schools make their own schedules, typically scheduling easier games to start the year in order to pad their record before conference play. And for Big 12 and SEC teams who face a grueling conference game every week, it's hard to fault them for doing this.

There's also the issue of the small schools who depend on a pay day from the bigger schools. They don't travel to national powerhouse's stadiums and get thrown around the field for 60 minutes for nothing. The revenue they make from playing that game is important towards their school's athletic program that doesn't make much money. It would also be unfair to strip them of a chance at that pay day.
There's also the problem of schedule's being set a few years in advance. As well as the issue of not knowing which teams will be in the preseason top 10.
But think of the benefits college football would reap. A top ten match up every Labor Day would generate major interest for the upcoming season. Many football fans think of the first week of college football as an appetizer for the start of the NFL season.
Watching the powerhouses in the first week of the season run over players half their size, updating their Twitter accounts as they catch touchdown passes isn't going to keep the casual fans coming back for more.
Here's a few solutions towards fixing the aforementioned problems of small school scheduling and predetermined games:
1) Let each national power continue to schedule their games in advance. However, there's a possibility that they will have to reschedule their first week game.
2) After the preseason top 25 polls are released, randomly select two teams from the top 10 and have them face off at a neutral stadium on Labor Day.
3) Both teams that were selected the previous year will not be eligible for the Labor Day game the next year. And the team they originally had on their schedule for last year will be played a year later. 
I know, this will never happen. But it would create an enormous amount of suspense and be great for the fans. Fans would be clamoring for their teams to be selected preseason top 10 in order to gain eligibility to the Labor Day game.
Let me put it this way. Monday's Boise State - Virginia Tech game felt like a Bowl Game. New shiny uniforms, neutral stadium, 80 thousand people screaming their asses off. You know what it also felt like? A typical NFL prime time game.
College football has a long way to go before it catches the NFL. A shake up to the first week of the season could provide a platform for growth.
Now that's a party I'd attend every year.

College Football Week 1 - Wisconsin vs. UNLV

Over the last few days, I've had some computer "issues," to say the least. I was planning on writing about a bunch of my thoughts on the first week of college football action, as well as a separate post about my alma mater, the Wisconsin Badgers. The Badgers post will be a weekly thing, just like I've been doing with Tottenham.
Since I'm kind of late, I'm going to condense this post to a few quick thoughts about about the first week of college football, with an emphasis on the Wisconsin game.

- Denard Robinson looks like a budding star in Rich Rodriguez's offense. However, if he doesn't learn to slide or lower his should and absorb hits, he'll be injured by the sixth week of the season.
- Florida will solve their issues under center, but expect three to four losses from them this year. And what was up with the lack of emotion from Urban Meyer on the sidelines? Is he just trying to keep his blood pressure low early in the season? Or possibly experiencing post-Tebow break up depression?
- I didn't watch that Oregon game, but any time a team wins 72-0, they're trying to send a message that they deserve to be discussed with the nation's elite.
- Look for TCU to deliver their second straight undefeated regular season after defeating Oregon State's high powered offense. TCU's biggest obstacle to perfection will be on November 6th, when they visit Utah.
- Jacksonville State true freshman quarterback Coty Blanchard's perfect 30 yard strike to Kevyn Cooper on 4th and 15 in double overtime and the two point conversion that followed will go down as a top 10 moment of the 2010-11 college football season.

Initially, I didn't know how to feel about a Badger game broadcasted on Versus. To my knowledge, Versus only broadcasts hockey and auto racing. Before the game, they were showing former college football sideline reporter Jack Arute cheesing it up with a member of a pit crew, and at that point, it was safe to say that I was worried about the quality of this broadcast.
My fears were confirmed when the announcers opened the broadcast yelling. They continued yelling well into the first quarter. I understand, they're unknown announcers and are trying to make a name for themselves. Everything they've been taught about announcing is that they have to sound passionate and exciting, and they took it over the top a little. Fortunately, as the game wore on, I either suffered a slight hearing loss and became accustomed to them, or they toned it down.
Wisconsin's first possession of the game displayed the type of football they'll be looking to play all season. Run the ball, control time of possession, and wear the defense down. They did all of that en route to the first touchdown of the game.
While it's still early to speculate, it's not a stretch to say that the Badgers run game could be second in the nation next to Alabama's. They have John Clay (who is looking more and more like Ron Dayne) to pound the ball on first to third down, Montee Ball can also run between the tackles and is a better receiver out of the backfield than Clay. Add in the speed of freshman James White, and you have 266 rushing yards, and one of the most versatile backfields in college football. Not to mention, an NFL-sized offensive line blocking for them.
When you have a dominant running game going up against an overmatched defense, the passing game tends to be underused. Such was the case in Las Vegas.
I've always thought quarterback Scott Tolzien is underrated. Despite his size, he has a surprisingly strong and accurate arm. He also has a few speedy receivers to work with that will allow them to run a barrage of reverses, slants, and go routes to keep defenses on their toes.
Wisconsin has a legitimate shot at the Rose Bowl this year. There's only two things I think that could possibly hold them back.
1) Turnovers. We saw this in the UNLV game. Two turnovers led to 14 points. Wisconsin was up by only 3 at halftime despite dominating the game. The first turnover was a pick 6 from Tolzien, and the second was a fumble in the red zone from Nick Toon that UNLV returned 82 yards to set up a touchdown pass. In Big Ten play, these type of turnovers will cost them games.
2) The Secondary. I'm really worried about this secondary. Thankfully, the front 7 is excellent and should get plenty of pressure over the course of the season. They're going to need to because Wisconsin's defensive backs won't be successful out on an island for long. Our safeties aren't exactly stellar either. Jay Valai is a big hitter that can stop the run, but his coverage skills leave something to be desired. Aaron Henry is playing safety because he failed as a defensive back.
Overall, it was a good first game. I look for Wisconsin to limit their turnovers and get tight end Lance Kendricks more involved in the offense next week.

Team USA Improves To 5-0

I've been watching many of these FIBA games and have been thinking about why I'm enjoying this tournament so much. The obvious answer is that the USA is beatable. It's much more fun when you're rooting to win and not rooting to win by at least 40. But no, it's not that.
Another answer could revolve around the nationalism that goes hand in hand with an international sports tournament. One problem: besides the rivalry between Turkey and Greece, there aren't any countries and fans that blatantly hate each other like you'll see in the World Cup.

It finally dawned on me while watching this morning's USA-Tunisia game. It's the funny looking guys on the international teams that you just don't get in the NBA. Think about it, if you saw any NBA player walking down the street, somebody could point towards him, tell you that's Player X, and you'd believe them. Brian Scalabrine is the only exception. Even a weird looking guy like Chris Kaman gets a pass because he's a seven footer.
Each international team has at least five Scalabrine's. In fact, Tunisian forward Radhouane Slimane's baldness attracted more attention than anything that actually happened in the game. Slimane is 30 years old and looks about 45. Just think about how hard it is to look 15 years older than you are.
Slimane is exactly the type of guy you would immediately D up on in a pick up game thinking you'd get a rest on defense. First possession, he hits a mid range jumper in your face and you shrug it off as luck. Then he does it again the next time down the floor. "Shit," you say to yourself and play defense for the rest of the game.
Anyway, what I wanted to talk about is how much Eric Gordon and Rudy Gay have improved their stock during this tournament.
Gordon led all scorers against Tunisia with 21 points on 7-10 shooting. I was more impressed with his defense. He recorded three steals in 25 minutes. Gordon has been USA's best option off the bench, and his play has led some to speculate about his possible insertion into the starting lineup.
But at who's expense?

Rose and Billups have both looked lackluster at times. I think pairing up Gordon with Rose would be ideal because Rose's ability to penetrate would create plenty of open looks for Gordon.
Another possibility is starting Gordon next to Billups and moving Billups back to point guard where he's more comfortable. This would be a better defensive backcourt but would lack speed and athleticism.
My guess would be that Coach K sticks with his original starting lineup. Rose is too versatile not to start, and I think he likes the veteran leadership that Billups provides. If it ain't broke don't fix it. Gordon has excelled off the bench, so he'll likely remain in the 6th man role.
Rudy Gay is another player that I've been impressed with. I think it's not so much that he's improved, as it is I wasn't aware of how good he was. I always assumed Granger was the better of the two players. The stats last season would suggest that (Granger - 24/5/3, Gay - 19/6/2) they're more even than I thought. Also take into account that Gay plays with a 20 ppg scorer in Randolph, and Indiana's offense is run through Granger.
Gay has shot the ball well and shown a willingness to rebound the basketball (the same can't be said for most of his teammates). At this point, Gay has cemented his spot as the back up small forward. The Tunisia game is evidence. Granger got the majority of the minutes during garbage time in the second half because he needed to find a way to work Granger into the game somehow.
USA will face Angola on Monday for their first game in the 16 team single elimination tournament. More on that tomorrow.

Gonzalez, Not Sandberg The Favorite To Land Cubs Job

According to the Chicago Sun-Times, sources have suggested that GM Jim Hendry is leaning towards a manager with major league experience to replace the retired Lou Piniella, and that man is former Marlins manager Fredi Gonzalez.
Gonzalez was fired midway through this year after Florida posted a 34-36 record through 70 games. Gonzalez's career record is 276-279 in three and a half years with the Marlins. This record will hardly thrill Cubs fans.
Actually, any decision Hendry makes these days won't thrill Cubs fans. That's why with this decision, he has to go with the fan favorite, former Cubs second baseman/ Hall of Famer, Ryne Sandberg. Sandberg has worked his way up from single A ball and is currently managing the Iowa Cubs (AAA), who coming into today, were 20 games over .500 and sitting atop their division.
I'm definitely not an advocate of general managers making decisions based on the opinions of the fan base. I'm a fan myself and realize that our opinions are off base the majority of the time. But this time Hendry needs to defy conventional wisdom and take a chance on the fan favorite.
It makes sense that Hendry wants an experienced manager to fill the position. But ask yourself this question: Will an experienced manager make next year's team any better?
I'm not sure, but it's an interesting question.

The 2011 Cubs are going to be young, and quite frankly, not very good. They probably won't contend in the NL Central for at least another three years. So is it better to have an experienced manager in Gonzalez (who is still considered an up and comer, by the way), or to throw the rookie Sandberg in there and allow him to experience some growing pains along with his team.
I feel very certain about one thing, if the team struggles, the fans will be much more forgiving if Sandberg is the manager. He's the Hall of Fame second baseman, the guy who did things the right way, and according to all reports is doing a great job of teaching the AAA kids. Basically, he can do no wrong.
If the team sucks next year and Gonzalez is managing he'll be heavily criticized. He'll likely be painted as a manager who isn't getting everything out of his players, and more importantly, the guy standing in Sandberg's way.
If the team struggles and Sandberg is managing, expect the blame to be on the players. I can see it now. "What's he supposed to do? He has a terrible team to work with."
In my opinion, neither manager will have this team in contention next year, or is better suited to make them competitive in the future.
That's why Sandberg needs to be given his chance now. It would be a disaster to have him sign on as an assistant somewhere else and eventually become a head coach. I doubt he'll wait around to see how Gonzalez works out.
Sandberg is a former Cubs player. He understands the expectations and knows what it takes to win here. He's one of our own and wants to be here. His loyalty should be rewarded with a major league job.
Just this once, the fans may be right.