The top 5 things everyone gets sick of dealing with when it comes to sports

I didn't watch the NBA finals. I didn't care. It isn't that I'm not a fan of basketball--quite the contrary, in fact. So what is it, you ask? Well...there are several reasons, reasons that I guarantee not only drive myself nuts, but send the rest of the world into diatribe the likes of William Wallace would tip his hat to--or in this case, bow his lovely celtic skirt.

Thy words move not only my heart, but also earth and moon my good lad.

1) Announcers, Spokespersons, Analysts.

They all go in the same category because they all say same things that a five year old child would say when cheering on his younger brother or sister. "That was a good play." "Nice job, Timmy." The only difference? Tina isn't wearing a 1500 dollar suit and doesn't do it for a goddamn living. Let me be clear: say something that sounds somewhat intelligent. Don't say, "you know, Tim Duncan is just solid in the post." No shit he's solid in the post: he's been playing in the post since the Dark Ages; I don't need to hear how good he is in the post or how nice of play it was--I can see it was a nice play. Tell me something I missed. Show me a replay of a pick and roll that set someone up or an off-the-ball movement that somehow freed a player--show me things I can see myself. Most of these guys have played professional basketball, played against top, legendary players. Tell us what it's like to guard them, to shoot over them. Tell us how difficult it is. Give us a sense of what it takes to be a shooting guard and having to walk the ball up the court with five seconds left; yeah we know it's tense, but what's going through your mind? 

Do they do that? No. Is that only for basketball? Hell no. I can clearly think of soccer as an example: Alexi fuckin' Lalas. That man has a bigger head than any goldeneye character with big head mode on.

Picture for reference and size comparisons.

The funniest thing about it? Alexi Lalas did absolutely nothing for soccer in the U.S. Sure, he may have influenced some people, but how many kids have posters of him in their room? And that's his problem. He expects them to. They got clobbered at the world cups time and time again,  in a time period that american soccer was looked upon as the worst of the worst. Sure, he had some wins, but who cares: You're getting paid to get on national television to tell me that Spain is excellent at holding the ball--yeah, we know; any idiot with eyes can see that. Genius. Absolute Genius. 

2) Comparisons. 

We here it all the time: MJ and Lebron; Kobe and MJ; Jesus Christ and Lebron (wouldn't be surprised if that has happened already). "Well, Jesus walked on water, but Lebron took his headband off...ya gotta give to Lebron there: he's got two championships; Jesus don't have any." I don't give a shit about comparisons and the rest of the country gets sick of hearing about after the--oh, I don't know-- 1,000,000,000th time you've mentioned it. For the record, no, Lebron will never be as good as Michael Jordan and there are too many goddamn reasons why. End of discussion. I don't want to hear it even if he does get to six championships. Why? Because I"m not watching the game to listen to those comparisons: I'm watching the game because I've had a long day and I want to watch mind numbing basketball where I can get into the game and cheer my favorite team on. That's why we love college so much: it isn't as much about the superstars; it's about the team. It's always about the team. You don't see this in other sports, I don't think. Sure, there are some comparisons in soccer, but I don't know about Hockey and Baseball--I don' t know much about the sports so I can't comment. What I do know is that when I am watching baseball or hockey, I don't ever hear those debates; I hear about trades, burnout, statistics, possible playoff scenarios, and frankly, when I watch those sports, I see something that isn't in basketball right now: the love of the game. You listen to hockey announcers, you can tell they absolutely love it; they love how the game is played; same with baseball. But when you listen to sports announcers and analysts for basketball talk, all they can reference are the players, not how exciting the game is. Jesus Christ, shut up already. 

3) Money

The fact that there was even an NBA lockout with this shit just drives me up the wall. Whatever happened to playing for the fun of the game? Is that what sports have come to? You don't see that in hockey or soccer though (can't speak for baseball). Like I said, those players LOVE to play that game. They would be playing the game if their pay was taken from them and they were homeless. 

Where the fuck is my hockey stick? 

The point? What was the point of the NBA lockout? Hey let's decide how much money players get as compared to the managers. How arrogant are you? You really need that extra million bucks in your pocket? What's worse is some of them came from nothing and have forgotten that. You see some of them walk around with $5000 watches and god knows how expensive their suits are, and to what end? You deprived fans of quality time watching a sport they love because you wanted more money? Do you not get paid enough? Tell that to the goddamn fireman who volunteers and comes home every night to watch a bball game and can't because boohoo Ray Allen wants more money (I have yet to talk about football, but I'm getting there). America should have just stopped watching basketball at that point. It's honestly depressing. In a tumultuous economic season, where shit can hit the fan at any moment, job losses are rampant, education needs reform, and healthcare is so messed up and corrupt that there may not be any hope for it, the last thing we want is to have a little bit of pleasure taken from us because 23 year old basketball phenoms want an extra million. Play the game. You play for us. You play for yourself. Not fuckin' money.

4) Grow the fuck up

And that's another thing: grow the fuck up. You're not Jesus Christ. You're not god's gift to basketball. Here's a news flash: at some point, there WILL be somebody better than you. You see older, more mature players acknowledge this--Kobe and Tim Duncan come to mind. Younger players are so conceited and hotheaded they think they can walk on water. I don't blame them really though. Think about it. You're 22. You just finished your second year in college and you get all this media attention. You're unbelievable at putting a ball in a hoop. Scouts want you. Endorsement deals are on the line. You go to the NBA and get advanced 10 million dollars and all the sudden your face is plastered everywhere you can see it. Would you be arrogant? Yeah. So I blame the system, which I'll talk about next. But for now, you can see the immaturity everywhere, from in-game behavior to the twitter comments they make. It's awful. Who raised you. Were you raised to be like this? Were you raised not to appreciate a single goddamn thing that was given to you? Granted, not all players are like this, but some are--and they are ignorant about it too, as if that's just how it should be. No it isn't. It should never be like that. 

One of my favorite moments in sports is when UC and Xavier got into a huge bball fight and UC's coach goes to the press conference and completely tears his players and the sport apart. He says, "They are not here to play bball; people are here to get an education." That's absolutely right. It's a privilege. Playing Bball at the highest level and for your country is a privilege, not an entitlement, so act like it. 

5) Deification of sports

This has to be the worst. And the best example of it is the Penn State football scandal in which young teenagers were molested and all people could care about at Penn State was how Joe Paterno got sacked for allowing it to happen, not the poor souls who would have to endure that terrible event for the rest of their lives. First, that asshole should have been sacked. Second, football isn't a religion. It isn't God, no matter how much you want it to be. And the fact that we are at the point in this country that we can neglect our morals and childhood teachings just because somebody coaches fucking football is absolutely ridiculous and is possibly the most pathetic thing I have ever heard. So much goddamn shit gets overlooked for the sake of sports. Why? Because they are stars? Because they are more important than other people? That's just ridiculous. 

Want another example? When Lebron took his fuckin' headband off. I mean are we serious? Did sportsnation really just write a whole article about a headband? A HEADBAND? I could understand if it was something important like a chain his wife gave him, but a headband?

One headband to rule them all, one headband to find them; one headband to...okay you get the picture.

I suppose I should admit I'm not immune to this. I do idolize Steven Gerrard, but I would hope that if he came out and said he was racist or made homophobic comments, or touched little boys in the bathroom, I wouldn't love him anymore. And that's the point: we don't take into consideration character anymore. I love MJ, but he cheated on his wife. No one ever mentions that. I hate Duke but I love the coach (his name is too long) because he teaches character. He teaches respect. Have sports lost that? Or has this country lost it and sports become the vehicle with which it is visible to the world? I don't know. In the end, it just makes me want to scream. 

have a good one. 

--Matt

Thoughts about Music--more like a rant really.

Recently I read an article that reported a blog post made by Patrick Stump, the singer/songwriter/guitarist of Fall Out Boy, commenting on how all everyone does is hate/troll anymore over Twitter, YouTube, and whatever other sit-behind-a-safe-chair-and-criticize-people social media website that the world uses. This led me to his blog post. I read it. I liked what he had to say. I do think he's right on one level: people can't seem to really encapsulate why they hate Nickelback, they just do; people can't seem to grasp why they hate Creed, Taylor Swift, Nicki Minaj, Justin Bieber, Rhianna, and any other artist you can think of that gets mass radio airplay over the pop stations. Patrick goes on to say that he never indicated that he himself liked Nickelback or Creed either, but that people should stop trolling and "defining themselves by hate." This is a valid point, and one that I should consider myself. Patrick Stump even went as far as blowing up his tweeter feed to someone who trolled him recently and the insults he threw back were pretty creative. The man knows his stuff..

But you know what...I do know why people extremely dislike those aforementioned artists--well, at least I know why I extremely dislike them.

I'll start with Fall Out Boy. In my opinion, the lyrics and words are just pretentious, fanciful, and self-dramatizing (see what I did there? the irony), but that is me. That isn't the kid sitting alone, depressed, wishing he had someone to talk to and puts a Fall Out boy album on and it speaks to him. That's different. I'm 24. I grew up with different tastes and so maybe I'm giving Patrick Stump too hard of a time on that one. Stump: 1. Matt: 0. But then I see the title of their latest album: Save Rock and Roll.

You google this  and find numerous reporters writing articles asking, "Can Fall Out Boy save rock and roll?" to which Stump has not replied. And I don't expect him to. 1) Fall Out Boy isn't rock and roll; they never have been. At most, the band is the apotheosis of an emo evolved pop/punk band, influencing legions of young teens in their youth that deal with issues at home, at school--whatever. I say emo, but not in a condescending sense of the word. I mean emo as in not rock and roll: rock and roll is a term that has its origins in sex (of course). When people wanted to get it on they would say, "let's rock and roll". Like everything, it has evolved. Music became its medium, where rock and roll could take the form of notes, of harmonies, of earth-shaking guitar riffs. And so, there aren't many rock and roll bands left that fit that criteria that are still touring. There aren't many bands that shake the ground they play on. I'd say the Rolling Stones, Red Hot Chili Peppers to some extent, AC/DC, Oasis (if they'd ever get back together), U2 at some moments in their career (my favorite band), The Black Keys, Foo Fighters, and The White Stripes (when they were together)--Jack White is some mix of all the awesomeness in the world so I don't consider him Rock and Roll to the full extent. There are others that I know I'm forgetting but these are the ones off the top of my head.

 2) Knowing that you aren't a rock and roll band--Patrick acknowledges this in his blog post--what message is he sending, and is the band sending, with this new album titled Save Rock and Roll? Fall Out Boy can't save it, and it's something beyond arrogance if they ever thought they could. Sorry, they just aren't talented enough. They're a good band with good lyrics, but there is a reason bands like RHCP, U2, AC/DC. Jack White, are regarded with such admiration and awe. They got something more. I don't know what it is, but take a look at some of Bono's lyrics sometime, particularly the songs, "The Fly" or "Moment of Surrender", or listen to how unbelievably difficult and creative and long-lasting RHCP has been and how freakin gifted they are. Look at how U2 has changed over the years. Listen to "Mysterious Ways," then "Where the Streets have no name," then "Lemon."--yes that's the same band. And maybe I'm biased--okay, I probably am very biased, but other bands have done this as well: Zeppelin, Beatles, Stones, Radiohead; they know that music--their music must evolve and become more complex, while at the same time still being able to appease the hardcore fans they've had since they were young.

I can forgive all that. That still doesn't make it for me. Though the bands I mentioned have these characteristics in common, they also have another one that is much more important: they created something completely unique and new. Edge. Enough said. He alone has influenced music to the likes of Coldplay, Killers, Muse, and any other freakin' band that uses a delay and echo pedal. RHCP blended punk, funk, and rock for the first time ever; and the Beatles...well..do I even need to say anything? The point is this: Who the hell titles their album Save Rock and Roll when they have never been a rock and roll band and never will be and will never have the talent to save anything except for their respective genre?

Sigh.

Patrick says we shouldn't have people like Nickelback or his own band, but you're asking for it when you title your album that way. Patrick stated that nickelback is working on being the best damn nickelback they can be. Oh yeah. You mean the I-use-the-same-four-chords-but-on-a-different-key-to-get-a-hit-song band? Cause that's what they do? Go listen to photograph, then someday, somehow, then far away.. same chord progression, same goal in mind: let's make a hit song to get popular with younger audiences, particularly teenage girls, so that we can make more money.

That's why we hate those types of people. That's why we troll. We get sick of the music industry in general. We get sick of listening to Taylor Swift write another song with below-mediocre lyrics about a girl in love with a boy she can't have or has broken up with. That's like romance novelists: they have a formula, they stick to it. The plot is the same, the characters different. The song is the same, let's just change the order and melody a bit. No effort really. None. Nobody cares. Sure, teenage girls want to hear it, but let artists who are at that age sing about those experiences. How old is Taylor Swift now? 22? And the best she can come up with in all her life experiences is singing about sitting around a fire gabbing about exes and meeting strangers that you want to have sex with? You know what most people were going through at 22? Life adjustment issues. Moving away from family. Changing Roles. Accumulation of Responsibilities. Some people went through Divorce. Depression. Thoughts of Suicide. Deaths in the family. Deaths in your friendships--real or symbolically. Ask yourself when you were 22 which would you find more relevant, which would connect with you the most: that Taylor Swift song or someone talking about leaving home for the first time, having to do things on their own, etc.? That song isn't a song about someone at 22; it's a song about someone at 15, masquerading like its supposed to be 22-year-olds. It shows the lack of maturity and how Taylor has yet to leave high school.

Why do we hate Justin Bieber? Because he won a goddamn milestone award for his ingenuity and musical innovation at the tender age of 17 when he hasn't done a damn thing (this was voted by fans). His music hasn't created anything new. He isn't Daft Punk. He didn't define Blue-Eyed Soul like Billy Caldwell, Hall and Oates, and Michael McDonald. He isn't Bill Withers, Al Green, Earth, Wind, and Fire; he didn't define Motown like the Spinners and he isn't changing Motown like Fitz and the Tantrums are doing right now. He didn't freakin' define Rock and Roll like Clapton, Cream, Zeppelin, and numerous other bands emerging in the 1960s, and he isn't changing it like Jack White, RHCP, and the Black Keys are doing right now. I don't care if he writes what he writes. He can write stuff like "boyfriend"; it's age appropriate. That's what I would be writing if I was 17. But don't wear your pants below your damn knees and walk around like your god's gift to music. You have nothing to be arrogant about and you should know that.

But I really don't blame him. I blame the industry and I blame the lack of education in homes about music, what's good what's bad. I know that sounds pedantic and austere, but we let our teens listen to crap. And it shouldn't be a big deal. I know it, and I really don't know why I'm so pissed about all this. I guess its because I believe music should be more than what some artists represent it be. It should be more than making money. It should be about Tupac writing about his struggles to get out of the hell he was in; it should be about Billy Guy singing the blues or Stevie Ray Vaughan talking about his struggle with alcoholism. It should be something that opens our mind to new ways of singing or playing guitar (Jimmy Page, Edge). It should be about fighting for a cause, or an anthem for the poor.  It should be about the terrible heartache that individuals go through and about the joys of love, about the mind-numbingness of death in a family or friend, and about the injustices of this world.

Remember the first Black Eyed Peas song that was a hit single? It was about what was wrong with the world and now what are they singing about? Exactly. The same goes with Maroon 5: Adam Levine is so damn talented and yet he writes these sappy pop songs to make money. So do other bands and artists like Taylor Swift. The point? The sad pathetic point? You're wasting your talent. You have the opportunity to do something more with it and here you are caught up in the short-term aspect of things when you could do what U2 does and change the face of music. Okay done ranting. Whew.