A little over the top

Michael Vick is an athlete who's life is magnified right now. The media is on his every word and move, but when is it too far for the media to go? When is it a little over the top? Recently Michael Vick's apology notes sold for 10,200 dollars. (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3020177). I don't know about you, but I definitely think that is over the top. I can see someone buying Barry Bonds record breaking home run, but a convicts apology note. The media is behind these purchases of famous athlete's stuff. Their over the top, very opinionated coverage sucks in its viewers to an extent where they are infatuated with the athlete. I think that the media should separate an athlete's personal life from their professional life. Even though what Michael Vick did was bad I still don't think he deserves the extreme amount of humiliation he's getting from the media. Think of how you would feel if an apology note you wrote was sold for 10,200 dollars. I'm not just referring to Vick, I'm referring to all athletes in all sports. For example, Mike Tyson and his problems. He is retired and I see no reason for the media to be covering him. I would be embarrassed and ashamed of myself. I'm not condoning bad behavior, but I don't think that every citizen deserves his privacy. That means the media knowing when the coverage is a little over the top and leaving a person's private life private.

Comebacks and Criticism

Every few years retired players have a feeling; some call it a "mid-life crisis", and believe that they can compete at the elite level again. Most of them failed their goal of coming back the same as before they left, but there's one that stands apart from the rest. Michael Jordan's first comeback, towards the end of the 1994-1995 season, is the only comeback I can think of where the player came back at the same level. Since that day I’ve welcomed any player to try a comeback. Hell, even when Michael Jordan lost a step during his second comeback I didn’t criticize. Every time a player makes a comeback there are a growing number of critiques who don't condone it (i.e. when Reggie was mulling over a return to the game). On SportsCenter we all see the panel rip into players walking the comeback trail to the pros. The majority always puts down the idea of the return and chalks it up to missing the game. I disagree with the panelists. For example, Allan Houston is coming back this season, working out at the Knick's facility, and the analysts are putting him down. Allan was one of best shooters in his time and was forced to retire due to injury. He's healed up and wants to comeback. I think Allan and all players who want to make a comeback, in any sport, should be able to do so without the criticism. I know the criticism of retired players comeback is not a major issue or even noticed by media, but it's just a repetitive act that I feel should be hushed by the leagues.

Defending the best interest of baseball

Salaries are sky high, but one player has the potential to blast the market into space. Alex Rodriguez has the option to opt out of his record setting contract to set a new one. No player in the game today has a yearly salary in the 30 million dollar range, but A-Rod has the possibility to do that. Players continually state that they're not looking to cash in just want what they're worth, they want market value (http://epaper.tfponline.com/WebChannel/ShowStory.asp?Path=ChatTFPress/2007/02/21&ID=Ar02904). If Alex does opt out and get 30 million per year the market value will rise. Mediocre players will be adding an extra five million onto their overpriced contract. For example, Ted Lilly has a contract of four years for 40 million. He has a career record of 74-65, hardly over a .500 win percentage, and if A-Rod had gotten 30 million last year Ted Lilly probably would be looking at four years for 60 million dollar contract. One record setting contract will increase the market value, which will raise the already sky high salaries. The MLB commissioner's job is, "defending the best interests of baseball", which gives Bud Selig the power to nix any deal he thinks is out of line. I think that if A-Rod opts out of his contract and is offered a 30 million dollar deal Bud Selig should nix the deal. The MLB doesn't have a salary cap, like the NBA, NFL, and NHL, and even if it were to happen it would take a long time to take effect. For the "best interests of baseball" a salary cap needs to be implemented to stop these inflating salaries. Until then Bud Selig should continue to nix deals that will increase the market value.

NBA Refs

Now we've all heard about Tim Donaghy and his gambling scandal, but what I want to get at is about the NBA refs. According to Ric Bucher from ESPN magazine, refs have voiced their disrespect for the system and their superiors. They're scrutinized by fans, media, and their superiors. Stern has said that the Donaghy scandal was an isolated incident, but I believe that the "fixing" is still going on. Stu Jackson and Ronnie Nunn are management who have really hurt their reputation with the refs. Nunn has a show on NBA TV where he goes over tapes, in slow motion, and points out wrong or missed calls by the referees. Jackson and Nunn do this critiquing throughout the season and call the officials and say you haven't whistled a particular infraction for several games and need to pick up the slack. Which makes refs feel like traffic cops filling ticket quotas. I don't know about you, but this doesn't sit right with me. If officials are being forced to call more infractions it takes the game out of the players hands. "Flops" are being called more often because refs say it's better to be safe and make the call rather than get chewed out later by a superior. I believe the system needs a makeover. Let the game be decided by the players and not whistles trying to fill quotas. Making the refs call certain infractions for consistency is stupid. Every game is different. Some are dirty, some are clean. Don't get me wrong, officials need to be evaluated, but this system has flaws that inadvertently affect the game, and needs to be changed.

Writing, what is it good for?

My feelings about writing differ depending on the subject I'm writing about. After getting a preview of this class though I don't think I'll have a problem with interest. Writing is very enjoyable if you're free to express your own opinions. In past English classes writing was a huge chore due to the fact of lack of interest in topic. So at the moment I still loath writing, but maybe I'll come to enjoy it again.