My fantasy football league recently held its draft and here’s a brief explanation on why I picked who I did and the starting rosters of the other 9 teams in the league. Sure, we opted to draft a little on the early side (right as training camps are starting) but we just couldn’t wait any longer. And just for clarification, our scoring is slightly different from the standard Yahoo League -who does standard scoring now anyway? We get .5 points per reception (instead of 0), 1 point for every 50 passing yds (instead of 25), 1 point per 30 return yds (instead of 0), 3 points per field-goal regardless of distance, 4 points per punt/kickoff return touchdowns and kinder penalties for defenses.
Click on to read about some draft strategy, how I ended up with Kurt Warner and Donovan McNabb and to watch some awesome highlights (including one of the best catches you will ever see) which I now watch in an effort to convince myself that my team has the talent to make the playoffs.
Seahawk’s wide-receiver T.J Houshmandzadeh has announced he’ll boycott the new Madden game until his player rating is changed. He first broke the news on a radio show but has since been invited on ESPN First Take to voice his displeasure with some of the Madden creators – this is the video above. I think these two geek-a-zoids (who probably have one of the best jobs ever) held their own quite well and Housh is coming out of this looking a little bit dumb.
First Housh is rated 91. He’s complaining about being rated a 91. That puts him as the 10th best receiver in the entire game! I would argue that the rating is extremely generous and Housh should be more than happy with it. He is 32 after all and his career is on the decline. He’s one of the most reliable receivers around but he’s got no speed, no downfield threat and doesn’t score a lot of TDs. He can place all the blame he wants on the offense in Cincinnati, but the numbers don’t lie. And in the world of video games, your numbers are what makes your rating – there are no intangibles.
Anyways, he says he’ll prove himself in this new Seattle offense and they’ll be forced to up his number. But can’t he just get the game and change his rating if he really feels so strongly about this?
As many of you know, the 2009 ESPY’s are coming up on the 19th, so here are my votes for some of the more interesting categories (who are we supposed to pick in the ‘Best Jockey’ and ‘Best Bowler’ categories?).
This was the best moment in 2009 for a number of reasons
Nominations: Florida’s Tim Tebow’s speech, Helio Castroneves wins the Indy 500, US Swim Team wins thrilling finish in Olympic relay.
I think this is pretty obvious. ESPN doesn’t hide its strange fascination with Tebow (we get it, he’s a great person) and Castroneves’s win after his legal troubles was quite emotional (for him, anyway) but none of these ‘moments’ come close to the US winning the relay. Not only did the win keep Phelp’s quest for the record alive, but it was one of the most exciting finishes in swimming history. Do not forget that the French team vowed to “crush the Americans” and the British commentators prematurely stated that the Americans could not catch up. Their comments made the .08 second victory that much sweeter. Easily the best moment.
Robin Soderling’s stunning upset of Rafael Nadal at the French Open left many critics puzzled (“Wait, wait, wait. Who’s Robin Soderling?”). Nobody had ever seen Nadal (previously undefeated at the French Open) pushed around on clay with such consistency before. Experts struggled to come up with valid reasons explaining how this ever could have occurred. What did Soderling do so differently from everybody else? Soderling, didn’t do anything different. Nadal on the other hand changed a lot… And he’s not the only one.
Read on to see what other athletes made the mistake of wearing pink and thinking they could get away with it.
Ivanovic just realized the men's trophy is bigger...
So I just watched the French Open Women’s Final (weird, I know). The commentator mentioned that both the men and women champions would be receiving equal prize money. In fact all Grand Slams have now made pay for men and women equal. I was watching the match with a 60+ year old dutch man (also, weird) and he pointed out that the men have to play longer than the women, therefore justifying a higher paycheck. For those that don’t know, a women’s match is best out of 3 sets, while men play best of 5 in Grand Slam tournaments. He argued that equal pay was unfair because the men had to play more than the women. Over the week, those extra sets add up. In addition men consistently attract bigger crowds and TV viewers. Is he right? Does this justify a higher prize?