Rushing

This is one of many comments that have given Rush Limbaugh a not-so-favorable perception despite his status as a media icon. Some liberals, especially those who make a living from needling conservatives, may consider him the cancerous throat in the right wing movement in the United States. Some conservatives, especially those who enjoy philosophical banter with their counterparts, see him as a flawed, but passionate champion of the cause to bring America back to an idyllic time that may have never truly existed. Moderates may view him as a blowhard who would likely find an enemy in every corner of a gentrified Harlem or a friend in a certain Congressman that defied proper House decorum recently.

The story surrounding Limbaugh as a potential bidder for ownership of the St. Louis Rams has exploded to the point that there is little else to add to the conversation except the above audio clip and an overlooked consideration if majority owner Chip Rosenbloom truly takes a look in his direction.

If the team owners consider a potential sale to this group, it would show that the Limbaugh/Dave Checketts union is more about Limbaugh’s cash and Checketts’ resume than it is about Limbaugh’s views. For those who don't know, Checketts was pretty much born into the sports business. From becoming the youngest General Manager in NBA history for the Utah Jazz at 28 years old to evenutally becoming president of the New York Knicks in 1991 to the head of all Madison Square Garden properties to his current ownership of Real Salt Lake (MLS) and the NHL Blues, Checketts has faced nearly every challenge the sports business has.

With a tenuous stadium situation for the Edward Jones Dome and a painfully quick fall back to the bottom rung of the NFL after Super Bowl success about a decade ago, the Rams are in need of a steady hand at the table. Yes, money can provide everything a fan base desires, but an absurd amount of riches can be a curse if not managed properly (see Oakland, Dallas and Washington).

I do believe that Jason Cole at Yahoo! Sports says it best in regards to how the other owners (even Oakland's much-maligned Al Davis) are going to monitor the Limbaugh bid:

For all the hard-hitting and violence of the NFL, the reality is that the league likes the benign a lot more. It’s like when singer Glenn Campbell had his show in the 1970s and was going against the likes of the Smothers Brothers. When Campbell’s producers urged him to take on political topics, he refused. He wanted his show to be an escape, not an agitator. As a result, he had much higher ratings.

And folks, the NFL is all about ratings (duh). This isn’t even about how the players or the NFL Players Association or anybody really feels about Limbaugh. It’s about providing an escape from the likes of Limbaugh. Keep the people happy as they watch and, most importantly, spend. The NFL is the Disney World of sports and just as Disney makes sure that none of the paying customers wear anything out of line, the NFL restricts folks from saying anything out of line (just ask Jerry Jones).

In the sports business, we have seen time and time again how individuals will leverage their fame, access and resources to become players in the boardroom. Look across the major league landscape and you’ll find people from various backgrounds who, while having some passionate interest in the games, probably have no reason to be involved (Jay-Z, Usher, pretty much everyone who has a piece of the Miami Dolphins outside of principal owner Stephen Ross). Unless Rush agrees to let Checketts handle the minutae of the Rams' business without having to concern himself about his partner's provocative politics, there's little chance that the owners will bring him into the fold.

Basics (Again)

A few times in recent days, I've had people tell me, "Jay, I'd love to read your stuff if I knew what you were talking about."

You'd think that would upset me considering that so much time is spent watching, listening and analyzing the totality of sports; totality meaning the games, business, media and culture. Yet, that sort of feedback is just as important to me as thoughs from the obsessed.

Back in 2007, I came up with a list of links* that would help explain the basics of a few of the sports I talk about from time to time. As you take a gander, you'll see that there are plenty of other games that aren't mentioned on Scribe. For that reason, I ask that you please feel free to add a few sites of your own for all of us to learn about them.

Most of all, if you are truly willing to invest time to learn about sports, here are a few ideas:

1. May I suggest a book with one of the coolest covers you may ever see (or feel)?
   
   
2. When you begin watching games to understand them more, try to not watch pre-game shows. The lingo of those shows are speaking to the already converted, therefore, everything those anaylsts and commentators say won't make a lick of sense to you unless you've watched a good bit of contests. Instead...
   
   
3. As anything else in life, some learn through osmosis; taking all the information in like a sponge before performing the tasks. So, it may be a good idea to read those basics while or even before you watch games. Yet...
   
   
4. Others learn by doing. You might want to actually try to play these games or at least place the objects of the games in your hands and simulate the motions of the game. Play catch or properly hold as basketball in your hand and practice shooting. This seemingly silly and simple idea might help you understand how difficult it really is to be an elite performer.
   
   
5. The most important suggestion I have for you is something that seems blasphemous: for the initial period/quarter/half, mute the game. A lot of fans out here say that they mute the TV when an announcer they dislike is calling a game. While most of them actually don't, the truth is that the sounds of the game can color judgment rather unfairly.
   I am a firm believer in objectivity, even with personal favorites and professional interests. More often than not, the games you will view come from the home team and the biases will make you believe that one side (typically the home team) is naturally better than the other for a plethora of reasons that have little to do with the games themselves. One shouldn't believe that a different color of laundry automatically makes one player superior to the other when clearly the opponent may be the best in the business. Taking the blinders off from the outset should make it easier to hone in on the specifics of the games as you grow more comfortable watching sports.

While you can do what you will with the suggestions, do take the time to walk through the basics. I do the best I can to mix up topics on Scribe to make sure that people of varying levels of fandom (or non-fandom) can find something to their liking. Yet, even beyond this tiny portal of the world, understanding the fundamentals won't make sports so foreign.

* After 22 years of operation, the Arena Football League (as we knew it) folded in early August. This isn't lost on me, so for proper accuracy, this footnote and post acknowledges the fact. While seeking an article discussing the news, it turns out that there are talks for a reincarnation of the league. Good timing, perhaps?

Inaccessible

There may never be another like Michael Jordan, no matter how hard we try to find one.

Or in the cases of some, make one.

For years, those of us who love and appreciate the game of basketball have been participants in the crisis of the search for “the Next One”. Most of us have passively accepted this as background music while trying to enjoy the game play of current stars. Yet, there will always be those that either love to debate which player has the standing to take his mantle – between LeBron James, Kobe Bryant and Dwayne Wade – or want to single out the NBA for even pushing the agenda.

Yet, if you take a look around, you’d find that the A isn’t the only entity looking. In fact, if there is one league that feels that they have that next Jordan, it’s the Professional Golfers' Association with one (Eldrick) Tiger Woods.

Starting tomorrow, Augusta National is going to be the epicenter of über-levels of hype as Woods takes part in his fifteenth Masters appearance.

Chronicling Tiger’s achievements over that span on Scribe would be kowtowing to carpal tunnel syndrome. You could sum up his career in the amount of majors he has won, his lifetime earnings, the potential to become the first professional athlete to earn a billion dollars as an active athlete and being the first “ethnic” star of significance in the sport’s history. Yet, the most impressive aspect about his career is actually how he made golf, for the lack of a better term, relevant to the mainstream sports world.

Prior to Woods’ arrival, only the diehards and keenly aware sports fans could name the most successful golfers on tour. Outside of those people, some may have still believed that Arnold Palmer was not only a really good non-alcoholic beverage, but still an active player on the PGA tour.

His consistent dominance in a sport known for quirks, flukes and frustration at the bunker made the sports world take notice. You can say his absence has the same effect as television ratings – no matter how criticized the metric is – plummeted and “when is Tiger coming back?” queries skyrocketed.

So, the major players in the media and advertising business believe that they found “the Next One” in Tiger. Just as discussed in this space about Jordan, Woods has the clean-cut look, the accolades, the publicly-displayed drive to succeed and the apolitical stance to not tick anyone off.

Yet, what those folks seem to overlook is that what made the ascension of Jordan possible was the sport he played.

You don’t need much to play a game of hoop. Anyone can get a ball (or something like it) and a hoop (or something like it) to shoot around, have a make believe dunk contest or practice their ankle-breaking crossover. Outdoors or at a gym, the game is one of the few that can be played in the same manner, regardless of location.

Just as some of soccer/football’s most revered players come from a myriad of backgrounds, basketball features much of the same mix (and surprising to some, many come from more middle-class backgrounds than we thought according to last year’s profile on the NBA by ESPN the Magazine). Part of the allure of Jordan for some is that by obsessively fine-tuning the craft, no matter where you were, you could attain similar success or very close to it.

That’s not exactly the case with golf.

There are most likely golfers who did not come from the pristine and exclusive world of private clubs, crisp polo shirts and affluence. Yet, unless you tear down some housing or want to fight with environmentalists, golf courses aren’t built every day. On top of that, just as the expense of equipment has been explored by Major League Baseball to reinvigorate interest in their game among African-Americans, it is a deterrent that golf has recognized, but not necessarily figured out to a T just yet.

This is not to say that suddenly, civil engineers devise their plans because of an athlete’s popularity. Yet, as anything in society, it’s easy for someone to be interested in a product – in this case, a sport – or service when the costs of participation are easier to negotiate.

Tiger is certainly one of the most revered athletes of all time. He shares equal footing with Jordan in terms of being a singular dominant force in a sport full of just really good players. However, to consider Tiger on par with Mike in terms of global stature is to say that golf’s popularity on par with basketball’s global reach.

It’s nowhere close, no matter how hard some try to ignore that fact.

Props to Getty Images for the photo