U.S. Skiing's Massive Fail...

We here at the Lager have a bone to pick.

It’s been bothering us for two weeks now, but it finally came to a boiling point last night, and we can’t hold back any longer.

Back in December or January, or whenever it was that NBC started repeatedly bashing the American public over the skull with their Olympic coverage promos, one thing really struck us here at the Lager: Lindsey Vonn is a freakin’ BABE!!!

The Sports Illustrated cover, the gold medal potential… it would be fair to say we were quite smitten.

But then the games started, and the slow sinking disappointment began to set in.

See, the more we here at the Lager see of Lindsey, the less attractive she becomes. One could call it the Hilary Duff Corollary. When you first see Hilary Duff, much like when we first saw Vonn on NBC’s Olympic promos (because, let’s be honest, no-one gives a shit about any winter sports besides hockey outside of this quadrennial two week period, and if you had started asking random people on the street who Vonn was prior to December/November of 2009, 85% of them would have erroneously guessed she was an American Idol contestant), you think here’s a hot, blonde, all-American girl… what’s not to love.

Then, as you see more and more of Hilary (like with Lindsey), you start to notice all the little flaws: “Well, she’s always carried a few extra pounds,” “Have you seen her without makeup? It’s like night and day,” “You know what, they’re really not as big as I thought they were,” etc., etc. For instance, this is not the same female that is pictured here.

To make things worse, as far as we here at the Lager can tell, Vonn has roughly the same emotional disposition as a piece of driftwood. She is about as interesting/personable as pre-Ambien/fire-hydrant/sex-rehab Tiger Woods.

And she sucks at skiing to boot!

Allow us to elaborate, clearly Vonn is a world class athlete who is capable of dominating her sport – but in this post-Michael Phelps era, if you want to shine as an Olympian, you have to SHINE baby!!! A gold in one event, crashes that keep you off the podium in two more events (Giant Slalom and Super Combined), and a bronze in an event in which YOU ARE THE REIGNING WORLD CHAMPION (Super-G) is simply not going to cut it.

Now, here’s where the massive fail on the part of the U.S. Alpine team comes in; some brainiac marketing director behind team USA decided to make Vonn the face of U.S. skiing for this Olympics… WHEN THEY HAD JULIA MANCUSO RIGHT THERE!

Let’s examine:

Mancuso is HOT! Really hot! And she’s funny (see her tweets regarding Tiger Woods’ press conference last week), personable, and wears her heart on her sleeve when she races.

When she won her Silver Medal in the Super Combined she was uncontrollable – rolling around on the ground at the finish line, kicking her legs in the air and screaming – and when she finished her second attempt at her not-so-spectacular first Giant Slalom run yesterday, she collapsed in a heap at the finish line like she had just been punched in the gut.

We certainly can’t speak for the rest of the American public, but we here at the Lager enjoy it when our athletes show a little emotion. It let’s us know they’re human, and not some over-marketed, politically correct, PR-contrived hype machines.

AND, Mancuso has managed to finish in the top-10 in all four of her events! Two Silver medals, an 8^th place finish in Giant Slalom despite yesterday’s fiasco one her first run, and a 9^th place finish in the Super-G.

Look, we get that Mancuso has performed at a higher level than expected, and Vonn at a lower level than expected – but not by a whole lot in either case. We also get that as a marketing/PR person with the U.S. Olympic team, you have to market Vonn, she’s your star… BUT, why not market both of them as a pair? Aren’t two hot skiing chicks (well, one hot skiing chick and one masquerading as a hot skiing chick), both who have a chance at medaling, going to attract more viewers than one?

By making it all about Vonn, the U.S. Alpine team marketing people, or whoever, have made it quite difficult for U.S. fans to feel good about the U.S. ski team if Vonn isn’t performing at a high level, a dilemma that was highlighted by Mancuso’s recent comments on the subject, in which she said that, “People (athletes on the U.S. team) are having a hard time reaching their potential because it's such a struggle for attention. You come to meetings after races and it's like it's a bad day if Lindsey didn't do well."

This dynamic is further examined in this Howard Bryant piece for ESPN.com, but the main point is that the U.S. Alpine Skiing team is having one of its best showings in Winter Olympic history, but the casual fan isn’t grasping that fact because all the focus from fans and media alike is on Vonn and her struggles. Why? Because that’s what was force fed to us for the last three months, Lindsey Vonn, Lindsey Vonn, Lindsey Vonn!

So, we here at The Lager feel for ya Julia, this Olympics should not have been the Lindsey Vonn show. So to the marketing idiot at NBC/the Team U.S.A. marketing department who screwed this one up, we would like to issue a simple “Nice job, dickhead.”

And to Julia, we just want to let you know that it’s not all about Lindsey all the time, because at the very least you’ve gained a few fans, fans who normally don’t even like skiing, but who will now follow you for the rest of your career as a direct result of Vonn-fest 2010: all of us here at the Lager.

Wacko for Who?

The following is inexplicable:

(from ESPN.com)

_____________________________________________________

Getting the 'W'

It's not always pretty, but Ravens QB Joe Flacco knows how to win in the postseason.
Here is a look at his career statistics in the postseason.

Opponent	Yards	TD	INT	Passer rating	W/L
Miami Dolphins	135	0	0	59.1	W
Tennessee Titans	161	1	0	89.4	W
Pittsburgh Steelers	141	0	3	18.2	L
New England Patriots	34	0	1	10.0	W
Totals	471	1	4	44.2 (avg.)	3-1

________________________________________________________

And I'm supposed to believe this guy has a shot at beating Peyton Manning and the Colts?

Congrats to the Indianapolis Colts on another AFC Championship appearance.

You're so vain, you probably think this post is about you....

Well, this is a rare treat.

Just three days after handing the “Ass-Clown of the Year” award to d-bag Chris Surette – whose “Walk of Shame” column is currently being specially printed onto 20 rolls of toilet paper for use in my apartment building’s public bathroom – I am blessed with the honor of handing out yet another prestigious award:

Congratulations Bill Belichick, you’re this year’s recipient of “The Arrogant Bone-headed Call of the Year Award.”

And to think, I thought it was going to Rick Pitino* …

The only possible way you can explain Belichick’s decision to go for it on 4th and 2 from his own 28 while leading by 6 last night is pure and unadulterated arrogance. Even Andy Reid knows you punt that ball and trust your defense to hold the opposition to a field goal in that situation!!!

(Though apparently Reid does not know you go for it on 4th and 1 from the opposition 1-yard line when trailing by two scores in the second quarter**.)

For anyone who might have packed it in and gone to bed after the Pats scored on the opening drive of the fourth quarter, putting them up 31-14, here’s a quick recap of what happened in the final 12:00 minutes of play:

• Peyton drives 79-yards and hits Pierre Garcon on a 29-yard touchdown strike when Leigh “Toast” Bodden bites on the pump fake.

• Pats fail to do anything with the ball on their next possession and punt.

• Peyton throws an interception on the first play of the Colts next possession. Pats drive 51-yards for a Gostkowski FG, putting them ahead 34-21 and seemingly sealing the victory with 4:12 remaining in the game.

• Peyton leads another 79-yard touchdown drive – greatly aided by a horrendous pass interference call on Pats DB Darius Butler – scoring in just 1:23 to put the Colts within 6 with 2:23 left to play.

That’s when it happened… when Belichick inexplicably morphed into “Reid 2.0: Bigger, Bolder, Dumber.”

The Pat’s got the ball back on their own 20 after a touchback on the Pat McAfee kickoff, and before even running the first play of the drive Brady was forced to burn a timeout***.

THE FIRST PLAY OF THE DRIVE!!!

How do you take the field on the first play of a drive without knowing which play you’re going to run and which plays you can audible to depending on where the defense lines up?

So, now the Pats run their first play with only one timeout remaining, getting just under a yard on a Kevin Faulk run up the gut. Indy calls its first timeout. Brady completes an 8-yard pass to Wes Welker on second down, but he’s still 2-yards shy of the 1st down. Indy calls its second timeout. Brady tosses a short pass to Welker on 3rd down that falls incomplete. The clock stops because of the incomplete pass.

The play clock starts to tic, and the Pats face a 4th and 2 from their own 28. Belichick has roughly 15-seconds to decide whether to punt, go for it, or line up and try to draw the defense offsides and then call his remaining timeout and punt. Those are your three options as a coach in this situation.

INSTEAD of doing any of those things, Belichick calls his third and final timeout without even having his offense line up and try to draw the Colts offsides!!!

Why?!? Why Bill?!? WHY?

This is about as classic Andy Reid as it gets – indecisive play calling, squandering timeouts, just overall poor clock management.

Then, it happens. The Patriots offense returns to the field and lines up for the snap as the following conversation takes place in living rooms across New England:

Person A: What is he doing? Are they going for it?

Person B: They can’t be. They’re on their own 28. You can’t give the ball back to Manning inside the 30 with this much time left and expect him not to score. They must be trying to see if they can draw them offsides then they’ll punt.

Person A: They just used their last timeout though, they can’t make the switch. They’re going for it.

Person B: (Nervously in a low tone) They can’t be.

Person A: They are.

Person B: (Silence)…… I like it! I like the call!!! Let’s go!!!

Barack was right, the human disposition toward optimism and hope when facing seemingly insurmountable odds certainly is audacious.

There is 2:08 remaining in the game at this point. If you have a good punter – and the Patriots have a fantastic one in Chris Hanson – you have him kick it high here in order to bring the clock down to the two-minute warning. So then, you potentially have Peyton getting the ball on his own 25-40 yard-line with 2:00 minutes left and only 1 timeout.

Dangerous? Absolutely. Peyton might be one of the most dangerous quarterbacks in the game in that situation. But when the alternative is giving him the ball on your 28 with 1 timeout and the two-minute warning???

Yes, I’m aware there was another scenario in play; the one where the Pats make the first down, run out the clock, Peyton stays on the sidelines and Belichick is heralded as a “genius” once again for his gutsy play-calling. But therein lies my point.

Belichick was well aware of everything I just broke down in the previous paragraphs when he made the decision to go for it on fourth down.

He knew the potential consequences of his decision, and rather than make the simple call, the call to punt the ball, the call that the majority of coaches in the NFL would have made under the same circumstances and might have given HIS TEAM its best chance to win, he chose to make the riskier call with the potential to make HIM look like genius.

In an unapologetic display of arrogance, Belichick chose the chance for individual glory over the potential for shared victory.

If the Patriots punt the ball and manage to stop Manning and earn a win, the story in today’s headlines reads “Patriot’s 4th QTR defensive stand saves victory.”

But, if the Patriots make that first down? If Kevin Faulk doesn’t bobble the ball and gets his forward progress awarded? If Belichick had saved that one last timeout and challenged the forward progress? If the Patriots somehow get that first down, then the story in today’s headlines reads “Belichick’s gutsy call seals victory.”

Bill Belichick decided to turn 2:08 of clock into a one play game that was all about him on Sunday night, and that’s why on Monday morning he’s the proud recipient of 2009’s Arrogant Bone-headed Call of the Year Award.

Congrats Bill. Make sure you talk with Chris Surette at the after-party, he might have some pointers on how you can still pick up chicks now that you’re no longer a football genius.

___________________________________________________
*You know, for the whole get woman pregnant, force her to abort, convince assistant to marry her and pay them to keep quiet thing, Allegedly.

**See Philadelphia Eagles at San Diego Chargers, Nov. 15, 2009. Reid elected to kick a FG in this spot, as well as again in the 3rd quarter when facing a 4th and 1 from the Chargers 7-yard line. The Eagles lost by 8 points. For those of you lacking in the math department, the point differential between a FG and TD (plus PAT) is 4. The difference between the two FGs kicked on 4th and 1 instead of the TDs that could have been scored had Reid elected to go for it? 8 points.

***Now might be a good time for an NFL Replay Challenge Semantics refresher. In order to initiate a coach’s challenge in the NFL, you must have at least one time out remaining. This is because the way a coach is penalized for an incorrect challenge is via the loss of a timeout. If you could still challenge without a timeout, then what’s to prevent a coach from challenging every play after he’s burned his final timeout, he’s got nothing to lose, right? Keep this in mind as we continue.

"And this year's ass-clown of the year award goes to..."

Now, usually I try to refrain from criticizing other writers’ work – nobody is perfect and we all have misfires – but I stumbled across something this morning I just couldn’t keep quiet about.

Chris Surette, a columnist for The Mirror - Fairfield University’s student newspaper - has been making headlines around the blogoshphere because the reaction this column is garnering has placed the school in some hot water.

If you haven’t read the column in question, I would strongly urge you to do so before continuing to read this post. I’ll wait….

Done? Good.

Surette’s failed attempt at a humor column is the biggest, most offensive pile of dog shit I have ever read.

I am disgusted. And not so much with the subject matter – though I think Chris’s readers get a pretty clear picture of his opinions regarding the fairer sex in the piece – but more-so with the execution of the column itself.

Look, I’m not a great writer, and I don’t claim to be – but I like to think I’m at least decent at what I do. I also happen to be a recently graduated journalism major that had a fairly well read weekly humor column in my own student newspaper for three semesters, so I like to think I know my way around humor writing a bit (though some of you will surely disagree).

The subject matter Chris has chosen to expound upon is overdone and cliché in college humor writing. Which is fine!

Half of my material throughout my career in opinion writing has been overdone and cliché. However, if you’re going to dedicate a column to an overdone and cliché topic, the redeeming value for your audience has to be either a fresh take on the subject matter, and/or SOME ACTUAL HUMOR!!!

Surette’s piece fails to accomplish either.

Its offensive, douchebag-ey (that’s right, douchebag-ey), frat boy tone and horrendous grammar and sentence structure negate any potential for humor throughout the column. As for fresh takes, the closest this disjointed, rambling, pathetic excuse for writing comes to any type of deep reflection is, “There is nothing worse than the awkward wake up next to a girl, who is not as hot as you thought she was when you were 12 deep the night before.”

And why the fuck is there a comma after “girl”? Take some grammar lessons moron. Not to mention that the structure of that particular sentence makes it slow-paced and confusing, which will completely turn off any audience member still reading.

Instead, try, “There is nothing more awkward than waking up next to a girl who was much hotter when you were 12 deep last night.” Or just don’t write that sentence at all and come up with an ORIGINAL THOUGHT. Now there’s a novelty, an original thought!!!

But now I’m just nitpicking.

My real problem is this: Chris Surette is just another dumbass, Neanderthal male in a Red Sox hat trying to be something he’s not – a writer.

Since Bill Simmons' popularity has grown (sorry Sports Guy, I’m blaming you for this one), any illiterate idiot from the Boston area who follows sports thinks they can be the next Bill Simmons.

The problem is, the majority of them are just like this kid - hacks with no writing talent whatsoever who try much too hard to be funny and/or controversial. This absolutely infuriates anyone who actually possesses some level of talent.

Why? Because with all these Simmons-wannabes flooding the internet with their filth, most people tend to immediately dismiss anyone attempting to write a sports/humor column, blog, or whatever, as a writer of the same ilk. That leaves the rest of us who are trying to break into an already oversaturated market with fewer readers and far less credibility.

So thanks, Chris, for taking a complex art form that is dear to me and pooping all over it with your feeble attempt at a humor column that was no doubt solely for the benefit of you and “your boys”.

At least I can take solace in one fact, Chris – that after the women of Fairfield read that “though many may consider you a slut after witnessing your glorious Walk of Shame, just realize that you have given this lucky guy a story he can share with others at the Grape for the rest of the year,” – I’m fairly confident that “lucky guy” isn’t going to be you anytime soon.

- Seacrest out.