Letters to the Editor
ramoncreager
Published Letters: 423 Editor's Choice: 61
-
Baseball Anouncers
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You write,
"If Buck were an ESPN baseball announcer he'd be nowhere near the network's best -- Jon Miller -- but solidly in the upper tier, ..."
This brings back fond memories of the time Jon Miller and Joe Angel were teamed together doing Oriole games for WBAL. What a treat! I've never heard their like, and I doubt I ever will. These two were severely tested when the Orioles started the '88 season losing 21 straight, and eventually only won 54 games. They handled the situation with grace and were well worth listening to. I have this memory of one of them reciting Shakespeare during one dreadful game. It was a great moment.
-
Revenue sharing
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Yesterday, as I watched the Packers and Bengals go at it, the announcers attempted a "tribute" to Wellington Mara that told me absolutely nothing. Thanks for this piece. I am a soccer nut and I know something about the Serie A in Italy, the Premiership in England, and La Liga in Spain. Top-flite leagues all. Even so, the NFL has got to be the most successful sport league on the planet, bar none, and it is largely because of revenue sharing. Under this system, all benefit: owners, players, broadcasters, even the fans (what a concept!). For instance, although my Packers are doing poorly, I knew they had a decent chance yesterday (on any given Sunday...), so I watched and was rewarded with a close, competitive game. In contrast in the English Premiership, where there is no equal sharing of revenue, people are already conceding the championship to Chelsea FC with over two-thirds of the season yet to be played. Is that the kind of league Jones and Snyder want? Maybe they would get richer, but all of the rest of us would be the poorer. (Wait! Sounds familiar!)
-
Soccer is not boring! But...
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Carsten, I didn't say soccer was boring. I love soccer and watch Valencia FC any chance I get on GolTV. It's just that the season outcomes are too predictable. Lets take the EPL as an example. At the beginning of this season we knew which 3 teams had a realistic chance of winning the championship: Chelsea, Arsenal and Man U. in that order. (British bookmakers William Hill gave Chelsea 1/4 odds on winning the championship before the first game was even played.) We know roughly which 6 teams are in the most jeopardy of being relegated. And there is everyone else who is playing just to remain in the middle. A technically sound side like Middlesbrough can play very well here and there. But over the long slog of the EPL season, plus FA cup, etc. they will steadily fall behind a team like Chelsea, because they simply do not have the resources to replace injured and fatigued players, whereas Chelsea can probably field 2 or 3 unique, competitive starting lineups.
Here is FIFA president Sepp Blatter's take on this issue: http://sport.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=2080542005.
Wellington Mara's legacy is that his foresight has placed the NFL in the position that it can forestall many of these problems. Jones and Snyder, who incidentally are both filthy rich already, should think twice about bringing instability to the NFL's financial structure. BTW, I'd be interested in Malcolm Glazer's take on this, as he has a foot in each camp these days.
-
The filibuster
[Read the article: Alito, the nuclear option and the Democrats' thin hopes]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"How hard to do you fight if you know that you're going to lose anyway?"
The Democrats may well lose what little credibility they have with their base and with independents if they don't fight. Besides, what is the point of having a weapon, the filibuster, if you are not going to use it? This is it! The big one! The Democrats should fight Alito tooth-and-nail. Even if they lose and the Republicans go nuclear, fighting this awful nomination will allow them to establish something they sorely need: a clear record of opposition that they can point to during the next mid-term election campaign. Further, it will put the Republicans on record for nuking the filibuster, something most Americans opposed last time the issue came around, and put them at a disadvantage should they lose control of the Senate.
-
Why are Unions singled out?
[Read the article: Arnold's big flameout]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The author writes:
"Taking power from unions that inflict this kind of pain on the people they purport to serve doesn't seem like such a bad idea."
How very interesting. I will accept this proposition right after similar measures are taken to curtail the political power of large corporate interests. Heck, with what Enron bilked out of Californians, I would wager you could fund a pretty decent pension plan.
The author's view on unions betrays the typical upper class conceit that it is they who are most qualified to lead the helpless masses. Thus they give themselves tax breaks and other advantages while simultaneously attempting to curtail what little power the people have left to them, through tort "reform", union busting, and other anti-social measures. Ultimately they will succeed only in scuttling the mechanism whereby elites and huge corporate interests can be forced to act in a socially responsible and sustainable manner. I doubt this is what is best for California or our Nation.