Letters to the Editor
-
I will never "pay" for Salon...
While Heather Havrilesky and Stephanie Zacharek are routinely given 4 pages, and King is relegated to 2.
-
Lacrosse
I look forward to this article as then I'll know something about Lacrosse! Or maybe not. I tried watching Cricket Highlights when in Scotland and became more confused than before I started.
Hey, why not write an article explaining Cricket for those of us not born to it?
You can do this between the Superbowl and March Madness when no interesting sports games are being played. I believe you can do this, I read your articles year-round, even when they're about things like baseball (boring) or basketball (silly) or hockey (really silly).
-
Parity No More?
I think you make some interesting points about the aging of the market cap and the improving ablity of some franchises to manage it. Or is it a proven ability of other teams to consistently mismanage it? I guess I'm not so sure that its a case of good franchises staying good rather than bad franchises staying bad.
-
Packers fall to parity, not injuries?
Best wide reciever, plus three running backs were lost to injuries, they had a ton of other guys missing time, as well.
Parity, by my count, got Mike Wahle and the other guard. I'm all for giving O-lineman their props, but this might be overstating a tad. You might Father Time in their, with regard to Favre. I don't believe it myself, Favre has always thrown crazy interceptions, but its an argument.
King, or anyone, tell me why I'm wrong.
(my lines, on the other hand, are victims of parity. The parity between Old Man Ford, Matt Millen and Steve Mariucci's football acumen and that of a troop of red-assed baboons)
-
To Mike Skuras
KK gets two pages, five days a week. That makes a total of ten. HH and SZ don't get that much per week put together.
-
The Theisman Rant
I could not believe the comments by Joe Theisman after the spitting incident in the Washington-Tampa game. First, he hadn't heard Mike Carey say that #21 had been ejected. Then he wanted the replay booth to get involved, which obviously they could not. Then he just blasted Mike Carey for making a wrong call which could affect the outcome of a playoff game.
Carey was standing right in the middle of the incident. It was obvious that he must have seen something that wasn't picked up on camera. Spitting was the most likely candidate from the begginning. Theisman's rant was just completely out of left field and revealed a level of unmatched incompetence in the broadcasting field.
-
Another flaw in the theory
Denver didn't win their division last year -- that was San Diego at 12-4 -- so there were only 3 repeat division winners this year.
-
Today's column
Love ya, King. However, and this might be the result of a post-prandial dip on my part, I have no idea what you're talking about today. Still, love ya.
-
Something's happening here...
I don't think there's any great mystery whats happening here, there are just a couple of franchises that have figured out the cap system and will be able to produce credible teams on a much more consistent basis then other teams. What do three of the four teams that won games this weekend have in common?
They were all teams that had gone deep in the playoffs in the last two years and were playing rostors full of players that have never won a playoff game.
As for Tampa and Washington, well, its better to be lucky then good and the Redskins were.
On a completely different note, if the Skins win this weekend and face the Bears in the NFC Title game, would it be the first time a Wild Card team has played three teams it has already beaten in the playoffs?
-
Flying Spaghetti Monsters unite
King - based on the amount and accuracy of your empirical evidence as presented and the verifiability of its claims, your theory might qualify for state funding in Kansas.
Have you, too, been "Touched by His Noodly Appendage"?
-
????????????
I'd love to weigh in on this "theory," but I have no idea what the "theory" is nor what the "evidence" for it is. Thanks Sansho1 for saying something . . . I was afraid it was just me.
-
To Mark...
"KK gets two pages, five days a week. That makes a total of ten. HH and SZ don't get that much per week put together."
I should have been more clear. Word count/total pages wasn't my point. Two pages/1400 words (at a time) isn't really enough to let KK (or any writer for that matter) get a grip on a subject.
But if, you want to do the math -- Assuming that each writers most recent output is representative (HH and SZ were only 3 pages this week), let's do a word count.
KK = 1440 x 5 = 7200
SZ = 2031 x 2 = 4062
HH = 2490 x 2 = 4980
4062 + 4980 = 9042 > 7200
-
actually...
If by some other major stroke of luck Washington beats Seattle and goes on to play the Bears they will not play 3 teams in the playoffs that they beat in the regular season as they lost to TB in the regular season meeting.
And Theisman's rant was actually equaled by his partner Mike Patrick who seemed to be even more upset about the incident that Joe was. I usually like Mike Patrick, but he was way off base there. I figured the guy probably said something totally beyond the pale which was the reason for his penalty. Spitting made even more sense. When the ref is literally standing right there and is a guy who seems to be an excellent ref I would think the broadcast morons would have to give him the benefit of the doubt.
-
Aha!
"I'd love to weigh in on this "theory," but I have no idea what the "theory" is nor what the "evidence" for it is. Thanks Sansho1 for saying something . . . I was afraid it was just me."
Give King three pages to work with, and there would have been no confusion! :)
-
No, I don't understand it either
I would like to subscribe to the "Huh?" party with respect to this comment. King makes more sense when he's talking about baseball to me, which, since I've never seen baseball played, don't know the rules, and can't generally match the teams to the cities (no, I'm not an American, why do you ask?), is saying quite a lot.
To the extent that I can follow this nonsense he seems to be telling me that something's changed, but he doesn't know what. I think I'll have to quote sci-fi author Roger Macbride Allen in response:
"Sir, something's happened!"
"Thank you for that cognent and highly detailed report."