gosioux76

The Chargers also, in my mind, get extra credit for expanding their collection to include throwback-inspired looks without needing special helmets. I'd almost rather see retro-inspired uniforms rather than the actual throwbacks, which weren't originally designed to account for modern uniform cuts or helmet designs.

This is a really good point. I've been keeping an eye on these TV negotiations because I'm curious as to how the league is going to work around all of the troubles with regional sports networks' inability to work out deals with popular streaming services. I noticed how this year, the Timbers reached a deal in which all of their home games will be broadcast by the Fox affiliate but will be produced by the RSN, which then has rebroadcast rights. I thought it was a clever way to keep doing business with the RSN while not limiting access to the telecasts. Here in St. Louis, where I live now, I've been wondering whether the expansion team would attempt to do something similar. (As it is, I can watch every baseball game using MLB.tv except for the Cardinals, and as a Hulu+ subscriber can see almost every NHL game via ESPN except for the Blues.) But then I came to learn that MLS was shopping the whole thing out as a single package, so now I have no idea what the outcome might be.

Fascinating, for sure. I watched a lot more CFL last year thanks to ESPN+ broadcasting most of the games in the U.S., and I was certainly curious, but mostly as a novelty. I found the three down thing particularly difficult to adjust to, and got frustrated by watching teams go two-and-out so often that I couldn't adjust to the rhythm of it. Certainly, with more time I'd get used to it. But you have to want to stick around to give it more time, and I didn't feel compelled to do so.

The sweet spot for rule changes with these upstart league is making tweaks that are noticeable enough to make you look innovative but without fundamentally changing the game people recognize. I thought the XFL did a great job of this. Some of their ideas, like preventing the receiving team on kickoffs from moving until the ball is caught, were brilliant and added a new dimension to the game in small increments. In general, these leagues are a good platform to test out improvements to the game, and the NFL should really work with them in concert on that point. But straying too far can be a turnoff. I still struggle with watching CFL games. There's enough big, fundamental differences between CFL and the NFL to make me lose interest.

Would a league that's single entity like MLS, where the league owns the teams and governs most of its commercial contracts, even consider doing something like this? I mean, as far as I understand, the local operators aren't even the ones negotiating TV packages anymore. That whole thing is out to bid right now, led by the league office.

He's probably still writing about St. Louis' chances of getting an expansion franchise out of its lawsuit against the league. Talk about fantasy.

At least now there will be something somewhat whimsical and appealing on those boring Rangers uniforms.

I’m convinced the Twins front office is led by mad geniuses. That’s an incredible move. Now get pitching.

I can see your point. But if you adopted a minimum level of pitching substitutions in a game, I'd argue there would no longer be a need for the three-batter minimum. Say a team gets to make four (or pick your reasonable preferred number) pitching changes across nine innings: In that scenario, the only thing stopping the Cardinals from pulling that pitcher would be if they'd already used their allotment of changes. If the manager is doing his job, he'd be managing his staff in a way that accounts for that scenario. I don't think that's unreasonable. If anything, it brings a new dimension to managing your bullpen. One question about your proposed scenarios for speeding up pitching changes. Wouldn't it mean putting pitchers on the mound without adequately warming up? Or is this working under the assumption that those guys have been working in the bullpen for many innings before this switch happens?

I doubt this is an original idea, because it's way too obvious and probably flawed in ways I don't realize as I type this, but ... what about taking a cue from soccer and put a limit on pitching substitutions? Like, limit them to three pitching changes per game. It would require managers to be much more judicious about when they give pitchers the hook. They can still avoid overworking starters, but you'd see far fewer moments where a pitcher is brought in to face one batter. I'm sure this is something the players' association would hate because it would effectively legislate limited playing time for relief pitchers. But still, I think it's a good idea. This would also fall into the same sort of category @Ferdinand Cesaranowas lamenting. It limits managers from deploying players as they see fit. But if the way they're doing it now is dragging the game down, then I think the league has no choice but to regulate it. I'd still would've liked to see the shift given more time, though. I know someone earlier said something about pitchers today being a lot faster and better than during the Ted Williams era, making it harder for batters to adjust. But I'd have hoped more of them would have carried the ethos of Ted Williams. I mean, he Williams laughed at the shift and essentially said, "screw you, I'll find a way around it." It really seems like the only bonafide strategy of working around the shift today was to swing harder, as if it's a battle of cavemen against the pitching intellectuals who keep outsmarting them.

In a similar vein, I find fascinating that, in a 19-year career, Don Baylor's only World Series ring came in 1987, when he had only 14 hits in 20 games for the Twins. (Five of those hits came in the World Series, including a home run.) And for the sake of this thread, I'd say this is definitely him in the "wrong" uniform, despite the piece of trivia shared above.

You're right on all of this, of course. But I had hoped that the shift would end organically by forcing players to channel Ted Williams and become better hitters. I realize the whole "hit'em where they ain't" thing is easier said than done, but it seems like the prevailing strategy of modern day baseball is more Ted Kluszewski than it is Rod Carew.

Yes, I realize that, and I saw the same graphic. But can't how it ranks within the internal organizational structure be different from how USL is attempting to position it within the broader U.S. soccer landscape? Or was this league intended from the jump to be a second division?

This seems like a pretty smart move from a competitive landscape perspective. I can't recall exactly, but will the new Super League be considered the tier two women's league, much like USL Championship is to MLS? Or is it intended to be a direct competitor to the NWSL . If it's the latter, setting your schedule to run in parallel with the European season is a smart way to draw attention to your product without the noise of a more established competitor. I'd assume this might also have ramifications as it relates to being a player in international transfer windows, but that's just a guess.

He was rolling before injuring his knee a few weeks back. He's back on the court, but apparently still trying to re-find his footing, so to speak.

Agreed. Childhood me has a lot of fond memories of Harlan as the play-by-play voice of the expansion Minnesota Timberwolves back in '89.

I think you're right about this, but I also don't think that it's anything new. It's the same reason why worst-to-first stories are so rare in baseball. It's just not a sport where you can turn a team around easily in a two- to three-year window, especially if you're one of the have-not markets that, in addition to not having bottomless pockets, aren't a first-choice free agent destination. And it's certainly not like the NFL or NBA where a top 10 draft pick can come aboard and instantly make you better. That talent takes years to develop and they seem to fall short of expectations more often than they don't. Because of that, the machinations of team building will continue to be centered around these overly complicated decisions that usually involve weighing the value of unproven long-term assets (prospects) to make equally risky short-term deals. In an environment like that, it seems like the only formulas that work for long-term planning are overspending and dumb luck.

It's OK not to like Tom Brady. I didn't care for him when he was with the Patriots and winning everything, but then he went to the Bucs and I realized it was the Patriots I disliked more than Brady. But aside from that, I find all the hand-wringing over his decision to play another year a little ridiculous. Think of it in a more relatable context: Your longtime co-worker is good at his job, but has worked a really long time and decides to hang it up. You buy the cake and give him the goodbye party, but after taking some time to think about it, he realizes he still really likes his job and isn't ready to retire. Do you get mad at him for prompting you to buy him a cake? This really isn't any different, except in the case of Tom Brady, a lot of people just don't like the guy who un-retired. And that's fair, just don't let that dislike masquerade in some argument that he did something wrong, because he didn't. You're just annoyed.

This Wolves team is dangerous and easy to overlook.

I assume this is a side effect of a team being a junior tenant in a stadium their majority owners don't control? I'm sure the objective here was to have something that could be removed and leave the Yankee aesthetic unsullied. But man, that's unfortunate.

I guess that's one way of looking at the trade. You could also suggest the Reds gave up a pitcher on the wrong side of 30 who's best years are behind him for a fireballer who was the Twins' top 2021 draft pick. As a Reds fan, you've got a lot of examples of things that are frustrating, but I think that Sonny Gray deal might be a push for both teams.

A merger makes a lot of sense, for all the reasons you outlined. No disagreement there.. But part of me also really likes the idea of arena football finding a comfortable landing spot through multiple, niche, regional leagues, kind of like the way baseball used to be a generation ago. It's the one pro sport (outside of the ABA2000 nonsense) where mid-level to small metro areas can field a pro team. Even most third-tier American cities have indoor sports arenas they use to host events. I love it that cities like Bismarck and Sioux Falls can have a league that fits their metro model. I realize none of these leagues could be considered regional, and all cover a pretty wide footprint. But to me, going small and local is the sweet spot for this sport.

I think you did a great job of explaining exactly why Tom Brady's situation should not be compared to Peyton Manning's. Peyton Manning could no longer compete at this level, so he retired, unequivocally. Tom Brady has proven that he still CAN play at this level. Just because he's at an age when you, and others, THINK he should retire doesn't mean he's somehow more insecure about his legacy than Peyton Manning was. I get that all sports fans are essentially arm-chair experts in everything, but it's not Tom Brady's problem that every football TV broadcast wasted bandwidth on highlight montages because their own reporters speculated on his retirement. I could understand calling him a narcissist if he didn't still have game, but he's still one of the best quarterbacks in the league. Just because he's capable of defying norms defined by others also isn't his problem.

The number of statements that could start with "Don't know why ..." as it relates to this team and rebrand seems endless.

These are really nice. I also think it's pretty cool how they got Yoda to make one of their slogans: "San Diego, we are."