Keefe To The City

Mar 10, 2010

John Tortorella’s Time Could Be Running Out

Type “fire john tortorella” into Google and you will get nothing. Well nothing relevant. Sure, there are “about 17,800” articles that match those keywords, but none of those 17,800 search results suggest that he should

Type “fire john tortorella” into Google and you will get nothing. Well nothing relevant. Sure, there are “about 17,800” articles that match those keywords, but none of those 17,800 search results suggest that he should no longer be coaching the Rangers. The majority of the results involve the keywords, just not in that order, and instead commend Tortorella’s job as coach and beg for Glen Sather to be fired. That is actually the solution that makes the most sense to improve the Rangers, but at this point it’s unrealistic.

Since Glen Sather took over as general manager of the Rangers in 2000, he has fired four head coaches including himself. He has used the head coaching position as the scapegoat for his managerial mistakes and in turn built a revolving door behind the Blueshirts’ bench. He has spent his time as GM acting without consequences, and why wouldn’t he? If it took James Dolan as long as it did to fire Isiah Thomas, you’d have to think Sather is safe until at least 2020, no matter what product he puts on the ice.

Last February, after winning just twice in 12 games, Tom Renney became the latest casualty of the Glen Sather era, as he was relieved of his coaching duties with the Rangers sitting in sixth place. At the time, it was the only move Sather could make to shake up a club that he had allowed to go stale. He had cornered himself by yet again constructing a roster of overpaid former stars; stars that made names for themselves by achieving success away from New York. Despite proclaiming to get younger, Sather resorted to his old ways of signing aging free agents with their talent in decline, and his poor decisions from the previous summers were exposed as the level of play heightened in the final weeks of the season.

The Rangers were good enough to make the playoffs last season if Renney kept his job, just like they had been the three seasons prior. But in a state of panic, Sather hit the gong on Renney’s tenure in a last-second attempt to wake up an uninspired team that was simply going through the motions. With Sather’s “superstars” underperforming and the team watching their postseason berth slip from their grasp, a 2-7-3 slump was a good enough reason for Sather to pull the trigger on Renney. If Sather refrained from making a coaching switch, it was likely that blame would fall upon him if the Rangers missed the postseason. By putting a fresh face behind the bench, he could direct the media’s attention at the new coach and use the new coach as his newest scapegoat for his own mistakes if things didn’t work out.

On Feb. 23, 2009, Sather fired Renney and brought in John Tortorella, who went 0-3-1 at the helm of the Rangers on an interim basis in 1999-00. Just five years removed from winning the Stanley Cup with Tampa Bay, Sather was bringing a big name to Broadway. He wasn’t giving someone their first NHL coaching job like he did with Bryan Trottier in 2002-03, and he wasn’t rolling the dice with an unknown. He was bringing in a proven coach and someone whose in-your-face style and zero-tolerance policies were the anti-Tom Renney. Sather thought that Tortorella would love being back in New York and that New York would love Tortorella back. So far it hasn’t worked out that way.

Tortorella finished what Renney started by keeping the Rangers in the postseason picture last year. But in the first round, the team let a 3-1 series lead slip away to the heavily favored Capitals, and Tortorella became the focal point of the series after some unruly behavior with Capitals fans. A series that was supposed to be about the play of Henrik Lundqvist and Alexander Ovechkin became centered around the coach who was just over a month into his new job, and it looked like Tortorella and New York weren’t going to the be the match Sather hoped for.

With Tortorella in his first full season as Rangers head coach, the team has been everything it wasn’t when Renney was the coach, and it has been everything it was before Renney became the coach. The team is reminiscent of the inconsistencies that defined the organizations from 1997 until the lockout when the postseason was always just out of reach. Trying to predict which Rangers team will show up on a given night has become as challenging as predicting which Knicks team will show up. And like the Knicks, the “good” Rangers rarely show up two games in a row.

The team has been treading water all season, managing to stay in the thick of things in the playoff race, but really just prolonging their inevitable mathematical elimination, which is now creeping up fast with the recent success of the Flyers, Canadiens and Bruins.

So, my question is this: What has John Tortorella done to this point to remain as head coach of the Rangers?

I am certainly not a believer in changing coaches every season and giving coaches only one season to get their feet under them in a new city. But then again, I don’t decide who coaches the Rangers, and going by the history and the standards of the man (Sather) who does decide, it seems like a fair question.

Sather fired Renney – the Rangers’ winningest coach since Mike Keenan – for going 2-7-3 despite still being in playoff position. Renney had brought the Rangers to the postseason three times in three years and had them in sixth place in his fourth season before he was let go. He coached four Rangers teams that went to the postseason, which happen to be the only four Rangers teams to go to the postseason during the Glen Sather era.

In Tortorella’s first full season with the team, they have been chasing the Top 8 for most of the winter and the last time they had at least a 50 percent chance of earning a spot in the playoffs, according to Coolstandings.com, was Jan. 22 – well over a month ago. The team relies on success from two players – Marian Gaborik and Henrik Lundqvist –and despite outstanding seasons from both, the Rangers are still closer to be in 13th place in the East then they are sixth.

Hope is not yet lost, though it’s getting close. The Flyers, Canadiens and Bruins aren’t losing and even when they do, they don’t in regulation. Seven points separate the Rangers and the Flyers, five points separate the Rangers and the Canadiens and three points separate the Rangers and the Bruins. The Rangers have 16 games remaining and a possible 32 points available for grabs if they were to finish the season with a historical 16 wins in a row.

Since 2000, the lowest point total an eighth seed has gotten into the playoffs with has been 83 (2002-03). At that rate, the Rangers would need to average one point a game the rest of the way, and that certainly won’t be good enough this year considering the teams they are trying to catch are well ahead of that pace and aren’t slowing down.

Maybe John Tortorella’s work isn’t done in New York even though he has done little to nothing to earn another season. There is still a chance he can extend the Rangers’ consecutive postseason appearance streak to five, but time is running out on their ability to control their own fate. Coolstandings.com gives the Rangers a 21.5 percent chance of reaching the postseason entering Wednesday’s game, which is surprisingly up 5.1 percent since the league resumed play after the Olympic break. The odds are against them, but the schedule favors them in that they play Philadelphia three more times, Montreal once and Boston once with a chance to steal points from their direct competition.

During the Knicks-Hawks game the other night, Mike Breen told Clyde Frazier that he wished the Knicks could celebrate the team’s 1969-70 championship every year. Now he probably said it because it was enjoyable to talk to and be around the players and personalities from that memorable team, but he definitely also said it because that season was one of only two winning memories – the other being the 1972-73 championship – that the franchise has to live off of from the last 40 years.

This June will be 16 years since the Rangers’ last Stanley Cup celebration. The team has run out of ways to milk the memories of the 1993-94 team and run out of numbers to retire and players to recognize from the last Cup winner. After it looked like the franchise was headed in the right direction post-lockout, this season has set the Rangers back and erased any confidence Rangers fans had of returning to the finals in the near future.

It doesn’t look like the organization will have any new memories to remember and relive with Glen Sather leading the way, as his time in New York continues to be an epic disaster despite his illustrious career in Edmonton. It might not be John Tortorella’s fault that the Rangers are in the position they’re in, but eventually he will take the fall for the team’s failures, not Sather. The same thing happened to Tortorella’s predecessor and the same thing will happen to his successor.

Blogs • MLB

Mar 5, 2010

The Mets with the Most to Lose

No one knows what to expect from the Mets this season. If everything goes right and they catch a few breaks they could potentially win the division, though the wild card is probably a more

No one knows what to expect from the Mets this season. If everything goes right and they catch a few breaks they could potentially win the division, though the wild card is probably a more realistic goal. But as good of a chance as the Mets have of making the postseason, they have just as good if not better a chance of missing out on the postseason for the fourth year in a row. It’s hard to argue for or against any prediction when it comes to the 2010 Mets because it’s hard to predict success or failure for a club that has erased all expectations.

On Monday, Daniel Murphy told Mike Francesa that the team “is built to win now,” and Omar Minaya looked like the guy from the Miller Lite commercial trying to say “I love you” when he told Francesa that he believes in his team this year. Forget Mets fans, not even the players or management know what to expect this season.

The Mets are at a crossroads after gradually getting worse since their Game 7 defeat against the Cardinals in the 2006 NLCS. If you had told me before Game 7 that the Mets wouldn’t win a single postseason game over the next three years, I wouldn’t have believed you. I don’t think anyone would. As a Yankees fan, I was legitimately scared of the Mets’ rise in 2006 and the idea that they might make a run at being the toast of the town; the same way the Jets did this winter by becoming more relevant than the Giants. But here we are, 31 days away from Opening Day 2010 and the Mets’ last postseason win was against the Cardinals in Game 6 of that NLCS.

The conversation of breaking up “the core” of the Mets has become as much a part of summer as Wiffle ball and lemonade, and Omar Minaya and Jerry Manuel’s job statuses have become day-to-day as this point. Mets fans are at their breaking point if they haven’t already broke, and what has gone on the last three seasons can’t go on any longer … at least not with the same team and front office.

Right now, Mets fans are just happy baseball is back because it gives them actual games to talk about, and there is no longer a need to dwell on last season. But how long that happiness lasts will depend on how well the Mets perform. Stuck in the same city as the World Series champions and in the same division as the National League champions, Mets fans are in a unique position that no other fan base in professional sports can relate to.

The Mets will either return to the postseason this year and buy some much needed time with their fans, or they will extend their October-less streak and the Wilpons will change the look of the team like a dirty diaper, which is what they have become. Some players will stick around even with another losing season in Queens and maybe some front office executives will avoid the ax. But there is definitely more at stake for certain members of the organization than there is for others if the Mets don’t win. Here is what’s at stake for those players and personnel if the Mets lay another egg in 2010.

5. Does that offer in Boston still stand?
Jason Bay is living the high life … for now. He is the new guy in town and everyone wants to rave about his well-mannered personality and delightful clubhouse presence. But it’s also spring training and no one cares if the new guy is hitting the ball out of the park as long he is showing up to the park, isn’t injured and is friendly with the media.

Bay went from Pittsburgh to Boston and went from being “That Canadian guy from the Pirates that we only get to see during the All-Star Game” to being “The guy who made Red Sox fans quickly forget about Manny Ramirez.”

The same traits that Mets fans are using to praise Bay – his nice-guy routine and vanilla personality – will be used as ammunition against him if the team isn’t winning. As bad as the Boston media can be with just one team in town to worry about, Bay has no idea what the New York media and the city’s fans are capable of when things begin to go south.

Bay gave up the opportunity to hit in the middle of the order for a World Series contender to be the new guy on a team that could possibly win its division or be mathematically eliminated in July. He gave up a situation he was already comfortable in and a situation he already experienced success in. Now he will either be responsible for helping bring the Mets back to prominence or for helping extend a dark period in the franchise’s history. If it’s the latter, he will be left to think about “what could have been” in Boston.

4. 36 million regrets
If I’m Omar Minaya or Jerry Manuel and I have one final chance to turn things around, I wouldn’t want Oliver Perez in my rotation. There were other pitchers and more economically sound options for Omar Minaya during the 2009 offseason, but he decided to go all-in on Oliver Perez and ended up with a busted straight.

Perez made $12 million last year. For that amount of money, the Mets could have had Bobby Abreu ($5 million) and Randy Wolf ($5 million) and $2 million left over to split among their season ticket holders as an apology for their 2009 product. Instead, their return on investment was 14 starts from Perez at $857,142.86 per start and 127 base runners in 66 innings.

Perez’s current contract hasn’t been completely Carl Pavano-esque just yet, but it’s on its way. At least the Yankees had competition went they were courting Pavano, and they were actually outbidding other interested teams.

The Mets are still on the hook for two more years and $24 million for Perez, so he isn’t exactly going anywhere. The only place he is going is to the mound every fifth day – if he can stay healthy – and the Mets are going to just have to cross their fingers and hope for the best when he starts. Otherwise, $12 million is a lot to pay a Triple-A starter.

3. The Mets’ Donnie Baseball
David Wright is the core member with the least to lose, and because of that he isn’t grouped with the other two. He is the face of the franchise and he is the player the media looks to for answers, whether that is fair or not.

When Wright had the Mets one game away from the World Series in 2006 at the age of 23, he looked like he might be the centerpiece of the first dynasty on the other side of town. Now four years later, his career is looking to be more like Don Mattingly’s than it is Derek Jeter’s, as Wright is slowly creeping up on 30 and becoming a great player who happened to play on a bunch of bad teams.

Wright is the go-to guy in the clubhouse for the media, and the most popular player on a team whose popularity rivals Governor Patterson’s. He needs to be the leader of the team on the field and off of it more than ever this season. He needs to take control of the team and make it his team now that the veterans he came up with are no longer with the club.

Wright’s home run and RBI totals dropped off drastically in 2009, and that can’t happen again in 2010, even if Citi Field wasn’t built for right-handed power. Mets fans have refrained from turning on No. 5, but now it’s officially “David’s team,” if it wasn’t already, and the success of the team will be directly related with his own performance.

2. Break up the core
I have under June 1 in the “When will the ‘break up the core’ conversation dominate the tri-state area for an entire day” pool. And if it gets to that point, David Wright will be safe, but Jose Reyes and Carlos Beltran won’t be.

It wasn’t too long ago that Mets fans tried to argue Jose Reyes’ abilities against Derek Jeter’s. That debate ended the same way it did for Red Sox fans when they tried to argue Nomar Garciaparra against Derek Jeter. Now Mets fans aren’t worried about Jose Reyes being Derek Jeter, they would be happy if Reyes could just stay in the lineup the whole season.

Reyes’ contract is over at the end of the season with the Mets holding an $11 million club option on him for 2011, which they will most certainly exercise. But after that, it’s anyone’s guess as to what will happen with Reyes. Maybe he will be the pre-2009 Reyes or maybe his best days are behind him. No one can be sure, but coming off an injury-plagued year and already having health problems this season, Reyes has a lot to play for and a lot more to lose if he can’t regain his old form.

Beltran is in a similar situation to Reyes after being injured for a significant amount of time in 2009. Couple that with his recent knee surgery that the Mets may or may not have granted consent for him to undergo, and Beltran is going up against some serious pressure once he returns.

Beltran has more to lose than Reyes because he isn’t homegrown and because he is older. Mets fans love their homegrown talent and they will back them up – regardless of their abilities – until they are no longer a Met. With Beltran turning 33 this season and with just one year left on his contract following this year, the Mets will be more willing to find a new home for Beltran than they will be for the other core members. It’s just a matter of finding out if another home would even want to deal for Beltran.

1. Win or learn how to use Craigslist
Jerry Manuel and Omar Minaya are a package deal, and at this point in their Mets careers, they can’t exist without each other because ownership won’t let them. And ownership shouldn’t let them.

Neither of the two will be looking at the same position with another team ever again if they can’t right the sinking ship in Queens. It either has to work out in New York or it’s back to being a first base coach somewhere for Manuel and back to scouting the bus leagues for Minaya.

Omar doesn’t deserve another chance with another manager, and Mets fans don’t deserve to have Jerry Manuel as their manager unless he can lead the team to the playoffs. Because of this, Mets fans find themselves in a Catch-22. The majority of Mets fans want one or both men replaced, but in order to do so, the Mets would have to miss out on the postseason again. No Mets fan is willing to concede 2010 and live through another season of misery in order to get a new regime, so they are going to have to live with the “M and M” boys for one more season.

Bob Melvin’s recent hiring in the Mets scouting department can’t be good for Manuel’s future and Jerry is certainly aware of this. And since Omar didn’t exactly give a straight answer to Francesa’s question asking if he no longer is making the decisions in the organization, it’s safe to say Omar knows were his fate lies as well. Winning cures everything, and it’s the one thing standing between a happy ending and a horrible breakup for Omar and Jerry in Queens.

Blogs • Rangers

Mar 3, 2010

Deadline Dilemma

There was nothing on Monday to help ease the devastating feeling of Sunday’s gold-medal defeat. On Monday, the Knicks allowed 74 first-half points to the Cavaliers in an eventual 31-point loss … Alex Rodriguez was

There was nothing on Monday to help ease the devastating feeling of Sunday’s gold-medal defeat. On Monday, the Knicks allowed 74 first-half points to the Cavaliers in an eventual 31-point loss … Alex Rodriguez was linked to some sketchy doctor and needed for an FBI investigation … Jay Leno made his Tonight Show comeback in place of Conan O’Brien … Sadly, Jimmy Fallon still had his spot hosting Late Night … and I don’t even watch The Bachelor, but apparently he ruined the season finale by choosing the wrong girl. As if Sidney Crosby finding Ryan Miller’s five-hole seven minutes and 40 seconds into overtime wasn’t bad enough, the events of Monday just poured salt into the wound that Sid the Kid had opened the day before. On Tuesday, however, the gold-medal loss began to hurt a little less.

On Tuesday, the Yankees had their annual team outing, which resembled a 12-year-old’s birthday party, meaning it was the eve of the team’s spring training opener. And the tri-state area hockey teams resumed play after a two-week layoff, going undefeated on the eve of the NHL’s trade deadline.

The Rangers began a stretch of 20 games in 42 days by scoring four goals in a win against the Senators without Marian Gaborik. The Islanders helped improve their chances in the Eastern Conference playoff picture with a 5-3 win over the Blackhawks on the Island. And the Devils held off the West’s best in San Jose with a 4-3 victory against the Sharks.

With Wednesday’s 3 p.m. trade deadline looming, it was the last chance for teams to decide whether they would be buyers or sellers, even though the local teams have pretty much cemented their roles for the rest of the 2009-10 season.

The Devils are built to win now and they know it, as does the entire hockey world. Lou Lamoriello sees a team with several key players in their mid-30s and a franchise goalie who is nearing 40. It’s why he went against his own philosophy and the culture he instituted in New Jersey to acquire Ilya Kovalchuk in a deal that cost him Johnny Oduya, Niclas Bergfors, Patrice Cormier, a first-round pick in 2010 and a second-round pick in 2010. The Devils’ window of opportunity is slowly closing and this year might be one of the last chances the organization has to capitalize on the Brodeur Era. Lamoriello knows what he has and he is going for it all this season, even knowing that Kovalchuk’s time in New Jersey might only last through the team’s last game this season.

The Islanders, on the other hand, are built for the future. With a strong core of John Tavares and Kyle Okposo, the Islanders aren’t about to sacrifice the talented youth they have lacked since the lockout for a 19-game boost that will land them a matchup with the Capitals in the first round. The Islanders have been a pleasant surprise this season with a team of mostly 20-somethings, managing to stay in the thick of things in the playoff race. If the Islanders can find a way into the playoffs, they will have exceeded all expectations and completed an unlikely turnaround after finishing with a league-worst 61 points last year. And if they fall short of the playoffs, no one will be disappointed since they weren’t expected to achieve this much success this season anyways. The Islanders know where they stand in the Eastern Conference and what they will be able to achieve in the near future with their abundance of young talent.

That brings us to the Rangers. They aren’t really ready to win now, and they aren’t built for the future and don’t appear to be building for the future. They remain in the same spot they have been in for the past five seasons – good enough to make the postseason but not good enough to win in the postseason. There is a good mix of young and old on the Rangers, but to say the Rangers are a team capable of going the distance, well, it would be wishful thinking. Tuesday’s win over the Senators only added more confusion in the search to find out who the Rangers are, because no one – Glen Sather included – knows what to expect from the Rangers or when to expect to it.

Right now the Rangers are either …

Team A: A team that has won three straight, is peaking at the right time and is primed for the stretch run after finally realizing its potential after five months of inconsistent play.

Or …

Team B: A team that has won three straight, but a team that picked the wrong night to play above its head and in turn, only masked its offensive problems.

If the Rangers are “Team A” and have actually found the rhythm that all of New York has waited for them to find, then there is no need to alter the roster or change the team’s current landscape. If Glen Sather thinks that the team he saw smoke the Senators on Tuesday is the team that will come to play for the remainder of the year, then he doesn’t need to tinker with the team’s current makeup.

But if the Rangers are “Team B,” then they picked the wrong night to play like a team built to win this season since there aren’t any games remaining before the deadline for the Blueshirts to show their true colors. Sather needs to know if Tuesday’s win was false hope or a sign of things to come. He needs to know if the Rangers can make a run the rest of the way as currently constructed, and he needs to decide quickly.

Had the Rangers laid an egg in Ottawa and started the stretch run off with a weak effort, it would have been easy to say that without Gaborik the Rangers are a disaster, and it would have made it easy for Sather to make some sort of move on Wednesday to shake up the roster. Instead, the Rangers took it to the Senators without their leading scorer, and no one knows if this team is OK without Gaborik and a contender with him. No one knows whether or not this team should go forward as is, or if change is needed.

In all likelihood, Sather will stand pat at the deadline, and I’m not sure that isn’t the right move. I’m also not sure it is. I’m not really sure what to make of the Rangers’ situation or what to expect of them over the next six weeks. I’m not sure that there is a move that can be made at this point that will take the Rangers to the next level and get them through March and April and beyond. And even if a move of that caliber exists and Sather makes it, there is no guarantee that he will be able to justify it in the postseason since the Rangers are currently on the outside looking in.

If Sather has been able to maintain his position with the Rangers to this point, it’s safe to say that there isn’t a trade he can make or pass up that will cost him his job. There isn’t a level of success the Rangers need to achieve or a playoff round they need to reach for him to remain general manager.

Sather put the Rangers into this awkward position of being a perennial five through eight seed in the Eastern Conference, and it should be on him to get them out of their five-year funk. Just don’t count on it happening by 3 p.m. because at 3:01 p.m., chances are the Rangers won’t be a team built to win now or a team built for the future. They will still just be the same old Rangers. Who that is, I’m not sure?

Blogs • NHL • Team USA

Feb 25, 2010

Heavenly Hockey

Thirty years after the original “Miracle on Ice,” one game separates Team USA and the gold-medal game and a chance at history.

This column was originally published on WFAN.com on Feb. 25, 2010.

If you like hockey, then you liked Wednesday. And even if you don’t like hockey, chances are that you probably watched it at some point on Wednesday because it was on for 11 1/2 straight hours. Hockey had its version of March Madness, and in this case, the Elite Eight. Aside from not being able to watch three of the four games in high definition, it was a perfect day for a hockey fan. It was a day I didn’t want to see end, and on Sunday it will be a tournament that I wish didn’t have to disappear for four years. But if Gary Bettman has his way, the magic of Wednesday won’t ever return.

Between trying to decide if Pierre McGuire’s tenure as a “sideline” reporter between the benches has been a bigger failure than the FoxTrax puck was, and wondering if the over 2 ½ will hit on how many times Eddie Olczyk says “active sticks” during the USA game (it went under, he only said it once), I tried to imagine watching Olympic hockey without NHL players and I couldn’t.

Since allowing NHL players to participate in the Olympics in 1998, the decision has been the only one the game deserves credit for in recent years. Now the league is prepared to tell their fans – the ones they have left – that the Olympics will have to do without NHL players in the future because the league is losing too much money during the two-week layoff.

Gary Bettman isn’t exactly crushing it in approval rating and he is certainly isn’t winning any popularity contests. The same man who has watched two teams relocate from Canada during his tenure as commissioner is now ready to destroy the best thing the game has going for it.

With Bettman at the helm, fighting has been basically taken out of the game thanks to the instigator rule, a trapezoid has been painted behind the net and two-line passing has been allowed. He contemplated changing the size of the net, first allowed goalies to expand the size of their equipment and then created restrictions for them. He permitted the change of the overtime format to 4-on-4 and OK’ed shootouts deciding games and playoff berths. He let the Sabres change their colors to red and black before they changed them back, and then there was that time where the NHL didn’t play for an entire season. If people cared about hockey then Bettman might have to answer for his decisions. But no one cares enough to make a stand because Bettman chased away casual fans, and the only fans remaining are those that would watch the NHL no matter what type of mud Bettman drags it through.

It didn’t have to be like this and it doesn’t have to continue to be like this. I can’t remember the last time people I wouldn’t expect to be excited about hockey were this excited. Team USA’s resurgence, and the overall talent level of the tournament has casual fans finding out that there are other stars in the sport than Sidney Crosby and Alex Ovechkin. Even if those fans missed entire first periods because they were trying to find out what NBC ancillary channel the Olympics relegated hockey to, they have still become attracted to the game. There is a throng of new hockey fans with a desire to watch a sport that can use as many fans as it can get. And the commissioner who has spent the last six-plus years trying to attract new audiences is ready to deprive his newest fans of the reason they watched hockey in the first place.

On Monday I wrote about how Americans were interested in how Team USA would perform in the tournament, and mainly how they would perform against Team Canada. Well, according to the New York Times, the USA-Canada game matched MSNBC’s election-night viewership and was the most-watched sports program in Canadian history. It was a non-elimination game and it had more viewers in both countries than Game 7 of last season’s Stanley Cup final, in which the game’s biggest star was playing against one of the game’s most popular teams.

Did NBC do the NHL – its business partner – an injustice by not airing important preliminary games and even the Canada-Russia quarterfinal on its main station? Yes. If the games were on NBC, more people would have stumbled upon them while looking for The Office or 30 Rock, but the amount of positive exposure the NHL has received during the tournament can’t be rivaled by anything the league has done itself to increase popularity.

Maybe the NHL and the television networks of future Olympics can work out a marketing partnership or the networks can promise to put the intriguing matchups on their No. 1 channel in place of the biathlon or ski jumping or curling. If the NHL is so hung up on trying to make money off the Olympics rather than letting the Olympics work its magic for the NHL, then OK, find a business strategy that works. Just don’t sacrifice the participation of NHL players as that strategy.

The Olympics deserve the best hockey players from each country and that means NHLers. NHL-filled rosters offer an experience for viewers that isn’t duplicated at any other time. Sure, there is the IIHF World Championship each year, but that takes place during the NHL playoffs, so many of the top players aren’t available, and those who are usually decline to play. Amateur lineups would create a tournament similar to the World Junior Championships, and teams like the United States and Canada would be at a disadvantage against the European teams that include former NHL players currently playing in the KHL or European elite leagues.

The uniqueness of the event creates a bond among each country’s fans that rarely happens. The tournament allows for fans of NHL rivals like the Rangers and Devils to pull for each other’s players in the same way Yankees fans are asked to pull for Red Sox, and Mets fans for Phillies with home-field in the World Series on the line at the MLB All-Star Game. There aren’t too many times Rangers fans hope Zach Parise scores a goal and hope Henrik Lundqvist gives one up. For a week, Devils fans are allowed to hate Martin Brodeur and love Chris Drury.

Most importantly, NHL players in the Olympics just makes for better hockey.

Yes, the two-week break and lack of an All-Star Game is costing the NHL money today, but maybe Bettman doesn’t see what this tournament is doing for tomorrow and the future of the game. The Winter Classic is nice, but it’s not doing the trick, and the only thing that could get the game back on the map in the United States would be an American star equivalent in talent to Crosby or Ovechkin. The Olympics are doing a job that Bettman has tried to do since he cancelled the 2004-05 season, and no one cares that there wasn’t an All-Star Game or a skills competition this February. Fans want to see competitive hockey games with the world’s best players. They don’t want – or need – to see Zdeno Chara skate untouched and put all his weight into a slap shot that goes into an open net at 103 mph. Fans want to watch Olympic hockey with NHL players. They can live without the All-Star Game and its festivities once every four years.

Right now, there is a buzz in the hockey world following Canada’s rout of Russia and Slovakia’s upset of Sweden. United States fans are anxious for Friday’s semifinal against Finland and sports media outlets are asking whether or not Team USA can knock off Team Canada twice in the same week if they meet again. Players like Ryan Miller and Patrick Kane are watching their stock rise thanks to national television exposure. It has all contributed to one very pleasant surprise because when was the last time the talk anywhere focused on hockey?

If Team USA takes home the gold, it will be the perfect ending to a perfect tournament, and will do wonders for the final weeks of the NHL season. I suggest you watch because it might never be the same again.

Blogs • NHL • Team USA

Feb 22, 2010

Digging for Gold

Team USA’s 5-3 win over Canada sent a message to the hockey world four years after the U.S. was embarrassed in the Olympics.

This column was originally published on WFAN.com on Feb. 22, 2010.

Mike Milbury predicted that Team USA would lose to Canada in Sunday night’s pregame show. At that point, I knew that an upset was assured because, let’s be honest, when has Mike Milbury ever been right?

It’s hard to remember Milbury ever having been right as general manager of the Islanders. He wasn’t right when he drafted Rick DiPietro ahead of Dany Heatley and Marian Gaborik, and traded Roberto Luongo. Or when he traded Zdeno Chara and the second pick in the 2001 draft (Jason Spezza) for Alexei Yashin. During his time with the Islanders, Milbury compiled a long list of questionable and controversial decisions in his quest to become the worst GM in hockey history. He was wrong again on Sunday night when he picked against his own country.

After letting a 1-4-1 performance in 2006 resonate for four years, Team USA made wholesale changes for 2010. General manager Brian Burke scrapped the entire ’06 roster except for Chris Drury and Brian Rafalski, choosing youth and inexperience to replace the face of USA hockey. Burke skirted conventional wisdom by replacing the team’s core of Mike Modano, Keith Tkachuk, Bill Guerin and Doug Weight. On Sunday night in Vancouver, Burke’s moves paid off in a game Eddie Olczyk referred to as “tremendously tremendous.”

Doc Emrick isn’t used to seeing Martin Brodeur get lit up, and he probably can’t recall a two-goal game from Brian Rafalski’s tenure with the Devils. These two factors — Brodeur’s shakiness and Rafalski’s offensive outburst — contributed to Team USA’s first win over Canada since 1960. Team USA entered Sunday’s main event at plus 250 on the money line. They left with all of Canada calling for Roberto Luongo to replace Brodeur in Tuesday’s quarterfinal qualifier.

Ron Wilson’s club won in exactly the manner that Burke envisioned they could when he selected the next wave of American talent. Burke built the current squad with an emphasis on speed and goaltending, and it was enough to drop a Canadian team that outshot the Americans 45-23. Team USA limited their mistakes, stayed disciplined and remained out of the box, and Ryan Miller did his best Jim Craig impersonation with a 42-save performance. Team USA was outplayed and outshot by a roster that perhaps no Americans other than Patrick Kane or Zach Parise would crack, but they stuck to Wilson’s system and capitalized on the few opportunities they were afforded.

The win was the most significant for Team USA in Olympic competition since the second Herb Brooks-led team knocked off Russia in the 2002 semifinals. The game created interest in the young club for the American people, and the winning result has turned that interest into an attachment. People now seem to care about the team’s outcome in Vancouver, and this wouldn’t have been the case had Ryan Miller played more like Martin Brodeur. The dream of achieving gold in the tournament for the first time in 30 years has hockey back in the spotlight, and it’s going to be a challenge to sustain the current hype around the team and the sport.

Gary Bettman would love for that enthusiasm to carry past the end of the week and into the stretch run of the NHL season, however, just keeping Americans attached for this week is a step in the right direction. It might be wishful thinking to believe that Team USA can bring the game back to where it was prior to the 2004-05 lockout, but it seems to be a possibility, at least for the moment. Team USA has a chance to change the landscape of hockey in the United States, and give the NHL the boost of interest the league has unsuccessfully tried to achieve through rules changes, marketing and the Winter Classic.

An upset of Canada and the revival of American hockey in the Olympics won’t carry as much weight if Team USA falls in quarterfinal action or loses to Canada in a possible rematch. Team USA knocked off the favorites on their home ice. They have proven they can play with — and beat — any team in the tournament, and in doing so, they have made the goal medal game their end game. If Sunday’s win was their last of the 2010 Games, this last week of perfect hockey from Team USA will be a letdown.

Many hoped that after the 2006 debacle, Team USA would contend for a medal game in the tournament, though no one truly expected them to beat Canada and earn the No. 1 seed for the playoff round. As long as the Americans didn’t bow out the way they did four years ago, it would have been a successful trip to Vancouver. The expectations changed on Sunday, and now it’s up to this Team USA to show America and the world that they aren’t the same team that won only once — against Kazakhstan, no less — in the ’06 Games. It’s up to them to prove to Sidney Crosby that Sunday’s 5-3 win wasn’t “just one game.”

A week ago Team USA was hoping to avoid embarrassment and provide a respectable showing in Vancouver. Now they are the top seed in the tournament and three wins away from achieving Olympic glory, and improving the outlook on the game for the entire country.

Let’s just hope Mike Milbury doesn’t decide to jump on the Team USA bandwagon.

Blogs • MLB

Feb 19, 2010

Santana or Halladay? Who Gets the Ball?

Everyone listens to the Mets when they open their mouths in spring training, but no one ever takes them seriously. Over the last two seasons, the Mets have made headlines by sharing their pipe dreams

Everyone listens to the Mets when they open their mouths in spring training, but no one ever takes them seriously. Over the last two seasons, the Mets have made headlines by sharing their pipe dreams and senseless predictions with the media.

“Let me tell you this: Without [Johan] Santana, we felt as a team we have a chance to win in our division. With him now, I have no doubt that we’re going to win in our division. I have no doubt in that.” – Carlos Beltran, Feb. 16, 2008

False.

“Of course, we’re going to be the front-runner. Of course, we’re going to be the team to beat.” – Francisco Rodriguez, Dec. 13, 2008

Second verse same as the first.

“We’re expecting to go out there and win the National League East and go deep in the playoffs and win a World Series.” – David Wright, Feb. 18, 2010

To be determined.

Beltran’s lock for the division didn’t hold true in 2008, and K-Rod’s words didn’t hold up either, as the $37-million closer added to the Mets’ problems with career highs in ERA, WHIP and blown saves. Wright’s expectations have yet to play out, but let’s be honest, we all know how that story ends.

On Thursday, Johan Santana made headlines for a different reason. He didn’t call out the Phillies or proclaim the Mets as the odds-on favorite to win the World Series – an annual tradition his teammates started. Instead, Santana called himself the best pitcher in the division.

“In our division?” Santana replied when asked who the best pitcher in the NL East is. “Santana.”

It’s hard to get on Johan for thinking so highly of himself, even if Roy Halladay now calls the NL East home. Had Santana answered with Halladay’s name, it would have been a bigger issue than it already is. And if Halladay were ever asked the same question, you’d expect him to believe that he is the best pitcher in the NL East and not Santana.

Who is the best pitcher in the NL East? Santana or Halladay? We know what Mets fans think and what Phillies think, and everyone else would probably be split down the middle given their favorite team or personal allegiances.

So, here’s a better question: if you had to play a game for your life, would you start Santana or Halladay? No Mets jersey. No Phillies jersey. Who do you give the ball to?

The difference in their career stats is slim. While Santana has postseason experience, Halladay has spent his entire career in the AL East. Pitching against the Yankees and Red Sox on a consistent basis in the spring and summer isn’t exactly pitching in October. Then again, Santana would probably want us to leave October out of the equation since he’s 1-3 in the second season.

Both of them have Cy Youngs, sub-3.50 ERAs and unimaginable K /BB ratios. Santana might own a few strikeout titles, but Halladay owns something much more valuable: the ability to instill immense fear.

Paul O’Neill likes to talk about pitchers that make players check the calendar weeks in advance to see if they will miss them in an upcoming three-game series. Roy Halladay is that type of pitcher, and there is no other pitcher in baseball that is given the W before the game even starts. Santana might possess a similar intimidation, but in no way is it to this degree.

It doesn’t matter who is starting against Halladay or what lineup he will face, it is predetermined that he will win and there is really nothing that can be done about it. The best possible scenario you can hope for is that he has an “off” day and allows three runs. There is no such thing as working the count against Halladay, and there is no point in trying to keep the game close to get a shot at the bullpen. He is his own bullpen and his own closer.

Since Halladay broke into the league in 1998, the World Series champion has come from his division six of 12 seasons. He has made 78 starts and 83 appearances against the Yankees and Red Sox, going 32-20 with a 3.58 ERA. His only losing campaign in 12 years came at the age of 23, which is pretty remarkable considering he has never pitched for a division winner, and only once has he pitched for a division runner-up.

Halladay is the only pitcher whose removal from the AL East translates into four or five additional wins for the Yankees, Red Sox, Rays and Orioles this season. He is the one pitcher whose trade status last season had the ability to drastically alter a pennant race, and whose mere placement on the market caused a fan base to turn on its front office. He was the sole reason that the Blue Jays stayed out of the basement in the AL East all these years, and he was a symbol of hope for an organization that hasn’t experienced postseason play since 1993.

Roy Halladay is more than just a 148-76 record. He’s more than a career .661 winning percentage or 3.43 ERA. He’s more than a pitcher who dominated the AL East and the best two teams in baseball for a decade. He’s more than a pitcher who handled the competition with ease for a large portion of the Steroid Era. He’s Roy Halladay, the best pitcher on the planet.

Mets fans won’t want to admit that the best pitcher in baseball is a member of their division rival. They surely won’t want to admit that they would give the ball to that pitcher in a must-win situation, but it’s the right call.

In a game for everything, Halladay’s presence would have the other team believing they can’t win, and his actual stuff would finish them off. You have to give him the ball.

Blogs • Yankees

Feb 17, 2010

Some Questions Still Unanswered

Five questions surrounding the Yankees as spring training begins.

This column was originally published on WFAN.com Feb. 17, 2010.

The first day of pitchers and catchers is the first official day of the season. It’s a day that represents the closing days of winter and the excitement for spring and summer. It grants new life to the 29 teams that didn’t finish the previous season with a win, and gives hope to clubs looking to be this season’s dark horse. Today is that day.

Coming off a world championship, Tampa should be relaxed for the first time in a decade. New York’s real baseball problems are in Port St. Lucie at Mets camp where Omar Minaya is trying to build a rotation on the fly and trying to figure out exactly who is going catch that rotation. No one in Queens is satisfied with the situation at first base or in right field, and the team’s center fielder isn’t going to be ready for Opening Day. It’s a good time to be a Yankees fan.

But even with the Yankees boasting a team as good if not better than their 103-win club of a year ago, there are still a handful of minor housekeeping matters to be taken care of over the next six weeks. Here’s five questions surrounding the Bombers at the beginning of spring:

1. Can the veterans stay healthy?
The difference between the 2008 and 2009 Yankees was 14 regular season wins and another 11 wins in October. A serious rash of injuries created this difference. Aside from Alex Rodriguez missing the first month of the season, the Yankees were remarkably healthy in 2009. In 2008, they weren’t as lucky.

The injury bug wreaked havoc on the ‘08 Yankees, landing the following players on the disabled list at least once: Jonathan Albaladejo, Wilson Betemit, Chris Britton, Brian Bruney, Joba Chamberlain, Johnny Damon, Dan Giese, Phil Hughes, Jeff Karstens, Ian Kennedy, Hideki Matsui, Andy Pettitte, Jorge Posada, Alex Rodriguez and Chien-Ming Wang. Starters landed on the DL, as did their replacements, and their replacements’ replacements. It was a disaster from Opening Day through Game 162 in what was the worst season in the Bronx since 1993.

This season, the Yankees are somewhat younger than they were a year ago after trimming Johnny Damon (36) and Hideki Matsui (35) from the roster. However, there is still cause for concern as the team’s superstars get up there in age.

Here are the current ages for the starting lineup: 26, 27, 28, 29, 29, 31, 34, 35 and 38.

Here are the current ages for the starting rotation and closer (Hughes and Chamberlain included): 23, 24, 29, 33, 33, 37 and 40.

There are a lot of 30s listed there, and they are all very significant players on the roster. The Yankees are going to need good fortune and a bill of health similar to 2009 to make another October run, and they are going to need to leave camp healthy.

2. Who’s going to play center field?
When the Yankees traded for Curtis Granderson, I thought they finally had a long-term solution in center field. I was also thinking that Johnny Damon was going to be back in left, but that is clearly not the case. As of now, it looks like Granderson will be in left and Brett Gardner in center, and maybe that is for the better.

The Yankees lost 24 home runs and 82 RBIs from Damon, and 28 home runs and 90 RBIs from Hideki Matsui. Granderson is going to be asked to make up for the offensive production lost with Damon. Nick Johnson will be an upgrade in the on-base department over Matsui, but he isn’t going to be able to provide the power that Godzilla gave the Yankees at DH – unless he becomes a product of the short porch.

With Granderson in left, there will be less wear and tear on his body than there would be in center, allowing him to be stronger offensively. No one is counting on Gardner’s bat anyways and any offense he can provide the team is a plus, but not needed.

If the Yankees feel that Granderson’s game has diminished in center like it appeared to be during the final weeks of last season, then Gardner is the right man for the job. It’s safe to say whatever decision is made at the end of spring training will be changed more than once throughout the year.

3. Who’s going to be the long reliever?
Joe Girardi didn’t think it was necessary to have a long reliever on the Opening Day roster last season. It didn’t take him long to change his mind.

Early on, the bullpen was overtaxed and it didn’t help that the team was asking Edwar Ramirez, Phil Coke, Jose Veras and Brian Bruney to get important outs. Chien-Ming Wang pretty much caused the bullpen fatigue for the first couple of weeks of the season, and the relievers didn’t recover until the Yankees finally made wholesale changes. The same thing can’t happen this season.

Chad Gaudin and Sergio Mitre will be the long reliever candidates since no matter what the Yankees say, the competition for the fifth spot in the rotation doesn’t include them.

When it comes down to it, Gaudin is the better option. He is more reliable (3.43 ERA in 42 innings with the Yankees) and has had previous success in the majors. Gaudin’s high pitch counts forced Girardi to have a short leash with him in most of his starts, but the ability to help the team is certainly there. I don’t know if you can say the same for Mitre.

Mitre might only be a little over a year removed from Tommy John surgery, but it’s not like he was some stud before his injury. Mitre allowed 71 hits in 51 1/3 innings with the Yankees last season, and posted a 1.63 WHIP, which was only worse than the pitcher formerly known as Chien-Ming Wang’s 2.02 and the always-exciting Edwar Ramirez’s 1.96. I would like to think that the best team in baseball would have someone more reliable than Mitre in the bullpen and serving as the long reliever. Give it to Gaudin.

4. Which A.J. Burnett will show up?
The difference between winning 95 games this season and 105 games depends on which A.J. Burnett comes to pitch.

There’s no doubt that Burnett has No. 1 stuff, but many times, he pitches like a No. 5. His potential no-hitters can quickly turn into four-run deficits, and when his game begins to south, there is no way to right the ship until five days later.

Burnett proved himself in the postseason after finishing the regular season with just 13 wins in 33 starts. His performance in Game 2 of the World Series made up for all the eggs he laid throughout the summer, but it wasn’t enough to fully gain his trust.

When Burnett takes the mound, you hope that you get the guy who allowed one hit to the Red Sox over 7 2/3 innings in August and not the guy who allowed a grand slam to Jason Varitek in April. The season won’t be won or lost because of Burnett, but he has the ability to make the Yankees untouchable in the division and the league.

5. How will the Yankees handle Derek Jeter’s contract situation?
A lot of newspapers will need to fill space between now and the end of the season, and they will argue about the contract status of Derek Jeter to do so.

When Jeter, Casey Close, Brian Cashman and Hal Steinbrenner sit down to hammer out a new deal for the face of the franchise and the face of the game, they are going to give Jeter what he deserves: whatever he wants.

Jeter isn’t going to be given a low-ball offer filled with incentives like Joe Torre was, and he isn’t going to be left hanging in the balance like Mariano Rivera and Jorge Posada were. Jeter is going to be given a multiyear deal for a lucrative amount of money, and there is no other way it will happen and there is no other way it should.

Speculation can be justified when it comes to the contract statuses of Mariano and Girardi, or with Posada at the end of next season, and that’s because they are not Derek Jeter. There is only one Derek Jeter, and because of that, he ‘s going to get treated and taken care of in a way that no other player will or should. End of story.

Blogs • Yankees

Feb 11, 2010

Plenty of Relief In Sight

No bullpen is perfect and no bullpen is unbeatable, but for the first time in a while, the Yankees might have one close to those things.

Every season I like to believe the Yankees bullpen is going to be better than it was the season before. For the first time since Mike Stanton and Jeff Nelson were building the bridge to ninth inning, it looks like the bullpen in the Bronx will be the best it’s been in quite some time.

I won’t have to convince myself this spring that the Yankees can catch lightning in a bottle four times in one season with four different relievers. There’s no more Brian Bruney. No more Phil Coke. No more watching late leads disappear into the right field bleachers. No more needing to worry about how the day’s bridge to Mariano will be constructed, or if it will be sturdy enough to reach the ninth inning.

The acquisitions of Curtis Granderson and Javier Vazquez this offseason will overshadow Brian Cashman’s decision to ship away Bruney and Coke, but I think these moves deserve just as much recognition. Cashman was able to take away two of Joe Girardi’s most used relievers, two pitchers who inspired zero confidence among fans, and whose only roles in the major leagues should be serving as mop-up men. Bruney and Coke combined for 116 appearances last season, and not once in any of those 116 pitching changes was there a feeling that the opposition wouldn’t add to their run total.

The obvious problem with the Yankees during the beginning of last season was behind the outfield wall in their bullpen. The absence of A-Rod from the lineup and Mark Teixeira’s early offseason woes didn’t help matters, but the real dilemmas began when Girardi went to the mound to pull his starter. The Yankees were a $200 million team with a $200 bullpen. On Opening Day, the bullpen consisted of Rivera, Bruney, Coke, Damaso Marte, Edwar Ramirez and Jose Veras. Outside of Rivera, there wasn’t one pitcher capable of getting important outs on a consistent basis. (Marte only remembered how to pitch in the postseason, and thankfully he did then).

All of the books and DVD specials about the 2009 championship season will focus on a number of elements: the return of A-Rod; Mark Teixeira turning it around offensively; the walk-off wins against the Twins; and Joe Girardi’s Billy Martin impression in Atlanta. All were notable turning points in the quest for No. 27, however, three dates that won’t be recognized when it comes to the club’s remarkable turnaround are May 18, June 8 and June 13.

May 18 was Edwar Ramirez’s final game with the team before being sent down until September call-ups. June 8 was Phil Hughes first appearance out of the bullpen – the most significant decision the team made all season. June 13 was Jose Veras’ last game as a Yankee before being traded to the Cleveland for three pouches of Red Man and two daily passes to the Rock and Hall of Fame.

The destruction and rebuilding of the bullpen midseason was more necessary than any walk-off home run or come-from-behind win. The reconstruction of the bullpen allowed for the late-inning heroics to take place, and turned the Yankees from postseason hopefuls into postseason favorites.

The decision to make Hughes the setup man and the emergence of David Robertson changed the late innings for the Yankees, by shortening games and allowing starters to know their winning decision wouldn’t vanish at the hands of Bruney, Coke, Ramirez or Veras.

This season, the Yankees enter spring training with Rivera, Robertson, Marte and Alfredo Aceves as sure things in the bullpen. Chad Gaudin will likely join them as the long reliever as will someone from the Mark Melancon-Jonathan Albaladejo-Boone Logan group. That leaves one spot for either Joba Chamberlain or Phil Hughes.

Even when the Yankees have finally decided on a set role for Joba, the debate as to whether he belongs in the rotation or bullpen will never end. The discussion is not going away anytime soon and will likely control the baseball talk once the Yankees make their decision on him for 2010.

I have been an advocate of Joba being a starter since the transition was made in 2008. More importantly, I am an advocate of the Yankees winning games and right now, putting him in the bullpen gives the Yankees the best chance to win.

It would have been satisfying to see Joba mature as a front-end starter and be a staple of the rotation for years to come, but it doesn’t look like he is going to get that chance. In this market on this team, there isn’t time for Joba to gain experience as a starter by failing at first. There just isn’t room in the rotation for a 4 1/3 inning pitcher, especially when that pitcher has had immediate and exceptional success as a reliever.

After Joba’s postseason dominance – aside from one fastball to Pedro Feliz – and the return of his high-90s velocity, it doesn’t seem possible that he will begin 2010 in the rotation, and it doesn’t appear likely that he will ever return there.

There will be enough words written in the city between now and Opening Day about Joba’s role on the team, but common sense has him beginning the year as a reliever. With Joba in the bullpen, Phil Hughes will slide into the No. 5 spot in the rotation, in what is currently the best rotation in baseball. Sorry, Boston.

Someone will take the fall as the mop-up man this season, but at least there won’t be several people deserving of that role. On paper, this bullpen has the potential to be the best in baseball, and the best in the Bronx since the last time Yankees went back-to-back and belly-to-belly in October.

No bullpen is perfect and no bullpen is unbeatable. There is usually a Kyle Farnsworth or a Scott Proctor on every club. There will always be a game where a three-run lead turns into a two-run deficit, but as currently constructed it’s hard to pick out who will be this season’s LaTroy Hawkins. For the first time in a while, there might not be one.

Blogs • NFL

Feb 9, 2010

What Have You Done for Me Lately?

Peyton Manning’s legacy and his ability to perform in pressure situations and in the postseason is once again under scrutiny.

This column was originally published on WFAN.com on Feb. 9, 2010.

Peyton Manning didn’t play poorly in Super Bowl XLIV, he just didn’t play the way he was supposed to – the way we have all come to expect Peyton Manning to play. Now, his legacy is being questioned. Perhaps more importantly, his ability to perform in pressure situations and in the postseason is once again under scrutiny.

Throughout the 2009 season, right up until his interview with Dan Marino finished airing in the pregame show, it seemed a foregone conclusion that Peyton Manning would earn his second ring in four years. Peyton Manning: Two-time Super Bowl champion and arguably the greatest quarterback of all time. That is how it was supposed to play out.

But a funny thing happened on the way to Peyton joining Joe and Johnny in the VIP room at the Hall of Fame. Sure, Peyton’s interception was untimely – and the final dagger in the Colts’ season – but it wasn’t that play or any one single play that lost the game for the Colts. A combination of safe play-calling by Jim Caldwell at the end of the first half, a devastating Pierre Garcon drop, Hank Baskett’s presence, and an unexplainable field-goal attempt ultimately lost the game for the Colts. Like any superstar, Peyton Manning takes the credit for a win and the blame for a loss, and Sunday’s loss to the Saints has fallen on the league MVP’s shoulders.

Since the clock ran out on the Colts, the hype around Peyton Manning has died down to the point that he is no longer the immortal, untouchable quarterback that sat down with Marino before the game. Peyton has returned to being the foot-tapping and unpredictable quarterback who was the whipping boy for the Patriots defense during their dynastic run. When you’re expected to win and you don’t, that will happen.

The debate following Super Bowl XLIV should have been about where exactly Peyton sits alongside Montana and Unitas. Instead the debate has been about how badly the loss impacts Peyton’s legacy, and whether or not the Colts will return to football supremacy in the near future.

The AFC Championship comeback against the Patriots in 2006 started a run for Peyton that helped erase his miserable big-game past. He discovered how to win in the postseason and earned the elusive ring some feared he never would. From his Super Bowl win up until the final knee taken by Drew Brees, the only type of attention Peyton had received was praise. He had erased any doubt that he was the best quarterback on the planet and left nothing about his game to be criticized.

One game greatly set back his legacy.

Peyton’s freefall from grace happened in a few hours with his image quickly reverting to what it was before he became a champion. With spring training around the corner, it’s hard not to think about a hometown athlete who undergoes the same superstar treatment.

In New York, Alex Rodriguez is held to the same standard as Peyton Manning. After last season’s success, A-Rod has the ability to build off his new winning image, or he could wind up in the same situation Peyton finds himself.

Like Peyton, A-Rod’s postseason past has been marred by first-round exits and one monster collapse. The Yankees’ postseason problems in A-Rod’s first five seasons with the team were far deeper than their third baseman being unable to hit his weight, but it was easy to pin the upsets on the superstar, and A-Rod took the blame.

It wasn’t A-Rod’s fault that the Yankees’ 1-2 punch in the 2004 ALCS was Mike Mussina and Jon Lieber, or that their best options after those two were an injured Javier Vazquez or head case in Kevin Brown. It wasn’t his fault that Randy Johnson failed to win pivotal Game 3s in 2005 and 2006, and it was Chien-Ming Wang, not A-Rod, who posted a 19.06 ERA against the Indians in 2007. But the Yankees’ pitching problems became A-Rod’s fault, and he took the heat for those losses.

Peyton Manning and Alex Rodriguez share eerily similar career resumes. Both players have experienced extraordinary regular season success (four MVPs for Peyton; three for A-Rod). They have had numerous postseason letdowns, and both spent the better part of their careers chasing their first championship. The only difference is Peyton came up short his second time on the big stage. A-Rod has yet to get his second chance.

A-Rod is coming off of a regular season in which he hit 30 home runs and drove in 100 runs despite missing a month due to hip surgery. He spent October and November making a mockery out of some of the game’s best arms, hitting six home runs with 18 RBIs in 15 games. He got the ring he came to New York for, shed his title of being unclutch and helped the Yankees return to the Canyon of Heroes. There is nothing left about his game to be criticized.

No one can ever take away the prefix “world champion” from Alex Rodriguez’s name, but that doesn’t mean people won’t forget about it.

It won’t take much for A-Rod to become A-Fraud again. A poor series to open the season at Fenway, or a four-game hitless streak at home would do the trick. If the over/under for when Yankee Stadium will turn on their 2009 hero for the first time in 2010 is set at the third home game of the season, would you feel comfortable taking the over? Probably not, considering the Angels are in town.

Prior to the Yankees’ 27th championship, it was unacceptable for A-Rod to make an out. It’s scary to try to fathom what the expectations will be now.

Over the last few seasons, Peyton has raised his personal bar for success to the point that only a championship would mean he and the Colts had a successful season. A-Rod had already been playing for a team with the bar set that high, and now with his remarkable postseason, the bar remains at the same place, just with added pressure.

“What have you done for me lately?” remains a common theme in professional sports, and in New York City, it’s a way of life. Peyton’s super loss was a reminder of how quickly someone can fall from greatness, and how short people’s memories are when it comes to winning. Around here memories are a lot shorter, but after six years, A-Rod is aware of that.

Blogs • NFL

Feb 5, 2010

Can They Be Giant Killers Again?

There’s more than just a second Super Bowl in four years on the line for the Colts on Sunday.

This column was originally posted on WFAN.com on Feb. 5, 2010.

With the Giants’ last game being 33 days ago against the Vikings, and their last meaningful game being 46 days ago against the Redskins, every Giant not named Eli Manning will spend Super Bowl Sunday the same way as me: watching it on CBS.

Without a horse in the race, the decision is whether to back the Colts or Saints on Sunday. Considering the Saints’ role in the demise of the 2009 Giants, the decision is a rather easy one.

When the Giants were 5-0, winning games by an average of 16 points and suggesting that the Raiders leave the AFC West for the Pac-10, they were the class of the NFL. The G-Men were being recognized the same way they had been in 2008, before Plaxico Burress’ fateful night on the town. Flying high behind one of the game’s most potent offenses and arguably the league’s best defense, the Giants had become the favorite to represent the NFC on Super Sunday nearly a third of the way through the season. A trip to the Superdome changed that.

The undefeated, but also truly untested Giants arrived in New Orleans as three-point underdogs in Week 6. They left The Big Easy with their self-esteem destroyed, their first loss on the season and their status as an elite team in jeopardy.

Before the Bayou Blowout, the Saints were trying to finish the feel-good story they began writing during the 2006 season when their magic ran out in the NFC Championship. Even after a 4-0 start to begin the season, no one was giving the Saints the credit they deserved, but a bye week and chance to prepare for the Giants changed that.

It’s likely that the injuries and incompetent backups would have caught up with the G-Men eventually, but the Saints were the first team to realize the Giants defense was overrated. The Saints exposed the holes in the Giants defense, and their season began to quickly take on water. Had the Giants and Saints met later in the season, the Giants would have been three-point underdogs … in the first quarter.

Following the 21-point loss to the Saints, the Giants didn’t win again for five weeks and had a six-week period between wins. While losing streaks of that caliber might be acceptable in Cleveland, St. Louis and Oakland, they aren’t in the Tri-state area.

The blowout had a lasting effect on the Giants, as late-game meltdowns became a Sunday ritual. A franchise built around and remembered for its strong defensive units, the Giants allowed 24 points or more in eight of their remaining 10 games. They limped to the finish line with two of the worst losses in franchise history coming in Weeks 16 and 17.

Following the loss to the Saints, Tom Sheridan became a deer in headlights when the competition was no longer the Chiefs or Raiders. His job security became a weekly discussion, and his time with the Giants led to Osi Umenyiora – the supposed face of the Giants’ defensive future – contemplating retirement rather than ever being part of a debacle like the 2009 season again.

Super Bowl XLIV is just two days away and the Giants are already over a month into their offseason. The future of the defense is now in the hands of Perry Fewell, and seemingly for the first time since their win over the Patriots, Tom Coughlin haters have remembered the call-in line to The Fan. The Giants have had to watch the division rival Cowboys put their postseason problems to rest and the Jets emerge as the city’s top team for the time being. It can all be traced back to the bayou, back in Week 6.

The Saints are 60 minutes of football away from something much bigger than Mardi Gras. They are one win away from giving their feel-good story a fairytale ending and from pulling off the second Super Bowl upset in three years. They have made it hard not to join the Who Dat Nation for one day.

But should the lasting image of the 2009 NFL season be the visor-wearing Sean Payton embracing Jeremy Shockey? Is seeing New Orleans win its first Super Bowl enough to want Jeremy Shockey to win a Super Bowl? Is the Saints getting their Walt Disney-like win worth knowing that Jerry Reese’s trade of the disgruntled and disrespectful tight end worked out in New Orleans’ favor? No, no and no.

This Sunday should be about Peyton Manning joining an elite group of quarterbacks and adding to his case as the best to ever play the game. It should be about Bill Polian justifying the benching of his starters so we don’t have to hear about how it backfired all offseason. It should be about the Colts taking over for the Patriots as the team and face of the NFL.

Who dat say dey gonna beat dem Saints?

The Colts.