Yankees? WTF?!

Shawn Lee, survivor of POL S 325, wrote to me while I was out of the country to complain about my “misguided” sense of sports loyalties.

Yankees: WTF! The fucking yankees. How Boring! That is all it took, take Talal to the ballgame, buy him some peanuts and a new ballcap, and he won't care if he ever comes back? The Yankees are the arrogant bratty prep school rich kid of baseball, they don't cultivate thier own talent, they just buy it from other teams, because they have far greater resouces than every one else. Any attempt at revenue sharing is routinely killed by the Yanks. Anyone interested in social justice, and aren't all you liberal academics interested in that?, should not support the Yanks. Enjoy rooting for Goliath. I am sure that is satisfying for the soul.

Your sports loyalities seem a bit troubling. There is no regional logic to them, and seems to have a heavy dose of (gulp) front-runnerism. By buddy from Detroit finds it odd that you are a Wings fan and a Packers fan, and now throw the Yanks in the mix. Whoa.

What’s truly magnificent about that speech is that I can hear it in Shawn’s voice in my head. Sports fandom brings out the passion in the male voice. It’s a beautiful thing.

Despite my admiration for the rhetoric, I have, however, felt for a few weeks now that this required some sort of rebuttal. Moreover, Neil has had his real life troubles over the past week, so I thought this might cheer him up. Here's hoping.

> Yankees: WTF! The fucking yankees. How Boring!

And there I was thinking I was being controversial... For what its worth, you don’t sound bored, Shawn.

> That is all it took,
> take Talal to the ballgame, buy him some
> peanuts and a new ballcap, and he won't
> care if he ever comes back?

Well, Neil actually did spend hour after impassioned hour explaining the strike zone and the nuances of the catcher-pitcher-batter triad. Listening to him explain strategy while at a baseball game is actually quite mesmerizing. But yeah, sheer enthusiasm and giving a shit was basically the price of my loyalty. I thought I was easy. But out of all my friends over several years, Neil was the only one who cared. So I’m a Yankees fan.

> The Yankees are the arrogant bratty
> prep school rich kid of baseball, they
> don't cultivate their own talent, they
> just buy it from other teams, because
> they have far greater resources than
> every one else.

Hmm. My friend Kirk, a Red Sox fan once posted to this blog to say, “If you take a step back and look at the Yankees of late '90s objectively any true fan (even Red Sox fans) would have to admit the team truly did win through home-grown talent.”

Did I mention Kirk is a Red Sox fan?

> Any attempt at revenue sharing is
> routinely killed by the Yanks. Anyone
> interested in social justice, and aren't all
> you liberal academics interested in that?,
> should not support the Yanks. Enjoy
> rooting for Goliath. I am sure that is
> satisfying for the soul.

Actually, this is what I’m enjoying. I’m always on the losing side. I’m an Arab, not an Israeli. I’m a Democrat and not a Republican (Republicans manage to rule with an iron fist with a mere 40 votes in the Senate—you've got to admire the skill). I’m gay, not straight. I’m always on the runty, losing side. This is new and different. Besides, if baseball is all about bucolic suburban serenity, wouldn’t it make sense that I’d be a fan of the team that’s the Hegemonic Urban Machine?

> Your sports loyalities seem a bit troubling.

Do they now?

> There is no regional logic to them,

I’m quite literally from Bedouin stock. You know, the people who “wander from place to place?” I have no regional logic because I’ve never really settled anywhere. Well, actually there is one exception to the non-regional rule—I was born in Bridgeport, CT. As it’s right outside New York City, that would make it logical that I wound up an Yankees fan. In fact, that’s the only team that has a slight regional logic to it. I have been to New York many times. I’ve only been to the airport in Detroit and I’ve never set foot in Wisconsin. Although my dear friends Simon and Nelly want me to go tailgating with them for the Favre game at Lambeau Field. When financial aid money comes in, we’ll have to see. The ticket to Chicago is pricey. Although we may see of going straight to Wisconsin is cheaper…

> and seems to have a heavy dose of (gulp) front-runnerism.

This of course has been my bad (?) luck. The only thing I can say in my defense is that I had no idea how football was played when I became a Packers fan, let alone that Packers had won the Super Bowl the year before. I really gravitated toward the Wings very strongly because my buddy Aram was a big fan. I understood a lot more about hockey than football, so watching them play was mesmerizing. Of course, as you say, the ’98 Wings were a legendary team.

For what it’s worth, you’ll see me still root green and gold, despite the fact that our offensive line still stinks and it’s quite likely that Brent is going to hand us our collective asses next Monday.

> My buddy from Detroit finds it odd that you
> are a Wings fan and a Packers fan,

Come on. They don’t play football in Detroit. I mean, yeah, there’s that whole “Lions” team they’ve got there, but no one takes them seriously. Well, except maybe the Redskins.

> and now throw the Yanks in the mix. Whoa.

Kirk, ever the scholar of sports patterns, actually hit the trend:

You seem to have adopted the teams with the best team histories in other sports. Green Bay and Chicago have far and away the best team histories in the NFL, particularly pre-merger. After 1970 or so several other teams have been more interesting but the Packers still will always have one of the very best team histories in the sport. The same goes with the Red Wings, who were one of the original 6, each of whom have great team histories. I would say that is probably the one characteristic that most closely binds the Packers and Red Wings and going with the Yankees for baseball would fit very well.

I definitely have tended toward teams that have rich histories and, above all, a fanatically loyal fan base. I’m usually rooting for the visitor whenever I get to see any of my teams. It’s good to know that your fellow fans will always be a presence in the enemy stadium. I have to admit, that fanatical loyalty that reaches beyond geography is deeply appealing to me.

I don’t know if that will convince you, Shawn. But I feel secure in my sporting fan choices…

A Really Good Day

I had an awesome day yesterday. Craig and I have been waking up early to take our walk. I’ve decided to work out at school on Mondays and Wednesdays, so we were both up by 7 am. The B-12 gives me enough energy to be able to handle regular exercise again and the endorphins from the workout have me feeling, well, chipper. As I am renowned for being a grouch, I gotta say I’m pretty pumped about the whole thing.

Craig had an early doctor’s appointment, so we had to skip the walk. Usually, I feel like shit in the morning. Not so these days. We actually had some very, very nice romantic time this morning instead. I was really pumped about that, too. I love my Big Bear!

Working Out at the IMA

I knew the gym at the Intermural Activities Building (IMA) at school was very good. Back before I met Craig when I still lived in the U District, I used to work out there. Sometimes I went myself and sometimes with Simon or Peter. Simon and I were really regular one term. It was a lot of fun. But they redesigned the whole complex a few years ago, and now, as far as I can tell, it is a Temple of Male Beauty! We have the biggest weight room I’ve seen in my life, endless banks of benches of all sorts and eye candy galore. There are tall windows to let in lots of light and spotlessly clean. It’s pretty inspiring.

It’s weird. When I was younger, I don’t think I could have appreciated a place like that. I was too stupid to enjoy looking at the guys, and was intimidated by how in-shape they were. When you’re a young kid and not athletic, you keep away from places likes that. Now, I throw myself into it and enjoy it. I guess it comes from confidence. I know I’m good at things I’m gifted at. It doesn’t bug me anymore that I’m not nearly as good an athlete as a lot of the other guys there. Being there and working out makes me feel good about life. It’s weird, but I feel closer to God at the gym. My upbringing always had me separate body and soul. I don’t do that anymore. I'm a lot happier because of it.

I almost completed all the exercises on my list, but…

I Ran Into Johnny

John Marlow is one of my favorite students. He was in my political theory section in the spring of 2008, did really well, and actually had the guts to sign up for Arab-Israeli last autumn. On the second day of class, he told me what was I think the most inspiring and wonderful thing a student has ever told me. He told me he came out because of me. Seeing me be out in front of my sections let him know that he could be a normal guy and be gay. So he came out to his folks and everyone else.

When he told me that, I knew that I’d been paid back for everything I’d put into teaching. I knew I’d really helped someone. Everything from here on in is cream. It was probably the proudest fucking moment of my life.

But get this, not only did John come out, but there was another really amazing gay guy in that section named Sklyer. Skyler, like John, was an incredible student. I had two of the best sections I ever TA’d for that spring. A guy could never feel down teaching these guys. They really rocked. Well, John and Skyler apparently became a number that term! Guys are finding love in my class! And I’m not even trying. I had no idea that Johnny was gay at all until he told me that fall.

But it’s better than that. See, I did know Skyler was gay because I had bumped into him outside a coffee shop and he’d introduced me to a friend that he kissed goodbye full on the mouth. I may be slow on the uptake, but I put two and two together. Actually, I was really proud of them both for the PDA in an admittedly liberal, but still non-gay neighborhood. It was a memorable moment.

So I ask John, “Didn’t Skyler already have a boyfriend?”

John gets this sorta pissed look on his face and goes, “Yeah, I found out about him a few weeks into the summer. We had to get that settled, but he’s out of the picture now.”

Now Skyler and John are both nice looking guys. Well, the boyfriend was also pretty damned good looking. Plus he looked to be in his early twenties. Now John was 19. Now that gap is a substantial one as far as getting from the “boyish” kind of handsome to the “smoldering” kind of handsome. I think John is safely across the gap now (they cross it so quickly!), but he was pretty boyish that spring. So not only does he come out, but he beats out the more seasoned veteran to land his man.

I’m so fucking proud of him I could burst. I was nowhere near this cool at his age. Just ask Kirk.

OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER: None of these guys hold a candle to my Big Bear. He’s my beautiful one. But still, one can’t help but notice less impressive marks on the ole radar…

So anyway, they’re facing their first romantic hurdle. Skyler is Teaching for America this year. He’s off at an elementary school in Phoenix, where no doubt he rocks. He’s a born teacher; you can tell. But they’re doing the long distance thing. This autumn, John is off to Chile, where he will spend the term abroad speaking Spanish. He wants to get into Arabic though (God help him). We’re getting together for coffee later in the week.

So we yacked a little too much and I didn’t finish my whole workout. I hit the showers and then was off to teach.

My Class Is Beginning to Loosen Up a Little

Sometimes a class starts out a little stiff. First day was like that. Classroom participation is like hockey. You need them to pass the puck. The team dynamic always rests on personality and until they start talking, you don’t know their personality. First day was comparatively shy. But we had a good start today. I start Arab-Israeli with a sort of “theory” upload. In the first part, we try to understand the biological basis for bias by looking at the theory of small groups that has been derived from studying hunter-gatherer groups and comparing them to other primates in our evolutionary sub-group. Then we graft capitalism on to that model of human nature to see how it creates ethnic conflict. They’re beginning to take to it. It’s fun stuff.

I Bumped Into Shawn Lee After Class

Apparently Shawn’s class is in the same classroom as mine. He gave me grief over my Wings 2008 Stanley Cup shirt. We’re scheduled to get beers soon.

Season in Review I: Favre Again

Shawn Lee, one of the survivors of POL S 325 and a really great guy to boot, is a passionate football fan (who has developed a pronounced interest in pan-Arabism). He popped me an e-mail the other day about, well, Brett Favre. Here’s the text:

You said that you don't see how Favre could've saved the season for the Packers, but I don't know I have to disagree. Sure Favre is having a rough go now, but he has been really good for NYJ, and in spite of what happens tomorrow, the Jets are a better team with Favre than they would've been with Pennington. You don't shove a legend out the door unless you have and absolute stud waiting in the wings (see 49'ers Montana to Young transition). Now Aaron Rogers is a good and serviceable qb, and could have a good career, will it be a Hall of Fame career? Probably not. A charismatic leader behind center, even if he is old an over the hill and overrated, forces d - coordinators, not wanting to look the fool, to overemphasize ("respect") his passing game more which of course opens up the running game. This year Grant was a bigger threat out of the Packers backfield than Rogers was, allowing defenses to key on him. The year before the opposite was true, Favre was more of a threat, which allowed Grant to emerge. Simply put the NFC North might be won by a 9 win team this year, the Jets have 9 wins, and your Packers are on the no. 1 tee box with my Seahawks.

This, of course, requires some sort of response. So, point by point, then:

You said that you don't see how Favre could've saved the season for the Packers, but I don't know I have to disagree.

You share this opinion with many of the most colorful posters to the Green Bay Press Gazette’s Packers page, home to the most vociferous of the Farve fans anywhere.

Sure Favre is having a rough go now,

Let’s compare and contrast his statistical performance for this year with that of Aaron Rodgers:

Note the gap of 566 passing yards. Favre made slightly larger number of attempts and completed 2.1 percent more of his passes. That said, Rodgers averaged 0.8 yards more per pass. As much as I may resent it as on old guy, I attribute this to the “zing” of youth. Indeed, our young gunslinger “zinged” us six more touchdowns than Favre made for the Jets. Moreover, Rodgers did it with nine fewer interceptions than Favre. I think I’d have wanted Rodgers, not Favre, on my fantasy team this year.

And as far as the Packers’ future goes, I really don’t think Rodgers has peaked yet. By the by, let's compare Rodgers with Favre's renaissance year last season:

Note here that Rodgers has nearly as many yards, an equal number of touchdowns and two fewer interceptions. Rodgers, incidentally, was sacked way more often this year than Favre was last year. Rodgers performs under pressure. Plus, the kid, like Favre, isn't made of glass. He played through a shoulder injury and started 16 times. Certainly, QB injury was every cheesehead's big worry going into the season. It turned out to be a red herring. The Kid is tough. Remember when making this comparison that 2007 was an exceptional year for Favre. We don't have enough data yet to be certain that Rodgers can keep this performance up, but you have to admit the numbers are deeply encouraging.

but he has been really good for NYJ, and in spite of what happens tomorrow, the Jets are a better team with Favre than they would've been with Pennington.

Does anyone debate this? Certainly I don’t. Favre was an excellent deal for the Jets even if he retires this coming season. Jersey sales alone probably made the deal a financial success, and I think Favre was a genuine asset for the Jets offense.

You don't shove a legend out the door unless you have and absolute stud waiting in the wings (see 49'ers Montana to Young transition).

Now, I’m not a Niners fan (far from it!), but did everyone know the year Steve Young took over that Steve Young was going to be Steve Young? I’d be interested in reading the first year rhetoric surrounding the young QB and his reception on the Niners.

Now Aaron Rogers is a good and serviceable qb, and could have a good career, will it be a Hall of Fame career? Probably not.

For what it’s worth, let’s compare the Kid’s first year with Favre’s and Young’s. Since Favre didn’t start all sixteen games in 1992, I threw in 1993 as well. Likewise, I threw in 1992 for Young.

First, note that Rodgers threw for more yards this year than either of these giants did in theirs. Of course, in Young’s case, this is an unfair comparison, as he made far fewer attempts. Young's average pass was longer than either Rodgers or Favre. Moreover, his low number of interceptions put both Favre and Rodgers to shame. But note that Rodgers is far more attractive than Favre in his opening two years. I see nothing in his cards that suggests that Rodgers can’t be one of the greats. You are correct that the odds are against him are high simply because of Favre’s exceptional talent (i.e. Favre is already exceptional and has been for a long time. In contrast, it's hard to spot an exceptional player before he has a reputation), but can you see why the Packers would risk a great deal to prevent losing Rodgers to free agency? Favre certainly didn’t start his career with better credentials than Rodgers.

A charismatic leader behind center, even if he is old an over the hill and overrated, forces d - coordinators, not wanting to look the fool, to overemphasize ("respect") his passing game more which of course opens up the running game. This year Grant was a bigger threat out of the Packers backfield than Rogers was, allowing defenses to key on him. The year before the opposite was true, Favre was more of a threat, which allowed Grant to emerge.

I would like to see you provide some sort of evidence that this process actually happened. At the very least, I’d like to see documentation of some sort of coaches arguing that they can relax on the Packers’ passing game and focus on corking up Grant. I watched every Packers game this season except the second Bears game just before Christmas. I saw little to suggest major fault on the offense other than the size of the linesmen and the injuries on the offensive line. Moreover, recall the rhetoric in 2005 and 2006. Everyone (but me, I felt) said Favre was washed up and a has-been. Fantasy guides systematically downgraded him. His reputation is far better now than it was then. No one predicted that Favre would have a blockbuster year in 2007. I need stronger evidence to be persuaded by your theory.

Simply put the NFC North might be won by a 9 win team this year, the Jets have 9 wins, and your Packers are on the no. 1 tee box with my Seahawks.

Compare QB performance on the Packers this year with Rodgers to our even more disastrous year under Favre in 2005, when the O-line collapsed after Wahle and Rivera were lost to free agency. I feel these years are quite comparable:

Rodgers had eight more touchdowns and sixteen fewer interceptions. Favre’s reputation didn’t keep us from going 4-12 in 2005, the last time the O-line collapsed. This time we’re 6-10. Why not admit that Rodgers did a better job than Favre under the real pressure of a no-win situation? It never matters who is behind the O-line when the O-line sucks. Tip steak or filet mignion, once the meat goes through the grinder, it's all hamburger. For what it's worth though, Rodgers, at face value at least, is a greater asset when the O-line falls apart completely. Among other things, this is due to Rodgers' exceptional mobility, an attribute he has in common with Young, not Favre.

I’m so sick of everyone dumping on Aaron Rodgers. The decision at QB this year was probably the most sound decision undertaken by Ted Thompson (I sure wish he could pick a punter). Sorry, Shawn, I just don’t miss Favre. Who needs a freaking prima donna who makes you go through this "will he/won’t he" routine about retirement every fucking year? Who needs a guy who basically comes out and says, "Well, yeah, I retired. But you were supposed to come after me for the next six months, wooing me into coming back, because I'm God's gift to football. I need to feel more special than this!" To be honest, I miss Mike Wahle and Marco Rivera more than I miss Favre. When they left, our O-line died. Favre should have retired. 2007 was an excellent ending. Everything after has been pure ego.