Shark Biten April 28, 2009
Posted by Neil in : Uncategorized , 1 comment so farAn immediate reaction to yet another playoff disappointment for the Bay Area’s best team:
If a #1 seed falls in the first round in troubling fashion, but the sport is hockey, does anyone care and is it a big deal? For the rest of the world and for 85% of the Bay Area, the answer is a definitive no. Average Joe American sports fan doesn’t care much about hockey. Especially on the West Coast. Especially when it was over 100 degrees in April in the Bay Area during the middle of the Sharks-Ducks series. While I care about hockey, it doesn’t move the needle, and I think there has never been a mention of the sport on this website. However, if ever hockey were going to be written about then this is the time. Not when the Sharks win the Stanley Cup in the next 3 years (which I predict they will), but now when they are the punch line to the joke that hockey has become to most Americans.
This blog isn’t for the mass of hockey haters out there. You guys have a large enough demographic and the ills and troubles of the sport of hockey have been played out ad nauseum. Even a huge sports fan like me doesn’t care about the regular season. I will glance at the standings once a week, make sure my Rangers and Sharks are in playoff position, and maybe attend one game while also watching a couple of third periods during commercials of more interesting fare. However, the playoffs are different. It is compelling. With its low scores, and the potential for endless OT’s. Playoff hockey is as good as sports get. That is why Sharks fans have a right to be slightily disappointed, but certainly not to the level of complaining I have heard in the 18 hours since the Ducks quacked all over the President’s Trophy champions.
Patience is a virtue. Sharks fans do not possess said virtue. While it certainly can be understood in Silicon Valley and the Bay Area where many have moved for the get rich fairly quick ideals of the tech boom in the 90’s and early 2000’s, it is disappointing to hear the expected fallout from the lowly loss suffered by the Teal that inhabit the Tank. I understand that people want results right away and expectation leads to disappointment when aspirations are not fulfilled, but this is not New York, Boston, or even LA. The Sharks are building a reputation as playoff chokers, but it is not so much gagging that has caused these early playoff exits, but merely the fact that the Sharks are as soft as can be. They lost to a better team when the games count which is when the calendar turns to April and not the absurdly drawn out 82 game ultra-marathon beginning in October.
This outpouring of feelings is not an attack on the Sharks players or even its management which has wholly failed in its attempt to find the correct concoction. It is an assault on Sharks fans at large. Who are they to demand a Stanley Cup title or even a Finals appearance? The Sharks are infants in the sports world. The franchise began play in 1991. Over the past 18 years they have been extremely successful. They have reached the Conference Finals and have routinely made the playoffs and won rounds. They have been well run and are always in position once the postseason begins.
Sure, the Sharks have been disapponting the past four postseasons. However, it is extremely difficult to reach a Stanley Cup Final. The Sharks will do it soon. Lady Luck will have them there soon due to the fact that they keep making the playoffs every year and one year they will have a netminder (Nabokov or other) stand on his head long enough to have the Tank rocking on West Santa Clara Street until June.
Sharks fans and management have fooled themselves into thinking they were contenders the last 4 years. They have Patty Marleau and other solid players, but no top tier superstars like an Ovechkin, Crosby, Malkin, or a multitude of players who have raised Lord Stanley’s Cup in MoTown over the past decade plus. They have no Joe Sakic like the Avalanche did, and certainly no Martin Brodeur or Patty Roy like the Devils or Colorado had in winning titles. The Sharks don’t even have a player of the ilk of Martin St. Loius who for 1 magical playoff run was the best scorer and player in the world in leading the Lightining to strike a few years ago.
The Sharks offer Jumbo Joe Thornton. He is one of the outstanding players in the league without a doubt. However, he really is a Steve Nash. Someone tell me when Nash has ever led his team to an NBA Finals? Never. Neither will Thornton get his team to June without playmakers who don’t wilt when the real big boy lights go in the postseason. Jordan, Kobe, eventually LBJ. Those guys win or will soon win championships. Gretzky, Messier, eventually Sid the Kid. These guys win or will win titles. They are charismatic leaders who can score when the chips are down and the hitting is tough. Thornton is a huge point guard without the clutch weapons in his arsenal to pass to. Trying to bring in the geriatric club of Roenick, Claude Lemeiux, Rob Blake, etc. to bring experience doesn’t do the trick. You need difference makers who are not getting close to receiving Social Security retirement.
The Sharks brass are doing what they have to do. Tinker here, twist there, and continue to manuever. Fire Ron Wilson. Bring in new blood. Get some veterans to show the young guys what the playoffs are all about. All rational moves that will one day pay off. It is a process to win a championship. It doesn’t happen in one offseason and takes a decade or more. The Sharks have been building toward the pinnacle and continue to climb that mountain. They will be there when you least expect it perhaps as a #3 or 7 seed some year. However, they are constantly reinventing themselves toward that ultimate goal.
As a New York Rangers fan growing up, all I heard about hockey in NYC was 1940. Finally in 1994 the Rangers got their Cup after 5 and a half decades of relative futility. Be patient Sharks fans, your day is coming.
Match Play: Yet Another Challenge for Tennis April 22, 2009
Posted by Paul in : Uncategorized , 2comments
This past weekend, NBA Commissioner David Stern got some of what he wanted. But much like cheesecake, and although he won’t come out and say it, Stern only wants what he got in moderation. His NBA Playoffs got injected with a little intrigue as both the Bulls and Sixers registered wins over the Celtics and Magic respectively. Boston and Orlando, at the beginning of the playoffs were substantial favorites, possessing significant star power and rosters full of marquee names. The Michael Jordan era forever changed how the NBA has been marketed. Since then, it’s been about elevating the big names, and leveraging their star power. It wasn’t about “the Bulls facing off against the Pistons” anymore. It had become “Michael Jordan and the Bulls versus Isiah Thomas and the Pistons”. Stern has largely been credited with quickly understanding that the stars would carry his sport. In our increasingly celebrity-crazed society that has anointed some public figures as demigods, with a slew of Hollywood-centric shows, the advent of “TMZ”, and bloggers like Perez Hilton, Stern was shrewd enough to identify and ride an emerging trend. Market these stars to their up most and ride them to success. Last weekend saw some marquee teams pushed a little, as the Celtics and Magic both dropped their respective first games of a best-of-seven series. But the last thing David Stern wants–much like indigestion caused by having too much cheesecake–is to have his star-studded teams out of the playoffs. Without those key protagonists that John Q. Public knows and cares about, the playoffs become far-less exciting to the average fan. The ratings drop, in consequence.
Now on to the realm of individual sports…. In the past few years, it’s been no secret that Roger Federer and Tiger Woods have struck up a friendship. After having met through their Nike endorsements, both men have hung out with each other quite a bit. Tiger made a point to attend some of Roger’s biggest moments, at the US Open. While the Swiss Maestro has made arrangements to walk with Tiger during some of his practice rounds. And who wouldn’t see the natural kinship between these two preeminent athletes. You think they might have a few things in common? Both men are supremely talented at their craft, and have worked their respective tails off to ascend to the pole position of their individual sport’s rankings. They are both image-conscious, and hold a tremendous respect for their game’s history and tradition. If tennis were any bigger in this country, you would see these two marketed together heavily; beyond that cute Gillette ad campaign we keep seeing…
Tennis and golf have often been compared for fairly obvious reasons. Both are individual undertakings. They take incredible mental fortitude in order to attain success. Both feature a long lapses of dead time between action; open to deep self-contemplation, making it that much more excruciating for its participants. Both disciplines has its protagonists on virtual islands, fully accountable for their own success and failure, without the ability to rely on teammates.
In the last decade, however, both sports have gone in different directions. Golf, as we all know, has been having its boom–largely carried by its central figure, a certain Eldrick Woods. Tennis, on the other hand–while having experienced its own rise to prominence in the 80’s with charismatic stars the likes of McEnroe, Borg, and Connors–has struggled to remain on center stage in the ever-crowded American sporting landscape with our shrinking attention spans and our caffeinated need for instant gratification.
On our radio show, a few months back, our good friend, SAP Open Tournament Director Bill Rapp recounted a very revealing story, on the business of running a professional tennis event. Tennis tournaments–particularly smaller events like the SAP Open held in San Jose–revolve around having marquee players partake, as they drive the lion’s share of ticket sales. In these events, the few headlining names you’re able to sign are largely responsible for the revenue generated at the ticket window: the aptly-named “walk up” sales. Event promoters are all too aware of that, and if you pay close attention, despite having to maintain some professional decorum towards impartiality, these men will often let off a couple of whimpers under their breath, as they see their top seed lose in an upset. In a story Rapp shared with us “on air”, the ever-gregarious tournament director told us about a time where Andre Agassi was seemingly holding on for dear life in an early round of his event, a few years ago. Rapp made no bones about telling us that his heart rate had risen as Agassi fought to first claw his way back into the match, and then to finally triumph over his opponent, in a nail-biter of a encounter. Agassi is one of most charismatic and transcendent figures the sport of tennis has ever had. With Andre’s chances rode the eventual success of Rapp’s event. The SAP Open’s Head Man was sweating through a tough Agassi encounter, where he could see the future of his tournament hang by a thread, for quite a while. If this anecdote doesn’t prove that the sport of tennis is driven by its marquee names, I don’t know what does…
Back to the solitary pursuit that had one of its Greats describing the activity as satisfying for the soul all the while frustrating for the intellect. Most golf tournaments on the professional circuits are played in stroke play format. The best score obtained over four rounds (i.e. lowest number of strokes) of competition earns you the winner’s trophy. Once in a while, a different format gets sprinkled into the pro golf calendar; where head-to-head competition takes place. You are not playing the course only, anymore, you’re playing the other guy or gal. Intimidation, all of a sudden, plays an even more palpable role. A perfect example is the WGC Accenture Match Play Championship, which this year, marked Tiger Woods’ return to the PGA Tour. Immediately after Tiger’s PR folks announced his comeback, the media spun itself into a tizzy, over-analyzing every angle about Woods’ comeback. Does match-play favor Tiger? Did this factor into his decision? Will this be an new-and-improved Woods? Is he favored to win his first event back? After all this hype and build-up, Tiger ends up being eliminated in the second round on Thursday of the tournament. What interests me more is this: (From Sports Media Watch) “The Golf Channel drew 1.7 million viewers for first round coverage of the Accenture Match Play Championship on Wednesday, February 26, up significantly from the previous year and the most viewed first round of any event ever on the network. Viewership rose even higher for second round coverage the next day, as 1.8 million viewers tuned in to watch Woods be eliminated by Tim Clark. The 1.8 million viewers for Thursday coverage was the second-largest audience ever for a PGA event on The Golf Channel. But many viewers tuned out once Woods was eliminated. Friday’s third-round coverage on The Golf Channel drew a mere 776,000 viewers, down 56% from coverage the previous day. NBC also felt the pain of Woods’ absence. Saturday coverage of the event drew a 1.4/3 final rating, down 50% from a 2.8/7 last year, and coverage of the finals on Sunday drew a mere 1.9/4, off 37% from last year’s 3.0/7.” This drop-off in ratings is known widely as the “Tiger Effect”, a phenomenon we’ve seen in golf in the past few years: the events in which Woods plays benefit tremendously in attendance and television ratings. Conversely, those events that don’t feature him suffer from a lack of mainstream attention. There couldn’t be a more salient example of how star power affects sports television ratings.
Now let’s take the time to transpose this match-play lesson to tennis. In most events, unlike golf, tennis doesn’t benefit from having its biggest names throughout the tournament. If the stars get eliminated early, a large portion of value in the product the tournament organizers are hawking, disappears. Tournament officials are left holding a devalued asset. Only the diehards are interested in the smaller names. The masses would like to see the marquee names: the Nadals, Federers, Williams, and Djokovics of the tennis world. In golf’s stroke play events, even when Tiger Woods is out of contention, television networks find a way to squeeze him into the telecast. Even in the worst of scenarios, the broadcasters covering the event may utter, in their usual hushed tones, “Let’s check in with Tiger, and see how he’s reacting to being 5 strokes back on the back nine on Sunday.” Match play, which is the chosen format for the great majority of tennis events, just doesn’t afford that. Once a player is eliminated, they usually pack their bags, leave the grounds and head to the next tournament. (Unless of course they are playing doubles.) With the incredible depth in both the men’s and women’s fields, in our era, it becomes incredibly hard for marketeers to depend on their stars to play through the length of tournament. You compound this fact, with the rigors of an incredibly grueling tennis calendar, and your chances diminish greatly of having all of your top stars peaking at the sport’s biggest events.
If elevating individuals above teams has worked for the marketing of team sports (as illustrated with the NBA’s rise to prominence in the Michael Jordan Era), it’s only natural to think that it would work beautifully for individual sports. Golf seems to have understood that well, leveraging the advantage of having its main stars around for four days in stroke play, provided they make the cut to the weekend. In an attempt to keep its stars around for a while longer, the ATP and WTA tours have experimented with a round robin format. But that hasn’t really taken off. As it pertains to cultivating its personalities, you would think that both tours would want to give the press ready access to its players. Having covered tennis events on or near the West Coast for a few years now, I can tell you that players are treated with kit gloves. It’s impossible to get a player after a loss for a radio interview. Interview requests have to be made days in advance. While you would think that tournament PR people are supposed to help propagate information about their event and its key protagonists, you quickly get the sense that they are there to protect players from the “invasive” media. Now, in Cartesian tradition, let’s go through some causal reasoning, with the points demonstrated above:
1) Team sports are largely driven by their individual superstars.
2) Popular appeal and financial success of individual sports (by their very definition) are even more contingent on the participation of its biggest names.
3) The media is the conduit by which the average person learns about the sport’s key protagonists.
4) Players become known quantities and then marquee names by the exposure generated by the media.
Ergo, in selling an individual sport, you would think that the media would be given good access to its superstars.
Instead, that is just not the case, unfortunately, in tennis. Most tennis journalists would tell you that they are begging to write more credibly about the game they love, by getting to know the players even better. Until the governing bodies allow the media in more, they have no right to complain about being less relevant in the American sports landscape. Let the press in, and they’ll find the compelling stories to watch, the intriguing pieces to produce, and the interesting angles through which to look at an issue. Instead, we’re left with most Americans not knowing about the human interests stories, the tales of survival in the minors of a Darwinian sport… The average American sports fan doesn’t know about the Acasuso’s, Juan Martin Del Potro’s, and Fernando Verdasco’s of the world.
Adam Helfant–I implore you. Take a lesson from golf and the NBA in marketing tennis. Get your players front and center, and accessible to the media. Journalists will do the rest. Leave the story-telling to them… Your sport will grow because your leading actors will be a known quantity to the public. An unbreakable connection will be forged between the average consumer and the star-system of players that you will have cultivated. A bond, that unfortunately, doesn’t quite exist today…
Don’t Let the Dog Out (of Jail) April 22, 2009
Posted by Neil in : Uncategorized , 2commentsA quick take on my feelings on the Michael Vick saga which have been bolstered in the last few days:
While I would never condone Michael Vick’s actions in funding and leading Bad Newz Kennels, my feelings toward Vick have soured even further in the last 3 days since watching an ESPN piece on the lives of the dogs that survived Vick’s criminal enterprise. I have always been a supporter of the talented, yet underachieving former Va Tech star since I was enamored with his playmaking abilities while under center for Frank Beamer in leading the Hokies to a National Championship game in ‘Nawlins. I drooled over his potential when he was drafted by the Falcons and thought that he might be able to revolutionize the most glamorous position in all of sports.
I marveled at how he became the first QB to ever go into Lambeau Field and win a playoff game on the road. I even defended him when during his last couple of seasons while in a Falcons uniform his lack of quality decision making was holding him back, and his work ethic was keeping him from attaining loftier heights.
I have to be honest that I wasn’t too surprised when I heard about the dog fighting allegations and his involvement as a major player in that lifestyle. I thought that there was probably a direct correlation with his bad decision making on the field and off. Even when he was thrown in jail for a couple of years, I thought to myself that I would love it if he came back to a team like the Niners or Raiders and became a success story.
These feelings have changed. I am sick of Michael Vick and I think he is someone that still doesn’t get it. While he may have all the talent in the world, he doesn’t have the moral compass or sensibility to do the right thing. I am largely against collusion or the blackballing of an athlete in any sport (I am still bitter that Barry Bonds wasn’t and isn’t in a MLB uniform), but I would have no problem with either Roger Goodell banning Vick for life, or all of the owners deciding collectively or independently that #7 is not worth the risk.
Vick may well return to the league and end up as a great slash player. He could provide us with a wonderful story of triumph and perserverance through adversity. However, I wouldn’t bet on it, and neither should any NFL owner. I am not a PETA member or anything close to one, but the atrocities that Vick perpetrated on innocent animals is far worse than taking steroids, smoking some weed, or even discharging a firearm into one’s own limb. Vick’s callous, cold, and insensitive behavior, as well as his horrendous decision making was downright scary. I have to think that any “deep remorse” he may show to the NFL commish would simply be an attempt to get back into the game because he has started to reach financial dispair.
Memo to Roger: This is your guy to make an example of. It is one thing to use a secondary player like PacMan to make an example of, but it makes a much bigger statement if you come down with a lifetime ban on one of the biggest stars of the last 10 years in the league.
Memo to Lucid NFL Owners: Roll the dice on guys like Percy Harvin, Plaxico, or others that are still capabale of being quality NFL players and people. Vick is a lost cause. If he can’t make any decent decisions off the field, how do you expect him to lead your franchise to a Vince Lombardi trophy? Vick could have ruined the Falcons. He would have if they hadn’t been saved by Matt Ryan. Now they and the whole NFL are better off with Vick behind bars.
Memo to Al Davis: This is your guy. Speed, quickness, and all the physical talent in the world. He can be the ringleader of the circus you are running over there. Signing him could be the final punchline to the joke you have become.
No More Terducken April 16, 2009
Posted by Neil in : Uncategorized , 1 comment so farA quick reflection on the retirement of my favorite NFL analyst of all-time:
The last week has been brutal for the sports world. While it may be the best time of year for a sports nut like me (NBA and NHL playoffs beginning, the MLB season underway, and last week’s riveting Masters), it has been a tragic week. The worst of all is losing Nick Adenhart. A young, talented pitcher who the night of his fateful accident had pitched shutout ball against the A’s. His is the most difficult because he was so young and had so much to give to baseball and so much life to live.
We were then rocked by the passings of Harry Kalas and Mark Fidrych on the same day. Kalas was one of the most classic broadcasters in history with his signature voice that he maintained with his penchant for lighting up a few cigarettes. The “Bird” was before my time, but by all accounts one of the most unique players ever to grace a diamond.
While the retirement of a broadcaster in no way rivals the seriousness of actual death, I am having an almost equally difficult time with the retirement of John Madden that was announced today. My generation has grown up on Madden. While our fathers may remember him as a portly coach for the Silver and Black back when Al Davis was actually lucid, I learned football from John by watching him every Sunday. There was nothing better as a youth then watching Pat Summerall and John Madden live from Giants Stadium for CBS and then eventually Fox as my G-Men battled the big bad Triplets (Aikman, Emmitt, and Playmaker) hailing from Big D. My love for football grew as I watched Madden explain it to me in his quirky, weird, and often irrational diatribes. Then, Thanksgiving Day came and John Madden was as prominent on my Turkey Days as cranberry, turkey, and gravy.
I continued to enjoy Madden every bit as much as he joined Al Michaels on Sunday Night Football on the Peacock Network for the last 3 years. You knew when Al and John came on your tube on Sunday night that you were in for the best matchup of the week. SNF won’t have the same excitement without Madden. Chris Collinsowrth is a nice guy and a decent analyst, but there is a reason that “Big” Dick Ebersol flew to California immediately when Madden advised him that he was going to retire and spent 11 hours with Madden trying to convince him to come back for another season. Madden moves the needle, Collinsworth doesn’t.
Whether its his signature line of video games or his uncanny and absurd soundbites, John Madden is every bit as important to the NFL as Tom Brady, LT (either the aging RB or Dancing With the Stars competitor who knows better than even the judges and professional dancers on the show what having great lines truly means), or any player that gave a decade on the field. Madden has been one of the central figures in the NFL for the last 3 decades.
I am glad that his final game was fittingly a wonderful Super Bowl. The only people who are happy about this retirement are the eco-conscious individuals who now can rejoice that the Madden Cruiser will spare the air around our nation throughout the fall. I appreciate all of the hundreds of hours I have spent with you John. If you want to pull a move like your favorite player has done ad nauseum, I will welcome you back with open arms.
There’s No Crying in Baseball and in Sports (Apparently)… April 14, 2009
Posted by Paul in : Uncategorized , 3comments
A few days ago, we were witness to an emotional breakdown by one of the toughest figures in sports. The man we’ve demonized, and used as a representation as to what is wrong with modern sports softened up and sobbed at the Angels’ impromptu press conference responding to the loss of one of their own. Super agent Scott Boras was commenting on the recent tragedy that had taken the life of his former client Nick Adenhart. Despite trying to, Boras, just couldn’t fight back tears, mid-way through his somber statement. After making a memorable statement on the mound hours before, Adenhart has passed away in a hit-and-run car accident, in the greater LA area.
This single incident set off a series of predictable reactions by the public: How could a calloused business man show this much emotion? Not too get psychological on you, but grown men do cry. And even supposed hardened negotiators that have been labeled as the single source for everything that is wrong with Major League Baseball. The fact of the matter is: Scott Boras does an excellent job for everyone single one of this clients. The Big Bad Wolf of professional sports gets them top-dollar for their services. We’ve chosen to use him as the single representation for what we perceive is wrong with pro sports. Taking a family an evening out to the ball park becomes an expensive proposition, even without the recent tough economic times. Concessions are out of control, you say? They keep gouging me for parking, you tell us? With the continued demand for professional sports, and willingness of sports fans to pay for them, the economic justification thus exists to pay the key protagonists handsomely. The fact of the matter is, we could make the strongest statement of all: our wallets. If fans were to decide to stop showing up at the ball park, or tune out of the television coverage of their favorite sporting events, then we would see player salaries go down. Until there’s a significant drop in either attendance or ratings, that will not happen, as free market economics justify this continued behavior. But enough with supply and demand analysis… The fact of the matter is: Boras is a human being too, with feelings. And having trained himself to have a steely demeanor in his business dealings, doesn’t preclude him from having just as much emotion as other human beings…
What interested me even more in the public’s reaction was the fact that some had the affront to tell us that Boras was “stealing the moment” by spilling a few tears. This instantly brought me back to another incident, this one in the tennis world, a few months back, which drew a similar reaction. Roger Federer, despite having fought hard to try to conquer his bete noire Rafael Nadal, Down Under, went down to the Spaniard in a tough five-setter in this year’s Australian Open final. In the post-match trophy presentation at Melbourne Park, Roger let a few tears go, when taking the microphone and thanking the legends of the past. After breaking down quite a bit, Roger gave up the pulpit for a while to compose himself, before coming back and giving a very classy speech. Some of the members of the media howled, “How dare he take the moment away from Rafa, by crying?” “How could he steal the show breaking down like that?” First of all, crying is not a controllable reaction. If you think that modern men want to show that side of themselves to the rest of the world, you’re strongly mistaken. It’s a salty discharge us men try to fight off as hard as possible. Yet, in both Boras’ and Federer’s teary moments, some people continue to say they are “stealing the moment”.
First and foremost, what is wrong with showing a little emotion, when it’s done tastefully without the intent to offend anyone? We often decry that the modern athlete have become jaded and detached from the common fan. On both instances, we see men have an honest outpouring of emotion, and some of us have the gall to say that they are “stealing the moment”? Has the media machine run out of interesting things to say? So much so, that it needs to nitpick at two men who were showing genuine reactions to difficult moments in their lives? Instead of showing sympathy or empathy, the moralists out there feel like men shouldn’t steal the moment away by crying? This not only doesn’t make sense to me. We should be applauding the humanity of these two men. We should be lauding the fact that they are in tune with what is going on around them, and are coping with their surrounding circumstances in their own way. Succeeding in “restraining themselves” may not have made for the authentic and dare-I-say beautiful manifestation we were witness to. Wasn’t it nice to see Rafa hug and console the man he had just taken down moments ago? Isn’t it more refreshing to see the usually composed, stoic, corporate Boras, show us that he’s not a commission-generating cyborg, but a member of the human race, like the rest of us? I’ve been thinking this for a while now, but as Tom Hanks taught us in ‘A League of Their Own’, “there’s no crying in baseball”….and apparently no weeping in sports.
Forty-Niners Flail Again, as Garcia Signs Across The Bay April 7, 2009
Posted by Paul in : Uncategorized , 1 comment so far
Jeff Garcia was probably begging for it. The Gilroy-born All-Pro quarterback has most of his roots here. His family still resides in the area. Steve Baker, his agent, is based out of San Francisco. Heck, Garcia grew up rooting for the team in red and gold. And the 49ers go into this regular season with two unproven quarterbacks vying for the starting job. Apart from a couple of games a few years back, Alex Smith hasn’t proven that he can operate a pro-style offense to save his life. And Shaun Hill, while being serviceable, hasn’t yet shown he’s the second coming of John Elway. One term comes to mind when describing San Francisco, at quarterback: mediocre. Oh, here’s another one: unexciting. So when we see Garcia signing for the veteran’s minimum to “backup” JaMarcus Russell, you expect rational fans and critical members of the media to stand pat without asking questions?
The fact of the matter is seeing Jeff Garcia in Silver and Black should make every single Faithful sick to his/her stomach. The Niners could have signed one of the best veteran quarterbacks in the league for a bargain basement price. Not doing so shows once again, that despite the recent re-organization, the 49ers have remained largely inept in the front office, and less than opportunistic, when a good deal presents itself at their doorstep. Here are the myriad of reasons why it was the 49ers’ move to make:
1) Experience/Leadership under center: as stated above, in the pre-eminent judgment position in football, the Niners don’t possess any person who will scare the opposition because of their track record. The elder statesman of the bunch, Damon Huard, has 4 seasons-worth of seasoning as a starter.
2) Rebuilding is just not an excuse. The PR machine at Stalag 49 may have you believe that they didn’t go after Garcia because they didn’t want to burden themselves with an aging quarterback on their roster, who was clearly in the twilight of his career. After all, how good is it 4 to 5 years down the road to have signed a Garcia, while a young signal-caller could have taken his licks under center? If you believe that, as a fan, you need to get yourself checked out. The NFL has become a quick turnaround league. The Falcons and Dolphins are the most salient examples of this past season, but there have been quite a few others. It doesn’t quite take a decade to rebuild a roster with this league’s parity. Secondly, the Niners reside in one of the worst divisions in football. Despite having a Cinderella story team in the Cardinals, the NFC West remains one of the weakest in the National Football League. Getting yourself an instant upgrade at quarterback could put yourself in the thick of things, for a playoff push.
3) “Damon Huard is our veteran presence”. Believe it or not, it’s something I’ve heard from some Niner fans, in (blindly) defending their team’s actions. Really? A guy with 64 games of NFL experience? A man who has thrown for just 33 TDs and 6303 total yards, in his career? This is the dude you want your young quarterbacks to look up to, as they develop under his wing? You would rather have him over a man who has made the annual trip to Honolulu four times, already? A man, in Jeff Garcia, who, last year, showed no real sign of slowing down, with a quarterback rating of 90.2 for the Buccaneers? A man who has thrown for over 40,000 yards in his professional career? One of only seven quarterbacks in NFL history with two consecutive thirty-touchdown seasons (2000 and 2001, interestingly enough with San Francisco)? A signal-caller who has taken three different franchises to the post-season? Yeah, you keep Huard, and I’ll get my own “veteran presence”, thank you very much…
4) Garcia can play within Singletary’s ball-control offense. If there ever was a quarterback who has shown selflessness, in the past, it has to be Garcia. His constant willingness to adapt to his varied surroundings make him a veritable chameleon as a signal-caller. Adding that he’s one of the best game managers around, and you have a perfect fit for the upcoming smash-mouth brand of football Iron Mike has in store for us, this season.
5) Jeff Garcia understands he sits on the sunset of his professional career. Jeff is smart and perceptive enough to realize that at 39 years of age, he sits on the twilight of his playing days. This contract with the Raiders shows that he was willing to take less money to return to the Bay Area, where he’ll probably end up settling down with his family. Garcia has become a true family man, as he is currently expecting his second child, with the beautiful Carmella DeCesare.
In a time in his life where he wants to grown his roots somewhere, what better than to return home to the Bay Area. Unfortunately, he’ll be playing for the team he grew up despising: Al Davis’ Oakland Raiders…as San Francisco stood idle, without making a move that made far too much sense…
