The Rangers made a deal yesterday…And the deal is intriguing to me. They traded hometown favorite Chris Young, Terrmel Sledge and Adrian Gonzalez to San Diego for a starting pitcher in Adam Eaton, setup man Akinori Otsuka and a prospect at catcher. This is a 6 man deal that, at first glance favors the Padres.
The Padres get is a good young pitcher in Chris Young. His contract is cheap. And, they have control of him for the next 5 years. Adam Eaton is a solid 28 year old pitcher that is costing them a fortune and can leave at the end of the year.
There are some things that are a little worrisome about Eaton:
1) He is not a groundball pitcher…He is a fly ball pitcher.
2) In a very spacious Petco Park he gave up too many home runs.
3) A finger injury ruined his numbers from last year after a great start.
But, before his injury last year, he was on his way to being a true contender for the Cy Young Award.
What is the plan here? I believe the plan is to sign Adam Eaton here long term. I believe they will have to offer in 3 years $25 million. If you give him the money and he comes here and fails, you are stuck with him for another 3 years. I believe that the key to this trade is signing Eaton long term.
The Rangers have a long history of not being able to lure free agent pitchers to this ballpark. Part of the problem is the ballpark itself. Pitchers don’t want to come here and put up bad numbers. Pitchers that put up bad numbers have a hard time negotiating future contracts.
That’s the beauty here. The Rangers can actually use the ballpark to their advantage. You see, Eaton has no idea how he will perform in Arlington. Yes, he can leave at the end of the season but if he puts up bad numbers here his value as a free agent will drop. Does he really want to take that chance? I don’t think so.
Eaton and his agent have got to consider all options and all scenarios. What if Eaton goes 8-12 with an ERA in the high 4’s? Does he want to take that into the open market and hope that he can still get megabucks? Or, would he happily accept a 3 year deal here that gives him security?
Signing a 3 year contract before the season begins provides Eaton insurance against “ballpark failure”. I’m thinking that, in a creative way, the Rangers can actually use the Ballpark’s effect on pitchers as an advantage in signing a pitcher.
It's obvious: They're too old. And they're too young.
You may not have caught this in Tuesday's Dallas Morning News -- it's hard to read a newspaper while you're throwing yourself off a bridge, eh? -- but the Cowboys' "obvious'' problem was printed right there. In black and white. (And red all over, once your hurtling body finally escapes this miserable football life and squashes itself into a bloody stain onto the pavement below).
On the sports section's page 1, there's lead columnist Kevin Blackistone detailing the "obvious'' fault: "Experience, or lack of it, is finally taking its toll on the club. ... Having to rely on youth at this level is a disadvantage. ...''
On the sports section's page 2, there's lead columnist Gerry Fraley detailing the "obvious'' fault: "Parcells should know that older players wear down late in the season. Despite that, he stocked the roster with aging players. The folly of that decision is showing on the field.''
So there you have it. Obviously.
The Cowboys are too young. And the Cowboys are too old.
As they sift through the wreckage of what was once a 7-3 season, an NFC East lead, a two-game demolition of the defending-champ Eagles and a control-your-own-destiny march to. ... maybe, destiny, we might also make the following "obvious'' evaluations:
The Cowboys are too short. And the Cowboys are too tall.
The Cowboys are too slow. And the Cowboys are too fast.
The Cowboys are too skinny. And the Cowboys are too fat.
My insolence is not meant as disrespect toward colleagues Blackistone and Fraley, who are quite frankly simply lunging for straws along with the rest of us. What do they know?! What do we know?!
We might, however, cast a glance of disrespect toward the head coach as he reaches his pudgy paws toward the same indecisive straw pile. I've monitored virtually every Parcells press conference this year, and attended some, too. And as contradictory and disingenuous as two newspaper columnists can be, Parcells can be more so -- all emanating from the same brain, from the same mouth, sometimes in the same paragraph.
Um, OK. So, maybe it's not so obvious.
On Monday, some of the players were bemoaning the trip to D.C. because "you don't see that many blowouts in this league.''
Cowboys, not that this is much consolation, but. ... you've lots of reasons to be embarrassed by 35-7. ... but one of them is not the oddity of it.
We've said it in this space before, and we'll say it again: The NFL has become a "Slot Machine League.'' You pulls the handle, you takes your chances. That goes for good teams beating bad, and it goes for lopsided outcomes, too. What constitutes a blowout in this league? Well, 28 points sure does, as you learned by watching Washington throttle your Cowboys, 35-7 on Sunday. For the sake of my argument, can we make it 17 points? A blowout is 17 points, let's agree.
In this year's NFL, an as-of-today contender has been "blown out'' by 17 points or more 15 times! Tampa Bay's pretty good, but it lost 34-14 to Carolina and 28-0 to New England. So maybe New England's above this? Nope. New England lost 40-21 to Indy, which also did it to Pittsburgh, 26-7. Minnesota's a contender, but it lost 30-10 to Atlanta, 38-13 to Carolina, 37-8 to Cincinnati and 28-3 to Chicago. So maybe Chicago is above this? Nope. Cincy did it to Chicago, 24-7. Carolina also did it to Atlanta, 24-6. And Denver did it to KC, 30-10. And Cleveland did it to Miami, 22-0. Hey, the Giants are good, right? Not in a 45-23 lost to San Diego, they weren't. So the Giants are bad? Nope. They beat somebody 36-0.
Who was that somebody? Washington. Which just beat Dallas 35-7.
On an average of once a week this season in the NFL, a contender in December has suffered a blowout. It could be argued that the Cowboys, who hadn't been victimized that way all year, were simply due. It was their turn.
I'm not denying that Dallas is in a bit of a tailspin here. ... "if by "tailspin,'' you mean the description of what your body is doing falling from that ledge. My colleague Norm Hitzges has some great numbers on Cowboys yardage in the first eight games and Cowboys yardage since. He says that Dallas was averaging 357 yards gained and 283 yards allowed after eight games, a net +74. And that since then, Dallas is averaging 279 yards gained and 330 yards allowed. Meaning the Cowboys are 78 yards worse on offense, 47 yards worse on defense and in total, for a net of 125 yards per game fewer than in those first eight games.
Yikes.
And now, you want to pinpoint the reasons why this is happening?
There are some "obvious'' theories.
The Cowboys are too tight. And the Cowboys are too loose.
The Cowboys are too strong. And the Cowboys are too weak.
The Cowboys are going to the playoffs. And the Cowboys will never win another game.
I think it’s easy to get caught up emotionally when a game is as awful as it was for the Cowboys yesterday. There was nothing of value that the Cowboys can take out of yesterday’s game.
In trying to keep the emotion of yesterday’s game, we need to keep in mind that you are never as good as you appear when things are going well and you are never as bad as you appear when things tank.
It is discouraging to see a lack of want in a team this late in the season. That was a game yesterday with your number 1 natural rival, on national television with playoff implications. If you can’t get up for that game, you’ve got issues.
It’s one thing to play hard and get beat by a better team. That’s not what happened yesterday. It was a dreadful effort all the way around.
Are the Redskins that much better than the Cowboys? I don’t think so. But the Skins definitely played better football yesterday. They seemed to play with more desire.
But, there was one particularly embarrassing segment of the game for me as a Cowboy fan yesterday. With 2 minutes left in the game, why in the world was Bill Parcells throwing the ball.
Let me tell you something, when you are down 28 points with two minutes to go on the road, you just let the clock run out. There was absolutely no reason for Parcells to be throwing the ball.
The game is over. The Skins had stopped laughing and were headed to the locker room. And there were the Cowboys trying to throw the football and trying to get a meaningless touchdown.
I have a question for Bill Parcells: If Drew Bledsoe had have gotten hurt in the final 2 minutes of a blowout, what would you say toady? What was that two minutes about?
Was it about Bill Parcells being mad? Well, pick up a mirror baby. That game was disgraceful. It was disgraceful on all levels. Including coaching.
I believe the last 2 minutes was about Bill Parcells' personal anger at the game yesterday. And tell me exactly what would have been accomplished had the Cowboys scored in the final 2 minutes yesterday? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.
Bill, if you would have just taken your medicine and handled things properly your highly paid free agent right guard would not have spent the night in the hospital last night.
As bad as that game was, it wasn’t until the last two minutes that I was truly embarrassed for you and your team.
The phrase is usually applied to politics and economics. Today, though, it also applies to football and the Cowboys.
It is "The Middle-Class Squeeze.''
This weekend in the NFL, the very best team lost when the 'Bolts shocked the Colts. And the very worst team won when the "Hapless Texans'' -- so often referred to that way that you wonder if the franchise had moved from Houston to a south-Texas suburb called "Hapless'' -- doubled its win total to two.
So NFL greatness shriveled down to the middle of the pack. NFL lousiness advanced up toward the middle of the pack.
And it's now really crowded up in there -- with your Cowboys getting Middle-Class Squeezed.
In the NFC, nothing more than a couple of links in the first-down-marking chain separates the Seahawks from the Giants from the Bears from the Falcons from the Redskins from the Panthers from the Bucs from the Vikings from the Cowboys.
Believing that makes watching the Cowboys get humiliated in D.C. by a 35-7 score all the more stunning -- especially inasmuch as this Dallas team that has traditionally matched up favorably with the hated Redskins has now, critically, lost a pair of meetings with their NFC East rivals. The domination here was so complete that the Cowboys don't have enough fingers to even begin to finger-point.
Not that, in their own way, they didn't try.
Before we go there, let's consider the possible option of not overreacting. The option of thinking that Dallas and Washington are both 8-6, both part of the Middle-Class Squeeze, because they are -- Sunday's bloated 28-point margin notwithstanding -- essentially mirror images of each other.
Or do you think that Redskins monster safety Shawn Taylor and his secondary are THIS much better than Cowboys monster safety Roy Williams and his secondary?
Do you think that Redskins runner Clinton Portis and their rushing attack are THIS much better than Cowboys runners Julius Jones and Marion Barber and their rushing attack?
Do you think that Redskins H-back Chris Cooley is THIS much better than Cowboys tight end Jason Witten?
Do you think that Redskins pass-rusher and their defensive front are THIS much better than Cowboys pass-rusher Demarcus Ware and their defensive front?
Do you think Redskins down-field threat Santana Moss and their receiving corps are THIS much better than Cowboys down-field threat Keyshawn Johnson and their receiving corps?
Well, considering that that collected Redskins recorded seven sacks, including three from somebody named Phillip Daniels, stole four turnovers, relied on Moss to control field position, got four TD passes out of their crummy quarterback, and three TD catches from somebody named Chris Cooley ... while the Cowboys countered with NOTHIN'. ... yeah, maybe.
But do you think retread Redskins QB Mark Brunell is THIS much better than retread Cowboys QB Drew Bledsoe?
And do you think another-generation Redskins coach Joe Gibbs is THIS much better than another-generation Cowboys coach Bill Parcells?
Well, again. .. yeah, maybe.
Fox's studio-show guys again sounded like goofy, drunken "the-quarterback-sucks'' fans in their assessment of what is wrong with the Cowboys. Apparently too intimidated to ponder whether sacred-cow Parcells had committed a misstep here, and apparently unwilling to offer anything more than analysis I can get from the front seat of a taxi, they lynched the quarterback. Fox's Howie Long actually offered a list of prospective Bledsoe replacements: He thinks the Cowboys should get "Brian Griese'' or "Matt Schaub'' or "the kid at Vanderbilt who they say might be the next Brett Favre.''
Note No. 1 to Howie: I think it's a little early for Cowboys thoughts to fully start turning to April. But if you really disagree, before you give unsolicited draft advice to a team regarding Jay Cutler, shouldn't you at least know the kid's name?
Note No. 2 to Howie: Did you hear Fox analyst Troy Aikman say of Bledsoe, "I've never seen a quarterback under such duress trying to throw the ball!''? Wouldn't that indicate that the problems went deeper than just the QB?
But again, this was a day for overreaction. So let's start and finish with the two individuals billed as the leaders of the club: Bill Parcells and Keyshawn Johnson. Over the course of the afternoon, Bill and Keyshawn demonstrated their leadership when:
Keyshawn screamed at the kicker. Bill glared at the punter. Keyshawn pushed a camera away from him. Bill glared at a cornerback.
And then at the end, when it was time for Dallas' Parcells to shake hands with Washington's Gibbs, there was no traditional gentlemanly midfield meeting of the coaches.
Gibbs kinda waved, and kept walking.
And Parcells -- he and his once-promising team now getting Middle-Class Squeezed -- kinda glared. And kept walking.
There are times when sports can teach us a lot about life. Nowadays it seems like the world of sports gives us plenty of opportunity to learn how not to act. But, sometimes we can all learn lessons from the world of sports.
In the real world we all know that life isn’t always fair. Well, it’s the same in the NFL. As a matter of fact, sometimes life in the NFL is the antithesis of fair.
But, in the NFL there is no room for complaining. In the NFL there is no room for excuses. In the NFL, when you are dealt a bad hand, you simply deal with it.
In the NFL teams are dealt bad hands every week. Sometimes it’s a bad call by an official. Sometimes it’s an injury to a star player. Sometimes it’s bad scheduling by the league. With all that can go wrong in the NFL, it is amazing that we don’t hear more complaints.
Sure we will hear fans (and talkshow hosts) complain about bad calls. We’ll hear fans make excuses for their teams. And sometimes on rare occasions we’ll hear a player or coach complain. But when you stop and consider all that could go wrong (and does go wrong) in an NFL season, there is really very little post-game complaining in public
And when a coach or player does voice a complaint, it is usually followed by “…but that didn’t cost us the game.”
To survive long in the NFL you must learn to deal with problems as they arise. If you dwell on bad calls or make excuses, you do not win. If you look at bad calls as obstacles you must overcome, you will have an easier time dealing with them.
It’s the same in life. Maybe you are being treated unfairly at work. Maybe your boss didn’t give you the promotion that you deserved. When you get dealt a bad hand how do you handle the situation? Do you complain? Do you dwell on your misfortune? Or, do you deal with it as an obstacle and move on?
As the Cowboys enter the final 3 weeks of the season, they find themselves one game behind the New York Giants. One game means a lot in today’s NFL. Sometimes it means the difference between the post season and the off season.. One game can be the difference between getting a bye in the first round of the playoffs or having to play an extra game.
The New York Giants played their final home game of the regular season today…It was actually the 9th game they played in the friendly confines of Giants Stadium. Remember back in week 2, the Giants were supposed to travel to New Orleans to play the Saints.
The NFL had very little time to deal with the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Most of the City of New Orleans was still underwater. The Superdome is still about a year away from being able to host any events. The NFL executives had to make a decision on how to handle the Saints first home game and they had to make it quickly. They decided to play the game in New York.
It would have been very easy for the Cowboys or any team in the NFC to complain about the Giants getting an extra home game. And to be honest, some of the teams did quietly complain at the time. It was a legitimate complaint. But once the decision was made. Every team in the NFC had to move on and do everything in their power to lessen the advantage that was given to the Giants.
It is very likely that the Cowboys will finish this season one game behind the New York Giants. That one game could mean that the Cowboys do not make the playoffs. If that happens, I am sure that a lot of Cowboy fans will want to point to Week 2 and the Giants extra home game. And, in all reality they will have a point. An extra home game is huge.
But, I can be fairly certain that we will not hear any complaining from Valley Ranch. The players in the locker room may point to a lot of reasons that they did not finish ahead of the Giants but we will not hear any excuses.
Why won’t we hear anyone from the Cowboys cry about the unfair advantage the league gave the Giants? The answer is simple: In the NFL you don’t dwell on the bad you deal with it and move on.
That’s a lesson we all need to learn every once in awhile.