Is Everybody Going Crazy?

Before I get to my rant, let me first share with you an excellent experience that I had on Sunday. My girlfriend took me to sit in the third row of the Celtics Cavaliers game on Sunday (which was an outstanding present), and the experience was everything that I thought it would be down there. The floor actually seems like the normal size, you understand how big these guys are, and (perhaps the best part) you can hear the things that the players call out to each other and the things that the referees say on the court. Perhaps the best part of the night was when Brian Scalabrine pounced on a Cavalier who was going up with the ball like a jungle predator pouncing on his prey from a tree (I think it was Gooden). When the foul was called, Scal threw his arms up and yelled "that was all ball!" This was great for me, as I have always envisioned Scal as someone who would complain about a foul as blatant and ungraceful as this one. Overall, a great experience, to hear everything that was going on almost made it feel like I was at a high school game (in a good way).

Moving on, there are a few things that I must address: first of all, I need to share my thoughts on the Heisman trophy before I explode. This is a trophy that is supposed to be given every year to "the most outstanding player in college football." There is nothing in the rules that stipulates what year in school the winner must be. I understand that if there are a couple of guys that have been equally good in a season, it's nice to see the senior win over the underclassman. However, I don't see how anybody can make an argument against Tim Tebow this season. The guy has run or thrown for 51 touchdowns! His statistics are completely overpowering and he has been the major offensive weapon on one of the best teams in the SEC. Would there be any question about Tebow winning the Heisman if he were a senior?




The main argument that I hear from the experts is that Tebow shouldn't win the award because his team has three losses. I don't see how this is relevant. This is an individual award given to the most outstanding PLAYER in college football. The Florida football team is not in a BCS bowl game because they have three losses. But, why should these three losses affect Tebow's Heisman status? The team wasn't below .500. They weren't even at .500. They play in the SEC. People say that you have to view the Heisman the same way that you view the MVP award in pro sports. This is perhaps the strongest argument for Tebow. If you took him off of the Florida team, there would be no offense. He is the leading passer and rusher. He is the reason why Florida was able to play the toughest teams on their schedule like LSU right down to the wire. He possesses all of the leadership qualities on the field that you would expect from an MVP to go with his mind-blowing statistics.

I can only assume that the people who won't vote for Tebow with three losses also won't vote for Darren McFadden or for Chase Daniels (who threw for over 4000 yards and 30 TDs, but whose team finished with 2 losses and won't appear in a BCS bowl game). So, that leaves us with Colt Brennan. Listen, if people are going to use Florida's three losses to deny the award to Tebow, then I am going to use strength of schedule to make an argument against Brennan. Florida would have also been undefeated if they played Hawaii's schedule. In fact, Florida probably would have blown out Washington on Saturday. Hawaii most likely would have finished with more than 3 losses in the SEC. Can you imagine how the stats would be different if Tebow never faced defenses like LSU or Georgia and Hawaii did. Hawaii does not play an SEC-caliber team once throughout the entire season. I understand that Brennan has no control over Hawaii's schedule, but Tebow can't control the fact that there were better teams in the SEC this year than Florida. He was responsible for 4000 yards of offense. He threw or ran for 51 touchdowns. He only threw 6 interceptions. Tim Tebow was the most outstanding college football player this season. I don't understand how people could think that this award should go to anybody else.


Next, the possibility of trading Jacoby Ellsbury for Santana. HOW IS THIS A BAD IDEA!!?? Look, I've stated already on this blog that I think baseball needs to change it's system. It's too bad that we have this kind of an "arms race" (to borrow a term from Erik Shea) but this is the way things are, and the Red Sox have the chance to lock up a big three of Santana, Beckett, and Matsuzaka for at least five years. Yet, all I hear is people calling up the radio and even hosts on the radio saying that they refuse to part with Ellsbury. I can't understand it. I would literally trade any center fielder in Major League Baseball for Santana. Look at the recent history the Red Sox have with trading prospects for aces. We gave up a great package of prospects to get Pedro Martinez, Curt Schilling (who was originally a Red Sox prospect), and Josh Beckett. You cannot underestimate the value of a dominant starter. You have to include Jacoby in this deal if the Twins say that he's the key piece. Again, I just don't understand how people could feel any differently.

Finally, some thoughts on the Marlins/Tigers trade. To me, this is a great move for both teams. Right now, the Tigers look just as good as the Red Sox. If Willis can pitch well, this is a dominant starting rotation and Miguel Cabrera puts another powerful bat in a lineup that is already scary. As for the Marlins, they got three highly-touted prospects that they can bring up through their system. I don't understand the hostility that I have heard aimed at the Marlins today all over ESPN and the radio. People are saying that the Marlins payroll is so low that they should be contracted. Last time I checked, this team has won two world series in the past ten seasons (1997, 2003) and this is the same formula that they have always used. They use their young, low-priced talent as long as they can, and then they trade that talent for more cheap, low-priced talent. This is the best way for a small market team to compete in Major League Baseball. People who want the Marlins to handle themselves differently might as well come out and say "the Marlins should pay a lot of money for a few stars and perpetually hover around the bottom of their division standings." Look, people were pissed when they unloaded everyone from 1997, then they won a World Series 6 years later. Again, this team has won 2 world series in ten years. Maybe other teams should be taking notes on how they operate their farm system rather than criticizing them.

PLEASE, if you disagree with any of this, or would like to make a point about anything happening in sports or just in the world, email us at roomofzen@gmail.com. We would love to have you in a mailbag article.