Don't Take Your Sports so Seriously

There is no doubt that I am a big sports nerd. I have long been a participant in fantasy sports games and have wasted several years of my life playing sports video games dating back to Intellivision. It is not surprising then that I also utilize sports commentary columns and radio shows to procrastinate at work. I have found though that I am not a big fan of the straight sports news story, instead preferring those voices that mix pop culture and politics with their sports talk. This is one of the reasons that my afternoon commute (all 10 minutes of it) is spent listening to occasional PTI host Dan Le Batard's local radio show. It is 25% sports, 75% nonsense. This is also the reason that I have followed the Tuesday Morning Quarterback column through it's many incarnations. I originally started to read the column on ESPN.com. But when the tastefully named Gregg Easterbrook angered his mousy overlord, he was forced to take his show on the road. Originally starting the TMQ column on Slate.com before moving to the big time at ESPN, Easterbrook was forced to move the vagabond opinion piece yet again, this time to NFL.com. Apparently Mickey has a short memory because TMQ is now back at ESPN. Some speculate that this is due to the departure of Micheal Eisner who was criticized in the objectionable article. I don't care were I find TMQ as long as I can print it up for travel to the porcelain jungle.

Easterbrook holds a position at the left of center political think tank the Brookings Institute, writes for the left leaning New Republic, and has published commentary on Christian theology. So naturally, his TMQ articles are filled with asides about happening in politics, ethics, and as a true geek, the factual errors of science fictions shows. These commentaries are not straight unbiased reporting either. The words of TMQ definitely are meant to advance the agendas of its author. I have learned to take the non-football reporting with a grain of salt. The level of spin added to some stories obfuscates the truth sometimes. For instance, I have found his campaign against the continued glorification of violence in the movies to be right on target but specific descriptions and accounts of scenes in the "Passion of the Christ" did not turn out to be on target when I actually saw it. Same goes for his recent comments on the last Harry Potter. I thought he had one of the most insightful comments yet about the last Harry Potter book when he wondered aloud why the good guys didn't use guns against the evil wizards when it was made clear the wizards were vulnerable to projectile objects. But the remaining issues that he listed made it sound like he hadn't read a page of the book or any other in the series. Although it is a horribly weak plot device, Rowling made it clear in a previous book that the Sorting Hat could produce the Sword of Gryffindor. (On a side note, I liked Stephen King's comment that habit of the kids coming up with a brand new spell every time they were in danger was lazy writing) There were many, many, many problems with the Harry Potter books that should have made them unreadable to adults. TMQ just didn't pick up on them. Despite all that, TMQ is still my third favorite place to catch up on current events. It is also a fantastic way to avoid doing the work piling up on your desk.