Happy Belated Birthday
That's right. Cox Bloc (pictured above) celebrated its first birthday on August 12th. Godd Till and I had a quiet little get together on Tuesday, where we marveled at how our beloved little bastard had grown. Over cupcakes and apple juice we discussed all the great times we've had during the last year. Like that time we made fun of Steve Simmons. And that other time when we were critical of Howard Berger for a lazy and intellectually dishonest column. And who can forget that time when we gave a sports reporter a mocking nickname based on one of their particular foibles. Oh, the good times we've had.
Anyway, thanks to everyone who has helped Cox Bloc get through this difficult first year. It has been a blast.
Birds of a Feather
Imagine how shitty I felt this morning when, less than a day after publishing my thoughts on Canada's starving Olympic athletes, I opened the Toronto Sun and discovered that I share the same views as Michael Coren on the subject of government subsidies for amateur sport.
Of course, I managed to get through my rant with out settling some lame grudge against Stephen Lewis and Michele Landsberg by taking personal cheap-shots at their son, and I'm sure Mr. Coren and I have very different ideas on how our government should allocate our resources, but it is still kind of scary.
I mean, wouldn't you be worried if you shared the same beliefs on any subject with a man who advocated nuking Iran, equates homosexuals with pedophiles and nazis, and regularly uses his column to smear Muslims with paranoid and hateful attacks?
So..........
I take it all back. Our athletes are tragically underfunded and our government should be doing more to support them. Hell, we should all be doing more to support them. Why, just this morning I threw a handful of quarters at the neighbour's kid while he was trampolining in the backyard. Hopefully he remembers me when he owns the podium at the 2016 Olympics.
I suggested yesterday that the government may want to consider funding social housing before equestrian programs, but seriously, any money they save by not supporting amateur sport is going to get wasted on things like extravagant catering bills for high-level bureaucratic meetings and Tony Clement's salary before it ever gets distributed to this country's most needy.
If we're going to throw money away, we may as well give it to our best and brightest sword-fighters and boat-racers. Especially if its gonna piss Michael Coren off. Maybe that, combined with the picture below of gay muslims parading through the streets of New York, will be enough to make his shiny hate-filled head explode with rage. Here's hoping, anyway.
That's right. Cox Bloc (pictured above) celebrated its first birthday on August 12th. Godd Till and I had a quiet little get together on Tuesday, where we marveled at how our beloved little bastard had grown. Over cupcakes and apple juice we discussed all the great times we've had during the last year. Like that time we made fun of Steve Simmons. And that other time when we were critical of Howard Berger for a lazy and intellectually dishonest column. And who can forget that time when we gave a sports reporter a mocking nickname based on one of their particular foibles. Oh, the good times we've had.Anyway, thanks to everyone who has helped Cox Bloc get through this difficult first year. It has been a blast.
Birds of a Feather
Imagine how shitty I felt this morning when, less than a day after publishing my thoughts on Canada's starving Olympic athletes, I opened the Toronto Sun and discovered that I share the same views as Michael Coren on the subject of government subsidies for amateur sport.
Of course, I managed to get through my rant with out settling some lame grudge against Stephen Lewis and Michele Landsberg by taking personal cheap-shots at their son, and I'm sure Mr. Coren and I have very different ideas on how our government should allocate our resources, but it is still kind of scary.
I mean, wouldn't you be worried if you shared the same beliefs on any subject with a man who advocated nuking Iran, equates homosexuals with pedophiles and nazis, and regularly uses his column to smear Muslims with paranoid and hateful attacks?
So..........
I take it all back. Our athletes are tragically underfunded and our government should be doing more to support them. Hell, we should all be doing more to support them. Why, just this morning I threw a handful of quarters at the neighbour's kid while he was trampolining in the backyard. Hopefully he remembers me when he owns the podium at the 2016 Olympics.
I suggested yesterday that the government may want to consider funding social housing before equestrian programs, but seriously, any money they save by not supporting amateur sport is going to get wasted on things like extravagant catering bills for high-level bureaucratic meetings and Tony Clement's salary before it ever gets distributed to this country's most needy.
If we're going to throw money away, we may as well give it to our best and brightest sword-fighters and boat-racers. Especially if its gonna piss Michael Coren off. Maybe that, combined with the picture below of gay muslims parading through the streets of New York, will be enough to make his shiny hate-filled head explode with rage. Here's hoping, anyway.
So, it appears that our week-long national nightmare has come to an end and Canada has finally won a few medals at the Beijing Olympics. Now that Canada has proven its superiority in 48 kg women's wrestling, demonstrated its second-bestiness in pairs rowing, and covered itself in bronze in 55 kg women's wrestling, maybe some of the hand-wringing can come to an end.
I haven't actually heard a single person I know complain about Canada's performance at the Olympics, yet I keep hearing about this nationwide sense of disappointment. Where is all of this negativity coming from?
Al Strachan's landlady (and Globe and Mail columnist) Christie Blatchford gives us a hint:
But that said, if you haven't read it already, you will; if it's not in your newspaper this morning, odds are it will be soon.
As predictable as death and taxes, every Olympics features the traditional "Canada chokes" story.
Hmmm.
Could it be?
Mittenstringers!
We all know that the reporters and columnists who cover the local sporting clubs have an annoying habit of projecting their own feelings on to the fans, and then belittling the fans for said feelings. You know, "stupid Leafs fans think Leafs will win cup, aren't they stupid"...it's Berger-by-Numbers. Well, with so many of the same reporters off to China to cover the Olympics, it is no wonder that we are seeing the same sort of stories about the 200 metre breaststroke and doubles tennis.
I mean, a Mittenstringer is always ready to ask the tough questions, whether its of a multimillionaire defencemen who scored on his own net in overtime, or an unknown amateur athlete who struggled near-poverty for years only to lose their one-shot at Olympic glory because it just wasn't their day.
My Globe and Mail colleague Matthew Sekeres describes being at an event where a young Canadian athlete was asked why she'd failed, and reacted with "a look like her puppy had died." Dawn Walton of The Globe's Calgary bureau was at the fencing hall when Sherraine Schalm, who lost in her first round to a lower-ranked fencer, was asked how she felt and said, "You feel like you want to curl up and die ... You train so long, and I feel like I disappointed myself, my coach, my family, my country, everybody."
Egad. Not only have these athletes suffered great disappointment on the world-stage, they now have Steve Simmons and Rosie "Rickles" DiManno in their face asking them why they failed and if they know how disappointed everyone is back in Canada. That ain't no picnic.
Of course, this always brings us back to the tired old story about the lack of funding for our Olympic athletes. As C-Blatch puts it:
...if Canadians want lots of Olympic medals, they will have to pay for them. While funding for athletes in Canada has increased in recent years, it remains a fraction of what is spent by the nations reaping all the gold, silver and bronze here, and athletes in less popular or more obscure sports still often pay some, or nearly all, of their own expenses.
Well, I'm sorry, but there are thousands and thousands of people in this country who don't get their dreams funded by the Canadian taxpayer. Many actors, musicians, writers and artists struggle along without a lot of government support. Federal and Provincial governments have spent the last decade and a half slashing social services so that many people can't even achieve their dream of having a fucking roof over their heads and food in their bellies.
Most egregiously, Till and I have long dreamed of giving up our day jobs and dedicating ourselves full-time to Pub Lunch, our cover band that only plays songs by the lesser-lights of mid 90's BritPop: Menswear, Gene, Sleeper, Shed Seven and many other forgotten also-rans. Unfortunately, this seems to matter about as much as fencing and kayaking, and Pub Lunch stumbles along without funding.
Thanks for nothing, Canada.
I haven't actually heard a single person I know complain about Canada's performance at the Olympics, yet I keep hearing about this nationwide sense of disappointment. Where is all of this negativity coming from?
Al Strachan's landlady (and Globe and Mail columnist) Christie Blatchford gives us a hint:
But that said, if you haven't read it already, you will; if it's not in your newspaper this morning, odds are it will be soon.
As predictable as death and taxes, every Olympics features the traditional "Canada chokes" story.
Hmmm.
Could it be?
Mittenstringers!
We all know that the reporters and columnists who cover the local sporting clubs have an annoying habit of projecting their own feelings on to the fans, and then belittling the fans for said feelings. You know, "stupid Leafs fans think Leafs will win cup, aren't they stupid"...it's Berger-by-Numbers. Well, with so many of the same reporters off to China to cover the Olympics, it is no wonder that we are seeing the same sort of stories about the 200 metre breaststroke and doubles tennis.
I mean, a Mittenstringer is always ready to ask the tough questions, whether its of a multimillionaire defencemen who scored on his own net in overtime, or an unknown amateur athlete who struggled near-poverty for years only to lose their one-shot at Olympic glory because it just wasn't their day.
My Globe and Mail colleague Matthew Sekeres describes being at an event where a young Canadian athlete was asked why she'd failed, and reacted with "a look like her puppy had died." Dawn Walton of The Globe's Calgary bureau was at the fencing hall when Sherraine Schalm, who lost in her first round to a lower-ranked fencer, was asked how she felt and said, "You feel like you want to curl up and die ... You train so long, and I feel like I disappointed myself, my coach, my family, my country, everybody."
Egad. Not only have these athletes suffered great disappointment on the world-stage, they now have Steve Simmons and Rosie "Rickles" DiManno in their face asking them why they failed and if they know how disappointed everyone is back in Canada. That ain't no picnic.
Of course, this always brings us back to the tired old story about the lack of funding for our Olympic athletes. As C-Blatch puts it:
...if Canadians want lots of Olympic medals, they will have to pay for them. While funding for athletes in Canada has increased in recent years, it remains a fraction of what is spent by the nations reaping all the gold, silver and bronze here, and athletes in less popular or more obscure sports still often pay some, or nearly all, of their own expenses.
Well, I'm sorry, but there are thousands and thousands of people in this country who don't get their dreams funded by the Canadian taxpayer. Many actors, musicians, writers and artists struggle along without a lot of government support. Federal and Provincial governments have spent the last decade and a half slashing social services so that many people can't even achieve their dream of having a fucking roof over their heads and food in their bellies.
Most egregiously, Till and I have long dreamed of giving up our day jobs and dedicating ourselves full-time to Pub Lunch, our cover band that only plays songs by the lesser-lights of mid 90's BritPop: Menswear, Gene, Sleeper, Shed Seven and many other forgotten also-rans. Unfortunately, this seems to matter about as much as fencing and kayaking, and Pub Lunch stumbles along without funding.
Thanks for nothing, Canada.
You may be surprised to learn that former Toronto Sun columnist and current Fox Sports contributor Al Strachan is one of the few reporters who have been given a free pass at the Cox Bloc. Unlike the others, who we don't pick on because they are generally very good at their jobs and entertaining (Brunt, Blair, uh, end of list), Strachan has mostly flown under the radar due to the personal wishes of Mr. Godd Till.
As far as I can tell, there are three reasons why Till instituted a No Al Bashing rule at this site:
1. Strachan was one of the few reporters, columnists and talking heads who gave the players side a fair shake during the lock-out. Unlike others who mimicked the fans' misguided disgust with "millionaire athletes going on strike," Strachan seemed to have a firm grasp of the actual labour issues involved in the lock out and wasn't afraid to stand up for the players in face of people like Bill Watters spitting bile and plain old spit. The fact that Strachan and Nick Kypreos were the only ones I can remember who took this approach is a very sad reflection on the state of sports journalism in Canada. Because those guys are terrible.
2. Till once met Strachan at a bar in Montreal, talked hockey for a bit, and bought big Al a shot. Note to Howard Berger: If you are sick of Till picking on you, just be nice to him for a few minutes.
3. Al Strachan spends his winters sleeping on Christie Blatchford's couch, which explains a lot. Anyone who is good with C-Blatch is good with Godd Till.
However, much like the production of Tahiti Treat, all good things must come to an end. Especially if, like Tahiti Treat and Al Strachan, those things are strangely coloured and really bad for you. After reading Al's recent attempted take-down of Brian Burke, Till noticed a cheap-shot at the expense of Felix Potvin and declared the Albargo finished.
Al is fair game. So...here we go.
I've noticed a few Leafs fans on the internets seem to be offended by the aforementioned Burke-bash, mostly because of a little dig at Canada's most beloved hockey team at the end of the column. I personally don't see why anyone would get their Doug Gilmour Underoos all in a bunch over this one. This isn't in the same league as Cox or Berger.
Well...actually...while Strachan's piece fails at even the most basic level of Leaf-fan-baiting so perfected by Cox and friends, it does resemble the usual Mittenstringer screed in that the author seems to be using his column to settle old scores rather than, you know, writing something interesting and thought-provoking about sports. Anyone who has seen Al on the Score or heard him on Hardcore Sports Radio lately knows that Al really really hates Brian Burke. Well, this column is basically a transcript of Al's recent TV and radio appearances.
I'm not going to give the content of this piece the usual Fisking because it doesn't really deserve the effort. Seriously, the crux of the piece is "take away Burke's Stanley Cup win and he hasn't really won anything." How do you even begin to bring logic into that conversation? What I'm really interested in is the genesis of this spat. What caused these megapowers to explode?
As far as I can tell, it started back in early 2001 when Strachan claimed that Burke, then GM of the Vancouver Canucks, was prepared to deal Brendan Morrison and Bryan Allen for Mike Peca. Hardly Hogan leaving Savage alone to get his ass kicked by Akeem and the Big Bossman, but Burke went off like a one man Cox Bloc anyway:
"The very fact that Al Strachan reported it, in my opinion, makes it extremely likely it has no factual basis what-so-ever. I deny it specifically and categorically. I have never discussed Brendan Morrison with Buffalo, I have never discussed Bryan Allen with Buffalo and I have not talked to Darcy Regier in three weeks. So I'm shocked that a respectable media outlet like Hockey Night in Canada would allow this garbage rumour-mongering to take place. I'm amazed that whoever produces that show would tolerate this."
As the recent and lengthy Brian Burke versus Kevin Lowe grudge match has shown, Burke doesn't really let these things go. A week later he was still royally pissed off:
Burke discounted the rumour, reported by the Toronto Sun's Al Strachan during HNIC's Satellite Hot Stove, saying that he had to phone both Morrison and Allen and assure them that they weren't leaving.
"The fact that Al Strachan reported this trade rumour by itself should make it suspect," Burke told the Globe and Mail. "His accuracy rate on rumours like this is non-existent.
"The fact that a respected media like Hockey Night In Canada would allow this type of garbage to be aired is ridiculous.
"I have never talked to the Buffalo Sabres about either of the players that were mentioned in that deal."
Is Burke really that naive? How could anyone be surprised by seeing this type of garbage on Hockey Night in Canada?
Anyway, three years later and Canada's version of Coronation Street was once again the setting for a classic Burkian beatdown on poor old Al Strachan. This one happened on February 28, 2004, after Strachan had claimed on the Satellite Hotstove that Burke was demanding $2 million per year in contract negotiations with the Vancouver Canucks. Here is a transcription of the fun bits from when Burke came on to respond:
BB: My objection, and the reason I asked to go on tonight is, a member of your Satellite Hotstove group, Al Strachan, just went on the air and said, as if it were factual, which he's pretty loose with generally, that I was asking for two million dollars a year. I don't care if other people in Canada think that's true. I want the fans here in British Columbia to know there's absolutely no truth to that whatsoever, and once again Al Strachan has cemented his relationship or his reputation with dishonesty.
RM: Well, you know Brian, that's not the first time I've heard that figure. Where's that come from?
BB: I have no idea. Why doesn't someone from Hockey Night in Canada call me and ask me if that figure is on the table? It's never been, it's not now.
RM: You're going to give us that figure?
BB: I can tell you it's not on the table. I can tell you this. I will put this bet on the line. I will publish, when this is all done, what is on the table right from Brian Burke as far as staying, and if there is a two in there anywhere I'll resign. If there's not, this guy gets off of Hockey Night in Canada like he should be anyway.
RM: Well, you'll have to take that one up with Joel Darling, but I will say I've heard that number. So wherever that came from, and as you know...
BB: Well, you know what Ron? You wouldn't have gone on the air and talked about the number.
RM: No
BB: You say you've heard the number. You would have had the professional sense to call me and ask about it. This guy is not professional.
(Snip. Boring bit about what the fans in Vancouver think.)
BB: I certainly wouldn't have come on this show to talk about my contract if someone on Hockey Night hadn't been irresponsible and deceitful about what's happened here. That's the only thing I care that people get right.
See, Brian just cares about getting things right.
Later, Strachan mocked Burke's playoff futility on a subsequent edition of the Hotstove. Burke responded by banning Strachan from the Canucks dressing room (much like how his successor, Dave Nonis, banned scoring forwards). More than four years later, and Strachan still hasn't let it go. His recent column manipulates a lot of facts, and ignores many others, in a seemingly never-ending quest to prove that Brian Burke ain't all that.
While all of this is kinda funny, it isn't journalism, and it isn't really becoming of a professional writer with a long career behind him. Why the "editors" at Fox News allowed this, I don't know. I mean, if you are only looking to settle grudges and take cheapshots at people from behind the safety a computer monitor, start a blog. Like we did.
On another note...
I just heard that Isaac Hayes died this afternoon. Very sad news. I had the opportunity to go see Hayes about a month ago at the Portland Blues Festival (pictured). He was a bit slow moving around the stage, but he still put on a fantastic show. Known more in recent years for Chocolate Salty Balls than Hot Buttered Soul, Hayes was the heart of Stax records in the late sixties and had his biggest hit a few years later with the Theme From Shaft. Hopefully he'll be remembered more for his incredible music than as a cartoon character (which, still, was also brilliant). RIP Isaac. Here are a few tunes to remember him by: Walk on By, By the Time I get to Phoenix, Theme from Shaft
As far as I can tell, there are three reasons why Till instituted a No Al Bashing rule at this site:
1. Strachan was one of the few reporters, columnists and talking heads who gave the players side a fair shake during the lock-out. Unlike others who mimicked the fans' misguided disgust with "millionaire athletes going on strike," Strachan seemed to have a firm grasp of the actual labour issues involved in the lock out and wasn't afraid to stand up for the players in face of people like Bill Watters spitting bile and plain old spit. The fact that Strachan and Nick Kypreos were the only ones I can remember who took this approach is a very sad reflection on the state of sports journalism in Canada. Because those guys are terrible.
2. Till once met Strachan at a bar in Montreal, talked hockey for a bit, and bought big Al a shot. Note to Howard Berger: If you are sick of Till picking on you, just be nice to him for a few minutes.
3. Al Strachan spends his winters sleeping on Christie Blatchford's couch, which explains a lot. Anyone who is good with C-Blatch is good with Godd Till.
However, much like the production of Tahiti Treat, all good things must come to an end. Especially if, like Tahiti Treat and Al Strachan, those things are strangely coloured and really bad for you. After reading Al's recent attempted take-down of Brian Burke, Till noticed a cheap-shot at the expense of Felix Potvin and declared the Albargo finished.
Al is fair game. So...here we go.
I've noticed a few Leafs fans on the internets seem to be offended by the aforementioned Burke-bash, mostly because of a little dig at Canada's most beloved hockey team at the end of the column. I personally don't see why anyone would get their Doug Gilmour Underoos all in a bunch over this one. This isn't in the same league as Cox or Berger.
Well...actually...while Strachan's piece fails at even the most basic level of Leaf-fan-baiting so perfected by Cox and friends, it does resemble the usual Mittenstringer screed in that the author seems to be using his column to settle old scores rather than, you know, writing something interesting and thought-provoking about sports. Anyone who has seen Al on the Score or heard him on Hardcore Sports Radio lately knows that Al really really hates Brian Burke. Well, this column is basically a transcript of Al's recent TV and radio appearances.
I'm not going to give the content of this piece the usual Fisking because it doesn't really deserve the effort. Seriously, the crux of the piece is "take away Burke's Stanley Cup win and he hasn't really won anything." How do you even begin to bring logic into that conversation? What I'm really interested in is the genesis of this spat. What caused these megapowers to explode?
As far as I can tell, it started back in early 2001 when Strachan claimed that Burke, then GM of the Vancouver Canucks, was prepared to deal Brendan Morrison and Bryan Allen for Mike Peca. Hardly Hogan leaving Savage alone to get his ass kicked by Akeem and the Big Bossman, but Burke went off like a one man Cox Bloc anyway:
"The very fact that Al Strachan reported it, in my opinion, makes it extremely likely it has no factual basis what-so-ever. I deny it specifically and categorically. I have never discussed Brendan Morrison with Buffalo, I have never discussed Bryan Allen with Buffalo and I have not talked to Darcy Regier in three weeks. So I'm shocked that a respectable media outlet like Hockey Night in Canada would allow this garbage rumour-mongering to take place. I'm amazed that whoever produces that show would tolerate this."
As the recent and lengthy Brian Burke versus Kevin Lowe grudge match has shown, Burke doesn't really let these things go. A week later he was still royally pissed off:
Burke discounted the rumour, reported by the Toronto Sun's Al Strachan during HNIC's Satellite Hot Stove, saying that he had to phone both Morrison and Allen and assure them that they weren't leaving.
"The fact that Al Strachan reported this trade rumour by itself should make it suspect," Burke told the Globe and Mail. "His accuracy rate on rumours like this is non-existent.
"The fact that a respected media like Hockey Night In Canada would allow this type of garbage to be aired is ridiculous.
"I have never talked to the Buffalo Sabres about either of the players that were mentioned in that deal."
Is Burke really that naive? How could anyone be surprised by seeing this type of garbage on Hockey Night in Canada?
Anyway, three years later and Canada's version of Coronation Street was once again the setting for a classic Burkian beatdown on poor old Al Strachan. This one happened on February 28, 2004, after Strachan had claimed on the Satellite Hotstove that Burke was demanding $2 million per year in contract negotiations with the Vancouver Canucks. Here is a transcription of the fun bits from when Burke came on to respond:
BB: My objection, and the reason I asked to go on tonight is, a member of your Satellite Hotstove group, Al Strachan, just went on the air and said, as if it were factual, which he's pretty loose with generally, that I was asking for two million dollars a year. I don't care if other people in Canada think that's true. I want the fans here in British Columbia to know there's absolutely no truth to that whatsoever, and once again Al Strachan has cemented his relationship or his reputation with dishonesty.
RM: Well, you know Brian, that's not the first time I've heard that figure. Where's that come from?
BB: I have no idea. Why doesn't someone from Hockey Night in Canada call me and ask me if that figure is on the table? It's never been, it's not now.
RM: You're going to give us that figure?
BB: I can tell you it's not on the table. I can tell you this. I will put this bet on the line. I will publish, when this is all done, what is on the table right from Brian Burke as far as staying, and if there is a two in there anywhere I'll resign. If there's not, this guy gets off of Hockey Night in Canada like he should be anyway.
RM: Well, you'll have to take that one up with Joel Darling, but I will say I've heard that number. So wherever that came from, and as you know...
BB: Well, you know what Ron? You wouldn't have gone on the air and talked about the number.
RM: No
BB: You say you've heard the number. You would have had the professional sense to call me and ask about it. This guy is not professional.
(Snip. Boring bit about what the fans in Vancouver think.)
BB: I certainly wouldn't have come on this show to talk about my contract if someone on Hockey Night hadn't been irresponsible and deceitful about what's happened here. That's the only thing I care that people get right.
See, Brian just cares about getting things right.
Later, Strachan mocked Burke's playoff futility on a subsequent edition of the Hotstove. Burke responded by banning Strachan from the Canucks dressing room (much like how his successor, Dave Nonis, banned scoring forwards). More than four years later, and Strachan still hasn't let it go. His recent column manipulates a lot of facts, and ignores many others, in a seemingly never-ending quest to prove that Brian Burke ain't all that.
While all of this is kinda funny, it isn't journalism, and it isn't really becoming of a professional writer with a long career behind him. Why the "editors" at Fox News allowed this, I don't know. I mean, if you are only looking to settle grudges and take cheapshots at people from behind the safety a computer monitor, start a blog. Like we did.
On another note...
I just heard that Isaac Hayes died this afternoon. Very sad news. I had the opportunity to go see Hayes about a month ago at the Portland Blues Festival (pictured). He was a bit slow moving around the stage, but he still put on a fantastic show. Known more in recent years for Chocolate Salty Balls than Hot Buttered Soul, Hayes was the heart of Stax records in the late sixties and had his biggest hit a few years later with the Theme From Shaft. Hopefully he'll be remembered more for his incredible music than as a cartoon character (which, still, was also brilliant). RIP Isaac. Here are a few tunes to remember him by: Walk on By, By the Time I get to Phoenix, Theme from Shaft
Back in January we crowned Damien Cox as the 2008 Mittenstringer of the Year. Cox, the namesake of this site, was a shoo-in for the inaugural award in 2007, but was pipped at the finish like by Steve Simmons, who turned in a stupid-on-steroids performance that couldn't be denied.
However, it took only 22 cold January days for us to determine that no one was topping the idiocy that Cox displayed in the waning days of Brylcreem Jr.'s maniacal reign at the helm of Canada's most beloved hockey team.
It seemed like a good idea at the time. I mean who could ever top this? Well, the answer, my friend, is a blowhard radio news man with a bushy nose-neighbour and a commitment to justice for the proletariat.
Over the last few weeks there has been a groundswell of resentment and anger directed towards Working Class Howard. Message boards are filled with diatribes against our favourite mustachioed mittenstringer. There is a petition to have his blog removed from Eklund's Magical World of Make-Believe. Pension Plan Puppets ripped him forty-two new assholes on Friday. Varry Galk wrote a post for this site about Berger which has received three times as much traffic as anything we normally post.
Has something changed? Why, all of a sudden, has Howard become such a subject of scorn? We've been ripping on the man since we started this blog, and many others have tried to keep Howard honest in the past, but these last few weeks it seems like everyone hates Howie. Maybe everyone finally reached their breaking point with Howard's manipulation of the facts, incessant Leaf-fan bashing, and periodic bouts of bewildering weirdness when he uses his blog to list the arenas visited during his career or wage class warfare against millionaire athletes.
Or, maybe, Howard is taking so much criticism because he is the only one working this summer. While Simmons has spent the last few weeks trying to figure whatever happened to Randy Knorr, and Damien Cox is off wondering whether Rafa Nadal could beat Tiger Woods in a game of Golfennis, Working Class Howard has spewed out a steady stream of bullshit that seems to have made a lot of people very unhappy.
His recent column about Nikolai Kulemin, (in which Leafs fans are scorned as deluded cult members for daring to be excited about a promising rookie who just happened to be the Russian league and playoff MVP last year) is just the latest frightening jeremiad by a man who, at this rate, will be outside the ACC with a sandwich board by opening night. His evidence? Outdated scouting reports and a guys signature on a message board profile. Next week he will probably count the number of blue cars parked on a square block of Eglinton and conclude that Leafs Nation has decided Mark Bell is a lock for next year's Hart Trophy.
It's gotten to the point where the commenters on Eklund's Candyland are in open revolt against the longtime champion of the working man, starting a petition to have him removed as Leafs correspondent and boycotting his entries. It's truly ironic that a man who has long championed boycotting the Leafs has become the target of a boycott himself. Is it possible to boycott the monolithic Leafs, who dominate a market in which 90% of Leaf fans don't come within Kyle Wellwood's refrigerator of attending a game? No. But boycotting an online column? That's a lot more feasible.
So, this is where you come in Bloc Heads. We don't want to come off like Brett Favre or Mr. Terrence Funk, but we think we may have to un-retire the 2008 Mittenstringer of the Year Award. Is it fair to strip Damien of his award? This isn't to say that Damien's work isn't terrible, but is it is mind-numbingly terrible as Howard Berger's? Either way, Berger may be doing the most valuable service of all. Every article he writes seems to be turning more and more Leafs followers towards blogs like Down Goes Brown and PPP in search of intelligent Leaf coverage. Maybe he really does care about the fans. Leave your thoughts in the comments.
*****A Godd Till and Kim Jorn Joint*****
However, it took only 22 cold January days for us to determine that no one was topping the idiocy that Cox displayed in the waning days of Brylcreem Jr.'s maniacal reign at the helm of Canada's most beloved hockey team.
It seemed like a good idea at the time. I mean who could ever top this? Well, the answer, my friend, is a blowhard radio news man with a bushy nose-neighbour and a commitment to justice for the proletariat.
Over the last few weeks there has been a groundswell of resentment and anger directed towards Working Class Howard. Message boards are filled with diatribes against our favourite mustachioed mittenstringer. There is a petition to have his blog removed from Eklund's Magical World of Make-Believe. Pension Plan Puppets ripped him forty-two new assholes on Friday. Varry Galk wrote a post for this site about Berger which has received three times as much traffic as anything we normally post.Has something changed? Why, all of a sudden, has Howard become such a subject of scorn? We've been ripping on the man since we started this blog, and many others have tried to keep Howard honest in the past, but these last few weeks it seems like everyone hates Howie. Maybe everyone finally reached their breaking point with Howard's manipulation of the facts, incessant Leaf-fan bashing, and periodic bouts of bewildering weirdness when he uses his blog to list the arenas visited during his career or wage class warfare against millionaire athletes.
Or, maybe, Howard is taking so much criticism because he is the only one working this summer. While Simmons has spent the last few weeks trying to figure whatever happened to Randy Knorr, and Damien Cox is off wondering whether Rafa Nadal could beat Tiger Woods in a game of Golfennis, Working Class Howard has spewed out a steady stream of bullshit that seems to have made a lot of people very unhappy.
His recent column about Nikolai Kulemin, (in which Leafs fans are scorned as deluded cult members for daring to be excited about a promising rookie who just happened to be the Russian league and playoff MVP last year) is just the latest frightening jeremiad by a man who, at this rate, will be outside the ACC with a sandwich board by opening night. His evidence? Outdated scouting reports and a guys signature on a message board profile. Next week he will probably count the number of blue cars parked on a square block of Eglinton and conclude that Leafs Nation has decided Mark Bell is a lock for next year's Hart Trophy.
It's gotten to the point where the commenters on Eklund's Candyland are in open revolt against the longtime champion of the working man, starting a petition to have him removed as Leafs correspondent and boycotting his entries. It's truly ironic that a man who has long championed boycotting the Leafs has become the target of a boycott himself. Is it possible to boycott the monolithic Leafs, who dominate a market in which 90% of Leaf fans don't come within Kyle Wellwood's refrigerator of attending a game? No. But boycotting an online column? That's a lot more feasible.
So, this is where you come in Bloc Heads. We don't want to come off like Brett Favre or Mr. Terrence Funk, but we think we may have to un-retire the 2008 Mittenstringer of the Year Award. Is it fair to strip Damien of his award? This isn't to say that Damien's work isn't terrible, but is it is mind-numbingly terrible as Howard Berger's? Either way, Berger may be doing the most valuable service of all. Every article he writes seems to be turning more and more Leafs followers towards blogs like Down Goes Brown and PPP in search of intelligent Leaf coverage. Maybe he really does care about the fans. Leave your thoughts in the comments.
*****A Godd Till and Kim Jorn Joint*****
When I was a kid, back before cable, the Internet, and pain-in-the-ass blogs devoted to snarking on sportswriters in a juvenile fashion, there were very few outlets for a snot-nosed little nerd like me to huff back my sports fill. Basically, my primary outlets to interact with what was then the far-off and mysterious world of pro sports were baseball and hockey cards, newspapers, occasional network TV broadcasts, books, and the then-rare magazines devoted to the North American scene.
Of those magazines, three stood out like hoary old giants coming down the mountain with unimpeachable testimony: Sports Illustrated, the Sporting News, and the Hockey News. (I was also enamoured of Hockey Digest, especially their 'Who's Better?' feature where you could hash out earth-shattering debates like the superiority of Bernie Nicholls vs Jimmy Carson. Do they still run that?)
These magazines had stuff no one else did - great photography, quality writing, lengthy, in-depth features, coverage of all the clubs in the league, not just your local team, best of all, rows and rows of stats - stuff that made them indispensable. But as with so many warhorses of the print era, the coming of the Internet has not been kind. The things they specialized in are now commonplace - a flick of the mouse or remote and I can, instead of reading a 500-word notes column on the St. Louis Blues, watch them playing Chicago, read their beat writers in the Post-Dispatch, and follow the team through the eyes of an impassioned, knowledegable fan on a blog. Or hell, I can just stop reading about Jeff Woywitka's progress in Peoria and watch Mr Perfect take on the Hitman.
The last few years have shown the toll this new scenario has taken on the three. The Sporting News stopped publishing it's 80-year old annual guides, moved out of St. Louis, and recently launched an abominable web-paper which is uncopiable, guaranteeing that no bloggers will link to it. Sports Illustrated gives away all it's content for free online, and responds to the obvious question of why anyone would now pay $5 a week for the mag by giving away free subscriptions with a 12-pack of toilet paper.
The Hockey News has changed the look of its magazine inside and out, and dropped the price, if I remember correctly. But of the three, they might be making the most progress in adapting to the online world. Apparently, they have been following popular websites like Hockeybuzz and realized the best way to attract the all-important page views is to write nonsensical columns trolling Leafs fans. Like this one!
So while Sundin dithers on what to do next season, here are 10 reasons why he won't make the Hall of Fame three years after his retirement. There might be 20 reasons why he will make the Hall some day, but some members of the selection committee will reject him for these flaws :
OH YEAH!!!!
10. Has never led his team to great heights.
Wow, I must have been WICKED high when I saw Sundin leading Team Sweden to the Olympic gold medal against the finest hockey talent in the world. You do know the it's HOCKEY Hall of Fame, right?
The rest of this article continues in this pointless vein, so I won't go point by point. Why should I bother, when Costello himself won't even put his own name on his argument, instead saying "this is what some writers will say but maybe not me when his time comes." Brian Costello, winner of this month's Cox Bloc Profile In Courage. I'll give you a couple more of the highlights:
3. Has never won an individual award.
Dude, he won the Mark Messier Memorial Lay's Potato Chips Goblet THIS YEAR!! Come on!
2. Has never won a Stanley Cup - or even made it to the final.
Wow, I guess Darryl Sittler, Brad Park, Borje Salming, Vladislav Tretiak, Tony Esposito, Jean Ratelle, Marcel Dionne, Michel Goulet, Peter Stastny, and about ninety other guys who never won the Cup are getting kicked out next year. Controversial. Also, did you know Mats Sundin is retired and his career is over? Costello has the SCOOP, Gz.
1. Has rarely played at a level where he's considered among the top few players at his position.
This, after he points out as a negative that Sundin has been a second team all-star twice, so actually he's been considered the second best centre in the league twice. He's also made the All-star team nine times (and would have been there again this year if he hadn't declined), and he wasn't the fourth line centre, believe me.
He has been loyal, durable, his production has been remarkably consistent, but he hasn't crossed the line between being a very, very good player and a truly exceptional player.
He might have an argument here, if that statement bore any resemblance to reality. Anyone who thinks the Hockey Hall of Fame is for only the 'truly exceptional' should take a look at Clark Gillies, Bernie Federko, Mike Gartner, and Glenn Anderson having a beer together at the next induction weekend. By any reasonable look at the HOF standard, Sundin walks it.
I would add stuff about Brian apparently having no idea to adjust for the fact that Mats played his entire prime in the Dead Puck era, but you get the point. With articles like this, I eagerly look forward to the Hockey News' next headline-grabbing move in the world of shinny journalism - the hiring of Howard Berger and Damien Cox as Editors-at-Large. Funny, I thought it was Mad Magazine who called their contributors "The Usual Gang Of Idiots".....
Of those magazines, three stood out like hoary old giants coming down the mountain with unimpeachable testimony: Sports Illustrated, the Sporting News, and the Hockey News. (I was also enamoured of Hockey Digest, especially their 'Who's Better?' feature where you could hash out earth-shattering debates like the superiority of Bernie Nicholls vs Jimmy Carson. Do they still run that?)
These magazines had stuff no one else did - great photography, quality writing, lengthy, in-depth features, coverage of all the clubs in the league, not just your local team, best of all, rows and rows of stats - stuff that made them indispensable. But as with so many warhorses of the print era, the coming of the Internet has not been kind. The things they specialized in are now commonplace - a flick of the mouse or remote and I can, instead of reading a 500-word notes column on the St. Louis Blues, watch them playing Chicago, read their beat writers in the Post-Dispatch, and follow the team through the eyes of an impassioned, knowledegable fan on a blog. Or hell, I can just stop reading about Jeff Woywitka's progress in Peoria and watch Mr Perfect take on the Hitman.
The last few years have shown the toll this new scenario has taken on the three. The Sporting News stopped publishing it's 80-year old annual guides, moved out of St. Louis, and recently launched an abominable web-paper which is uncopiable, guaranteeing that no bloggers will link to it. Sports Illustrated gives away all it's content for free online, and responds to the obvious question of why anyone would now pay $5 a week for the mag by giving away free subscriptions with a 12-pack of toilet paper.
The Hockey News has changed the look of its magazine inside and out, and dropped the price, if I remember correctly. But of the three, they might be making the most progress in adapting to the online world. Apparently, they have been following popular websites like Hockeybuzz and realized the best way to attract the all-important page views is to write nonsensical columns trolling Leafs fans. Like this one!
THN.com Top 10: Reasons why Mats Sundin isn't a Hall of Famer
by Brian Costello
31/07/2008 11:00:01 AM
Sundin is a consistent player, but here's why he isn't a Hall of Famer.
Some media outlets have referred to the indecisive Mats Sundin as an automatic Hall of Famer, regardless of what he decides to do with his hockey career.
So while Sundin dithers on what to do next season, here are 10 reasons why he won't make the Hall of Fame three years after his retirement. There might be 20 reasons why he will make the Hall some day, but some members of the selection committee will reject him for these flaws :
OH YEAH!!!!
10. Has never led his team to great heights.
Wow, I must have been WICKED high when I saw Sundin leading Team Sweden to the Olympic gold medal against the finest hockey talent in the world. You do know the it's HOCKEY Hall of Fame, right?
The rest of this article continues in this pointless vein, so I won't go point by point. Why should I bother, when Costello himself won't even put his own name on his argument, instead saying "this is what some writers will say but maybe not me when his time comes." Brian Costello, winner of this month's Cox Bloc Profile In Courage. I'll give you a couple more of the highlights:
3. Has never won an individual award.
Dude, he won the Mark Messier Memorial Lay's Potato Chips Goblet THIS YEAR!! Come on!
2. Has never won a Stanley Cup - or even made it to the final.
Wow, I guess Darryl Sittler, Brad Park, Borje Salming, Vladislav Tretiak, Tony Esposito, Jean Ratelle, Marcel Dionne, Michel Goulet, Peter Stastny, and about ninety other guys who never won the Cup are getting kicked out next year. Controversial. Also, did you know Mats Sundin is retired and his career is over? Costello has the SCOOP, Gz.
1. Has rarely played at a level where he's considered among the top few players at his position.
This, after he points out as a negative that Sundin has been a second team all-star twice, so actually he's been considered the second best centre in the league twice. He's also made the All-star team nine times (and would have been there again this year if he hadn't declined), and he wasn't the fourth line centre, believe me.
He has been loyal, durable, his production has been remarkably consistent, but he hasn't crossed the line between being a very, very good player and a truly exceptional player.
He might have an argument here, if that statement bore any resemblance to reality. Anyone who thinks the Hockey Hall of Fame is for only the 'truly exceptional' should take a look at Clark Gillies, Bernie Federko, Mike Gartner, and Glenn Anderson having a beer together at the next induction weekend. By any reasonable look at the HOF standard, Sundin walks it.
I would add stuff about Brian apparently having no idea to adjust for the fact that Mats played his entire prime in the Dead Puck era, but you get the point. With articles like this, I eagerly look forward to the Hockey News' next headline-grabbing move in the world of shinny journalism - the hiring of Howard Berger and Damien Cox as Editors-at-Large. Funny, I thought it was Mad Magazine who called their contributors "The Usual Gang Of Idiots".....
Rosie DiManno, in Beijing to cover the Olympics, shows that she is able to insult the Chinese with the same ease and ignorance that she usually reserves for her readers' intelligence:
Wow. I mean...wow.
Hopefully our athletes do a better job of representing us in Beijing than our reporters. The standard has already been set pretty low.
And then there's the food.
China seems unable to convince the world that its edibles, at least during the Games and most especially at the athletes' village, will be free of pathogens and substances that could trigger positive drug results, or just cardboard particles and dog meat.Wow. I mean...wow.
Hopefully our athletes do a better job of representing us in Beijing than our reporters. The standard has already been set pretty low.
Editor's note: About a week ago, we offered Varry Galk the opportunity to write a post about a recent piece of nonsense by noted fashion critic Howard Berger. And then we didn't check the ol' Cox Bloc inbox for a week. Luckily Howard (like most other mittenstringers) writes basically the same column over and over again, and Varry's post is still very much relevant. So here, better late than never and in all of its well-researched glory, is Varry Galk's belated Cox Bloc debut.
The last Howard Berger column Varry Galk will ever read is, in many ways, unremarkable as far as Berger columns go: illogically structured and lazily reported.
In an article titled "Leafs, Kings Bear Many Similarities," Berger of course proceeds to instead list a host of differences -- Kings actually have young talent, Leaf fans are moronic sheep, only the Kings are motivated to turn their franchise around. Boring stuff, although I did chuckle when Berger wrote that while the Kings have been characterized by failure and turnover, they deserve a pass because, unlike the Leafs, they are an expansion team...a 1967 expansion team. (Perhaps by 2073 the Kings can finally shed that "expansion" label).
His unrelated Part Two is somewhat more interesting. Feel Howie's smugness through your screen as he breathlessly reports the following:
Is it possible that the folks in charge of Hockey Night In Canada are finally souring on the Maple Leafs? How else can one explain the Blue & White being idle on three Saturdays during the 2008-09 season?[...]Is this an indication that CBC executives fear a decrease in the number of Leaf watchers? Or, are they merely embarrassed by their insistence to put the Leafs on national TV in recent years, no matter how dreadful the team?
Whatever the case, CBC decision-makers are banking on a trio of marquee match-ups in the Leafs' absence. On Dec. 13th, the early national telecast will be Washington [and Alex Ovechkin] at Montreal. On Dec. 27th, it will be Montreal at Pittsburgh [Sidney Crosby, Evgeni Malkin et al]. And, on Jan. 17th, Leaf fans will watch in envy as the Canadiens and Senators take the national stage at Scotiabank Place. This long-overdue shift in philosophy by HNIC is somewhat risky, given the Leafs' large, unconditional following. But, it's a decision that will be met with overwhelming approval by hockey fans in other parts of the country that are tired of being force-fed a lousy Toronto product each week.
So the CBC's righteous decision to pointedly humiliate Leaf fans by airing the Habs instead of the Leafs on three Saturdays is "long-overdue." Certainly, Howie's historically minded limo driver would agree.
Never mind that, as Kim pointed out so well, the Leafs have enjoyed much more success than the Habs since Montreal last won the Cup. Never mind that the Leafs have played the Senators in four separate playoff series this decade and won each one. Never mind that the Leafs defeated the Habs to pass them in the standings on the last day of the season way back...in 2007.
And never mind that Howie predicted the 2007-08 Montreal Canadiens - who, by this logic, should have been on HNIC last season rather than the "force-fed" Leafs - to finish in 14th place in the Eastern Conference. This oopsie has not prevented Berger from recently bragging about how easy it is for him to predict in July how teams will fare, based on their post-free agency roster.
No, the real problem with Berger's analysis of CBC's "shift in philosophy" is...there hasn't been one.
In about 2 seconds of online research, anyone can learn that TSN paid a record $200 million to obtain, among other things, the rights to 17 national Leafs telecasts. When you also consider Leafs TV and regional Sportsnet games, this only leaves 23 available games for HNIC to telecast. And there will thus be precisely 23 regular season Leafs games on HNIC for each of the next six years, even if the Leafs win the next six Cups. The centrepiece in the TSN negotiations was their ability to broadcast more Leafs games not just regionally, but nationally. Starting this season, the rest of Canada is getting more Leafs. Not less.
(As an aside, the Habs are off HNIC for three Saturdays as well, also thanks to the TSN deal. I'm sure Montreal fans will stay home those days and "watch in envy." I'm also sure Berger does not yet know this fact.)
Anyway, Berger has misinterpreted facts before when they dovetail with his various axes to grind (see Avery, Brunnstrom, or anything that gives him a forum to bash the Leafs). So why was this the last Berger article I will ever read?
For me, it's because of the cumulative effect of statements like these, all of which appear in Berger's latest:
Leaf fans can easily be sold a bill of goods, which allows for false optimism on an annual basis.
In Toronto, it appears that a hint of reality has overcome the Leafs' undying flock of supporters, though it's nothing that a two-game win streak won't cure.
The ability to reverse a losing environment is far more critical in [Los Angeles] than in Toronto, where fans of the Blue & White are limitless in their anticipation and reverence.
And so on. Other teams have fans that want their team to do well. In contrast, and as Berger points out, over and over and over again, the Leafs have "delusional" "zealots" who need not only to acknowledge, but to truly internalize, the belief that the team has been a disgrace to the sport since 1967. Hell, he even called us all assholes for taking an interest in the Leafs when children are dying of cancer at SickKids.
But it's not just the failure of our hearts and minds that rankles Howie. The current plight of the team is also our fault. To wit (from his July 14 column):
You have no power to influence the people that actually make decisions about the Leafs, for you continue to not only accept a bad team, but to thoroughly embrace it in ways that gorge the bottom line. Every jersey you buy; every ticket that is printed; every time you turn on the TV to watch the Leafs play, is another endorsement of the product - no matter how inept it is, or to what degree it torments you.
Let's set aside the huge issue of whether the average Leaf fan gets to buy any of these aforementioned tickets (Kim has already addressed this admirably on Cox Bloc). My first point is to point out that, analytically, his statement reads like the following:
Your mother is fat. You continue to not only accept your mother's weight problem, but to thoroughly embrace it. Every time you call, every time you visit her on Thanksgiving and every Mother's Day card you buy is another endorsement of her body shape, no matter how obese she becomes.
There are three obvious responses:
1. It is no such endorsement, and you know it;
2. Fuck you for even talking about this; and
3. What exactly am I supposed to do, other than treat my mother like my mother?
Point (3) is the real rub. What does Berger propose that we do differently? Careen back and forth between the Ducks and Red Wings bandwagons? Self-flagellate? Ignore hockey altogether until the Leafs are ahead in the third period of a Cup-clinching game, since obviously 100-point seasons and deep playoff runs are more appropriately lumped into the "failure" pile?
There are so many other problems with this vendetta. There is not one iota of evidence that abandoning a team during bad times is both necessary and sufficient to spur a return to glory (see Blackhawks, Islanders, Blue Jays, etc.) - in fact, it's more likely to cause management to try and make do on the cheap. There's also the concept that maybe, rather than failing to try to build a strong hockey franchise, it's that MLSE just isn't very good at it. Personally, I don't see how it helps the bottom line to spend to the cap on bad players and miss the playoffs rather than spend to the cap on good players and enjoy a profitable playoff run.
But more importantly, why on earth should Working Class Howard use up 90% of his bandwidth by laying into average Toronto fans? Cox may lie and mislead, but at least he attacks players and management - you know, people actually relevant to whether the team succeeds or fails. Exactly what difference does it make when Joey and his buddies in a sports bar in Woodbridge high-five after a Leaf win, while all the tickets they couldn't possibly afford were sold to wealthy and/or corporate season ticket-holders? Did Joey insert no-movement clauses and trade Rask for Raycroft while we weren't looking?
In fact, let me flip the script on Berger's "cancer should put the Leafs in perspective" nonsense. Some journalists put themselves in harm's way to alert the world to genocide. Others try to shed light on injustices or social trends. Howard Berger has chosen instead to make it his journalist's mission to take a bad hockey team and look beyond its players, decision-makers and even its paying corporate customers to attack average, working-class residents of the city in which it plays and remind them that their home team has not won a championship in a disproportionately long time. Period. Cheering a victory or even tuning in on television are not just ignorant but counterproductive in his world, unless and until the Leafs build the sure-thing bandwagon a discerning fan should jump back on. (I bet Berger owns a pink Red Sox cap.)
And he won't rest until every man, woman and child - even those ever-important cancer-stricken children at SickKids who love the Leafs because of frequent visits by the likes of Kaberle and Stajan - know how to pronounce the word "delusional." Hell, even Cox finds it annoying when he rocks out to the Eagles only to have a tut-tutting columnist remind him of their recent mediocrity and, by extension, his own supposed futility.
What an utterly worthless pursuit, Howard. I neither need to nor want to read you, and so I simply won't. Go Leafs.
The last Howard Berger column Varry Galk will ever read is, in many ways, unremarkable as far as Berger columns go: illogically structured and lazily reported.
In an article titled "Leafs, Kings Bear Many Similarities," Berger of course proceeds to instead list a host of differences -- Kings actually have young talent, Leaf fans are moronic sheep, only the Kings are motivated to turn their franchise around. Boring stuff, although I did chuckle when Berger wrote that while the Kings have been characterized by failure and turnover, they deserve a pass because, unlike the Leafs, they are an expansion team...a 1967 expansion team. (Perhaps by 2073 the Kings can finally shed that "expansion" label).
His unrelated Part Two is somewhat more interesting. Feel Howie's smugness through your screen as he breathlessly reports the following:
Is it possible that the folks in charge of Hockey Night In Canada are finally souring on the Maple Leafs? How else can one explain the Blue & White being idle on three Saturdays during the 2008-09 season?[...]Is this an indication that CBC executives fear a decrease in the number of Leaf watchers? Or, are they merely embarrassed by their insistence to put the Leafs on national TV in recent years, no matter how dreadful the team?
Whatever the case, CBC decision-makers are banking on a trio of marquee match-ups in the Leafs' absence. On Dec. 13th, the early national telecast will be Washington [and Alex Ovechkin] at Montreal. On Dec. 27th, it will be Montreal at Pittsburgh [Sidney Crosby, Evgeni Malkin et al]. And, on Jan. 17th, Leaf fans will watch in envy as the Canadiens and Senators take the national stage at Scotiabank Place. This long-overdue shift in philosophy by HNIC is somewhat risky, given the Leafs' large, unconditional following. But, it's a decision that will be met with overwhelming approval by hockey fans in other parts of the country that are tired of being force-fed a lousy Toronto product each week.
So the CBC's righteous decision to pointedly humiliate Leaf fans by airing the Habs instead of the Leafs on three Saturdays is "long-overdue." Certainly, Howie's historically minded limo driver would agree.
Never mind that, as Kim pointed out so well, the Leafs have enjoyed much more success than the Habs since Montreal last won the Cup. Never mind that the Leafs have played the Senators in four separate playoff series this decade and won each one. Never mind that the Leafs defeated the Habs to pass them in the standings on the last day of the season way back...in 2007.
And never mind that Howie predicted the 2007-08 Montreal Canadiens - who, by this logic, should have been on HNIC last season rather than the "force-fed" Leafs - to finish in 14th place in the Eastern Conference. This oopsie has not prevented Berger from recently bragging about how easy it is for him to predict in July how teams will fare, based on their post-free agency roster.
No, the real problem with Berger's analysis of CBC's "shift in philosophy" is...there hasn't been one.
In about 2 seconds of online research, anyone can learn that TSN paid a record $200 million to obtain, among other things, the rights to 17 national Leafs telecasts. When you also consider Leafs TV and regional Sportsnet games, this only leaves 23 available games for HNIC to telecast. And there will thus be precisely 23 regular season Leafs games on HNIC for each of the next six years, even if the Leafs win the next six Cups. The centrepiece in the TSN negotiations was their ability to broadcast more Leafs games not just regionally, but nationally. Starting this season, the rest of Canada is getting more Leafs. Not less.
(As an aside, the Habs are off HNIC for three Saturdays as well, also thanks to the TSN deal. I'm sure Montreal fans will stay home those days and "watch in envy." I'm also sure Berger does not yet know this fact.)
Anyway, Berger has misinterpreted facts before when they dovetail with his various axes to grind (see Avery, Brunnstrom, or anything that gives him a forum to bash the Leafs). So why was this the last Berger article I will ever read?
For me, it's because of the cumulative effect of statements like these, all of which appear in Berger's latest:
Leaf fans can easily be sold a bill of goods, which allows for false optimism on an annual basis.
In Toronto, it appears that a hint of reality has overcome the Leafs' undying flock of supporters, though it's nothing that a two-game win streak won't cure.
The ability to reverse a losing environment is far more critical in [Los Angeles] than in Toronto, where fans of the Blue & White are limitless in their anticipation and reverence.
And so on. Other teams have fans that want their team to do well. In contrast, and as Berger points out, over and over and over again, the Leafs have "delusional" "zealots" who need not only to acknowledge, but to truly internalize, the belief that the team has been a disgrace to the sport since 1967. Hell, he even called us all assholes for taking an interest in the Leafs when children are dying of cancer at SickKids.
But it's not just the failure of our hearts and minds that rankles Howie. The current plight of the team is also our fault. To wit (from his July 14 column):
You have no power to influence the people that actually make decisions about the Leafs, for you continue to not only accept a bad team, but to thoroughly embrace it in ways that gorge the bottom line. Every jersey you buy; every ticket that is printed; every time you turn on the TV to watch the Leafs play, is another endorsement of the product - no matter how inept it is, or to what degree it torments you.
Let's set aside the huge issue of whether the average Leaf fan gets to buy any of these aforementioned tickets (Kim has already addressed this admirably on Cox Bloc). My first point is to point out that, analytically, his statement reads like the following:
Your mother is fat. You continue to not only accept your mother's weight problem, but to thoroughly embrace it. Every time you call, every time you visit her on Thanksgiving and every Mother's Day card you buy is another endorsement of her body shape, no matter how obese she becomes.
There are three obvious responses:
1. It is no such endorsement, and you know it;
2. Fuck you for even talking about this; and
3. What exactly am I supposed to do, other than treat my mother like my mother?
Point (3) is the real rub. What does Berger propose that we do differently? Careen back and forth between the Ducks and Red Wings bandwagons? Self-flagellate? Ignore hockey altogether until the Leafs are ahead in the third period of a Cup-clinching game, since obviously 100-point seasons and deep playoff runs are more appropriately lumped into the "failure" pile?
There are so many other problems with this vendetta. There is not one iota of evidence that abandoning a team during bad times is both necessary and sufficient to spur a return to glory (see Blackhawks, Islanders, Blue Jays, etc.) - in fact, it's more likely to cause management to try and make do on the cheap. There's also the concept that maybe, rather than failing to try to build a strong hockey franchise, it's that MLSE just isn't very good at it. Personally, I don't see how it helps the bottom line to spend to the cap on bad players and miss the playoffs rather than spend to the cap on good players and enjoy a profitable playoff run.
But more importantly, why on earth should Working Class Howard use up 90% of his bandwidth by laying into average Toronto fans? Cox may lie and mislead, but at least he attacks players and management - you know, people actually relevant to whether the team succeeds or fails. Exactly what difference does it make when Joey and his buddies in a sports bar in Woodbridge high-five after a Leaf win, while all the tickets they couldn't possibly afford were sold to wealthy and/or corporate season ticket-holders? Did Joey insert no-movement clauses and trade Rask for Raycroft while we weren't looking?
In fact, let me flip the script on Berger's "cancer should put the Leafs in perspective" nonsense. Some journalists put themselves in harm's way to alert the world to genocide. Others try to shed light on injustices or social trends. Howard Berger has chosen instead to make it his journalist's mission to take a bad hockey team and look beyond its players, decision-makers and even its paying corporate customers to attack average, working-class residents of the city in which it plays and remind them that their home team has not won a championship in a disproportionately long time. Period. Cheering a victory or even tuning in on television are not just ignorant but counterproductive in his world, unless and until the Leafs build the sure-thing bandwagon a discerning fan should jump back on. (I bet Berger owns a pink Red Sox cap.)
And he won't rest until every man, woman and child - even those ever-important cancer-stricken children at SickKids who love the Leafs because of frequent visits by the likes of Kaberle and Stajan - know how to pronounce the word "delusional." Hell, even Cox finds it annoying when he rocks out to the Eagles only to have a tut-tutting columnist remind him of their recent mediocrity and, by extension, his own supposed futility.
What an utterly worthless pursuit, Howard. I neither need to nor want to read you, and so I simply won't. Go Leafs.
Well, we've given Working Class Howard a lot of grief round these parts, but today we have to salute the man for strapping us (along with some other blog making fun of the mittenstringers - our lawyers are on high alert and willing to go to any lengths to defend this unique blogging concept we stole from Fire Joe Morgan) to his back and carrying us to the tip, the top, the New York Times, the paper every right-thinking American knows is second to none at selling out the troops, keeping the white man down, and forcing traditional preachers to marry God-hating sodomites in front of the young uns at a family barbecue. We couldn't be prouder.
So in gratitude, I would like to point out that the above-mentioned NYT article is a little hard on Howard, using the fact that his article on third jerseys leads with with a discussion of the Leafs (you know, the beat he is paid to cover pretty much exclusively) to make a bunch of jokes about Leafs/Toronto self-absorption that were pretty hilarious in 1983. Gee Gray Lady, I'm sorry Howard didn't give equal time to the teal, mauve, and desert ochre jerseys with the Hypercolour reflective stripes to be modeled by one of the 20-odd NHL clubs no hockey fan give a good god damn about. Certainly New Yorkers would never have such a parochial attitude. I guess all the pots and kettles in NY must be buried under new Yankee Stadium along with that Ortiz jersey.
I did love the rich irony of Howard ripping off the Leafs for NOT gouging their fans by introducing a new 3rd uni design, likely cause he had to scrap the MLSE VMPIREZ RIP OFF SUKKOR LEAFS FAN SHP column he's had in the hopper for months. He is always thinking of ways to make his life easier though, suggesting the Leafs wear a '67 model jersey, cause apparently something significant happened that year and then didn't happen for a while and baby Jesus cried and Dairy Queen ran out of Skor bits. Imagine the premade column leads if they did that.You gotta love a guy for trying...
While on Hockeybuzz, I managed to catch something else Howard wrote recently about this being a godawful season ahead with nothing to look forward to, and it put me in mind of the ballgame I watched Saturday night. Giants-Dbacks is no one's idea of a marquee matchup, but with Arizona pitting ace Brandon Webb against Giants phenom 12-year-old Tim Lincecum, it was worth a look. And am I glad I watched - both had their good stuff going, especially Lincecum, striking out 13 in 7 innings with a moving fastball, solid hammer, and ridiculous changeup. The Giants fans were going mental, all thoughts of Barry Bonds gone as they rocked along on a summer night with Tiny Tim and his elbows and knees motion. It didn't matter that the Giants are an incompetent franchise running out a 41 year old shortstop, Rich Aurilia in the cleanup spot some nights, and starting a guy at third who got released by the freaking Pirates. They have Tim Lincecum, and he is phenomenal, and Saturday night I doubt they would have traded places with any other fans in baseball.
Fans love "their guys," the guys who came up through the system, the guys they have watched develop, struggle, and break through. It may be an illusion that these guys belong to us more, but it a necessary tonic to the grim reality that we are all ultimately cheering for laundry. I have two Tigers t-shirts - Granderson and Verlander. I could have bought a Miguel Cabrera one outside Safeco last month, but he's not one of "my guys." Not yet. I bought Verlander instead, remembering how excited I was he fell to Detroit in the 2005 draft, then marvelling through his poised rookie season thal lasted all the way to the World Series, and that unforgettable no-hitter last spring, the first Tigers no-no I'd ever seen. We go back a ways.
As long as I have been a Leafs fan, there have been precious few of those guys, and fewer still I followed from draft pick to rookie to star - Potvin, Kaberle, who else really? Antro? This year, no matter what the results on the ice, I will be fascinated watching the progress of Tlusty, Stralman, Kulemin, Pogge, Steen, Stajan, Schenn, hopeful that the Leafs have started to ice a team not built on veteran mercenaries who didn't really want to be here, or who you could never totally embrace (hello, Shayne Corson) but on a group of young guys who will grow together, jell together, thrill us as we see them take next steps, figure out defences, back each other up in a war against Philly or come together to surprise Detroit or Pittsburgh, to learn to hate Montreal and Ottawa as much as we do. A team that belongs to us. Whatever Howard says, I think it will be a hell of a ride.
And it sure beats the hell out of cheering for O'Neill, Lindros and Allison, no matter what the jerseys look like.
So in gratitude, I would like to point out that the above-mentioned NYT article is a little hard on Howard, using the fact that his article on third jerseys leads with with a discussion of the Leafs (you know, the beat he is paid to cover pretty much exclusively) to make a bunch of jokes about Leafs/Toronto self-absorption that were pretty hilarious in 1983. Gee Gray Lady, I'm sorry Howard didn't give equal time to the teal, mauve, and desert ochre jerseys with the Hypercolour reflective stripes to be modeled by one of the 20-odd NHL clubs no hockey fan give a good god damn about. Certainly New Yorkers would never have such a parochial attitude. I guess all the pots and kettles in NY must be buried under new Yankee Stadium along with that Ortiz jersey.
I did love the rich irony of Howard ripping off the Leafs for NOT gouging their fans by introducing a new 3rd uni design, likely cause he had to scrap the MLSE VMPIREZ RIP OFF SUKKOR LEAFS FAN SHP column he's had in the hopper for months. He is always thinking of ways to make his life easier though, suggesting the Leafs wear a '67 model jersey, cause apparently something significant happened that year and then didn't happen for a while and baby Jesus cried and Dairy Queen ran out of Skor bits. Imagine the premade column leads if they did that.You gotta love a guy for trying...
While on Hockeybuzz, I managed to catch something else Howard wrote recently about this being a godawful season ahead with nothing to look forward to, and it put me in mind of the ballgame I watched Saturday night. Giants-Dbacks is no one's idea of a marquee matchup, but with Arizona pitting ace Brandon Webb against Giants phenom 12-year-old Tim Lincecum, it was worth a look. And am I glad I watched - both had their good stuff going, especially Lincecum, striking out 13 in 7 innings with a moving fastball, solid hammer, and ridiculous changeup. The Giants fans were going mental, all thoughts of Barry Bonds gone as they rocked along on a summer night with Tiny Tim and his elbows and knees motion. It didn't matter that the Giants are an incompetent franchise running out a 41 year old shortstop, Rich Aurilia in the cleanup spot some nights, and starting a guy at third who got released by the freaking Pirates. They have Tim Lincecum, and he is phenomenal, and Saturday night I doubt they would have traded places with any other fans in baseball.
Fans love "their guys," the guys who came up through the system, the guys they have watched develop, struggle, and break through. It may be an illusion that these guys belong to us more, but it a necessary tonic to the grim reality that we are all ultimately cheering for laundry. I have two Tigers t-shirts - Granderson and Verlander. I could have bought a Miguel Cabrera one outside Safeco last month, but he's not one of "my guys." Not yet. I bought Verlander instead, remembering how excited I was he fell to Detroit in the 2005 draft, then marvelling through his poised rookie season thal lasted all the way to the World Series, and that unforgettable no-hitter last spring, the first Tigers no-no I'd ever seen. We go back a ways.
As long as I have been a Leafs fan, there have been precious few of those guys, and fewer still I followed from draft pick to rookie to star - Potvin, Kaberle, who else really? Antro? This year, no matter what the results on the ice, I will be fascinated watching the progress of Tlusty, Stralman, Kulemin, Pogge, Steen, Stajan, Schenn, hopeful that the Leafs have started to ice a team not built on veteran mercenaries who didn't really want to be here, or who you could never totally embrace (hello, Shayne Corson) but on a group of young guys who will grow together, jell together, thrill us as we see them take next steps, figure out defences, back each other up in a war against Philly or come together to surprise Detroit or Pittsburgh, to learn to hate Montreal and Ottawa as much as we do. A team that belongs to us. Whatever Howard says, I think it will be a hell of a ride.
And it sure beats the hell out of cheering for O'Neill, Lindros and Allison, no matter what the jerseys look like.
Is this thing still on?
A revelatory insight into the Silver Fox's endgame in the Jeff Finger negotiations can be found here.
A little (is two months a little?) belated, but farewell to former Raptors voice and longtime Marty York nemesis Chuck Swirsky. No matter who he's replaced with, we doubt they'll ever rise to the level of Chuck's cultural importance.
And why contribute to PPP or Bitter's "How I became a fan" series when I can use the same idea to pad out my own posts? (Come on, you didn't think we learned anything from the mittenstringers?) I will post more on my Leafs fandom in the coming weeks, but wearing the blue and white of failed glory and glorious failure wasn't a foregone conclusion (although I am a lifelong Scotland football supporter). Though I picked my baseball team early, I decided as a child to go with the team whose game I got to go to first. After a flirtation with the Montreal Antichrists, my dad won seats at Maple Leaf Gardens sometime in 91 or 92, where if my dodgy childhood memory serves, the Leafs overcame two goals by Mats Sundin and the Nords to win 3-2 in OT. And it was sealed.
Good thing I wasn't born ten years later - I'd probably have only been able to attend a Senators game. In which case.... I'd still be a Leafs fan! Try the veal, proceed to the comments - and maybe let us know what your first game was like.
A revelatory insight into the Silver Fox's endgame in the Jeff Finger negotiations can be found here.
A little (is two months a little?) belated, but farewell to former Raptors voice and longtime Marty York nemesis Chuck Swirsky. No matter who he's replaced with, we doubt they'll ever rise to the level of Chuck's cultural importance.
And why contribute to PPP or Bitter's "How I became a fan" series when I can use the same idea to pad out my own posts? (Come on, you didn't think we learned anything from the mittenstringers?) I will post more on my Leafs fandom in the coming weeks, but wearing the blue and white of failed glory and glorious failure wasn't a foregone conclusion (although I am a lifelong Scotland football supporter). Though I picked my baseball team early, I decided as a child to go with the team whose game I got to go to first. After a flirtation with the Montreal Antichrists, my dad won seats at Maple Leaf Gardens sometime in 91 or 92, where if my dodgy childhood memory serves, the Leafs overcame two goals by Mats Sundin and the Nords to win 3-2 in OT. And it was sealed.
Good thing I wasn't born ten years later - I'd probably have only been able to attend a Senators game. In which case.... I'd still be a Leafs fan! Try the veal, proceed to the comments - and maybe let us know what your first game was like.
Dear Damien, Steve, Working Class Howard, Richard, David, Marty, Darren, Toth, Rosie, and whoever else:
We need to talk. When this all started a year ago, it was fun, fresh, and exciting. We'd observed you from afar from so long that it was a real thrill to wake up every morning to read whatever nonsense you'd leaked all over the paper, knowing that that very night we'd be typing away in our Leafs jammies while Mom called us upstairs before our Boyardee got cold - ripping you on the Internet. The Internet! Where the real nerds write and everything!
But now things have gotten stale, and we think it's time to move on. Don't get me wrong, we've had some great times. Steve, we can remember staying up all night trying to explain to you how ERA worked (that scrunched up look of confusion on your face was adorable!). Damien, we spent hours glaring at the back of your head while we dissected your latest screed. And Howard - we'll always have that unforgettable limo ride in Montreal.
You might have noticed we've been a little distant lately. We want you to know that it's not us. It's you. We've changed, tried to improve our writing, mix up our wrestling references, anything to hide the fact that every week you write the same goddamn nonsense. This week, Howard, when you blamed Leafs fans for the state of the franchise and managed to contradict yourself all over the yard, we saw the call go up: "Where's Cox Bloc?" Well, to paraphrase Eric Bischoff, Kim and Godd ain't walking through that door anymore.
Don't worry, there's others out there that still care about you. Recently Bitter Leaf and Down Goes Brown have done an outstanding job lambasting your foibles and pointing out what you can do better (for more on that, call your buddy Lance). Maybe, deep down, they still think you can change. We don't.
Right now you're probably thinking, what about our child? Cox Bloc, the bitter, twisted spawn of your bad journalism and our splenetic rage? Well, first of all, we get full custody. Kim and I are still going to be writing here - probably a lot more regularly now that we're switching our gimmick. We're still going to write about the Leafs a lot, and hopefully will retain our good standing as fully paid up members of the Barilkosphere (well, we owe PPP ten bucks still. Sorry!). Hell, we'll probably even rip you every once in a while, for old times sake. But we want the freedom to write about whatever we feel like - Leafs, rock n roll, work, politics, Canada, baseball, George the Animal Steele, Brand Power, who knows. For our sanity, we've gotta start doing something else.
To the Blocheads - Varry Galk, Junior, Pob, Paul D, Dick, Bim, bk, Pike, Firko, Bllan, Marty York, eyebleaf, and anyone I may have missed - thank you. Your comments and criticisms (yo stoeten!) have been the most rewarding part of doing this, and we both really hope you'll continue to stop by here as we stumble blindly towards a new blogging day. Suggestions, feedback, ideas for what you want to see, and requests for Freebird? Proceed to the comments.
And to the mittenstringers, one more song for the road.
We need to talk. When this all started a year ago, it was fun, fresh, and exciting. We'd observed you from afar from so long that it was a real thrill to wake up every morning to read whatever nonsense you'd leaked all over the paper, knowing that that very night we'd be typing away in our Leafs jammies while Mom called us upstairs before our Boyardee got cold - ripping you on the Internet. The Internet! Where the real nerds write and everything!
But now things have gotten stale, and we think it's time to move on. Don't get me wrong, we've had some great times. Steve, we can remember staying up all night trying to explain to you how ERA worked (that scrunched up look of confusion on your face was adorable!). Damien, we spent hours glaring at the back of your head while we dissected your latest screed. And Howard - we'll always have that unforgettable limo ride in Montreal.
You might have noticed we've been a little distant lately. We want you to know that it's not us. It's you. We've changed, tried to improve our writing, mix up our wrestling references, anything to hide the fact that every week you write the same goddamn nonsense. This week, Howard, when you blamed Leafs fans for the state of the franchise and managed to contradict yourself all over the yard, we saw the call go up: "Where's Cox Bloc?" Well, to paraphrase Eric Bischoff, Kim and Godd ain't walking through that door anymore.
Don't worry, there's others out there that still care about you. Recently Bitter Leaf and Down Goes Brown have done an outstanding job lambasting your foibles and pointing out what you can do better (for more on that, call your buddy Lance). Maybe, deep down, they still think you can change. We don't.
Right now you're probably thinking, what about our child? Cox Bloc, the bitter, twisted spawn of your bad journalism and our splenetic rage? Well, first of all, we get full custody. Kim and I are still going to be writing here - probably a lot more regularly now that we're switching our gimmick. We're still going to write about the Leafs a lot, and hopefully will retain our good standing as fully paid up members of the Barilkosphere (well, we owe PPP ten bucks still. Sorry!). Hell, we'll probably even rip you every once in a while, for old times sake. But we want the freedom to write about whatever we feel like - Leafs, rock n roll, work, politics, Canada, baseball, George the Animal Steele, Brand Power, who knows. For our sanity, we've gotta start doing something else.
To the Blocheads - Varry Galk, Junior, Pob, Paul D, Dick, Bim, bk, Pike, Firko, Bllan, Marty York, eyebleaf, and anyone I may have missed - thank you. Your comments and criticisms (yo stoeten!) have been the most rewarding part of doing this, and we both really hope you'll continue to stop by here as we stumble blindly towards a new blogging day. Suggestions, feedback, ideas for what you want to see, and requests for Freebird? Proceed to the comments.
And to the mittenstringers, one more song for the road.
