Time Out with Alex Quirici (University of Oregon rugby player)

Vince D’Adamo: What is your major at the University of Oregon and how close are you to graduating?

Alex Quirici: I’m studying Economics and minoring in Journalism. I’ll be graduating this coming June.

D’Adamo: When did you first take an interest in rugby and what position do you play?

Quirici: I would have to say I started to take a serious interest in rugby towards the end of my sophomore year in college. I have to thank the members of the local “St. Helena Old Boy’s Rugby Football Club” for encouraging me to try out for the team. Members such as Bert Casten, Neil Bason, Dr. David Gold, Duane Hoff, etc. were the ones who got me to really think about pursing the sport. I joined the team at the beginning of my junior year. My position is Outside Center (Back).

D’Adamo: What is the class/practice/games balance like?

Quirici: Balancing academics and sports is something that I’ve been doing for most of my life but college academics has definitely made balancing the two a little more difficult. During our regular season (winter term) is when balancing the two is by far the most difficult. We practice most days of the week and then travel for a majority of our matches on the weekends. Away matches take up most of our weekend, so it’s important that I get my schoolwork done during the beginning of the week. College is all about time management so you learn to balance everything out.

D’Adamo: How much overlap is there between rugby and football as far as object of game and rules?

Quirici: There are definitely some similarities between the two. The main objective in both of them is to get into the end zone. This zone is referred to as the “try-zone” in rugby. A “try” is worth five points. A “try” in rugby closely resembles a “touchdown” in football.  After a try is scored, a “conversion” kick (worth 2 points) is attempted. So the scoring system is fairly similar to football. The offense in rugby closely resembles the backwards lateralling that occurs by a losing team at the end of a football game. In rugby you can only pass the ball backwards but you’re allowed to kick the ball forward to advance downfield. Overall, I wouldn’t say there isn’t a huge overlap between the two, but it’s safe to say growing up playing football has definitely helped me with my rugby endeavors.

D’Adamo: With all the talk of player safety in football with regard to concussions, is it true that rugby is actually safer without helmets in that you have to be more conservative with fundamentals?

Quirici: As far as concussions go, I can say for certain that I’ve seen more concussions in football than I have in rugby. With football you get this sense of feeling invincible since your body is covered with padding, but with rugby you don’t have the “unbreakable” mentality. When you’re delivering or a receiving a hit in rugby you have to be smart about the positioning of your body in order to embrace yourself for the impact. For instance, in rugby we are taught to place our heads behind the ball carrier when making a tackle. We often refer to this method as “cheek-to-cheek”. In football we were taught to place your head in front of the ball carrier when tackling. I’ve read into the topic and have learned that football coaches at all levels of the game are now advising their players to carry out rugby style tackling in order to reduce head injuries.

D’Adamo: You experienced a ton of team and individual success at St. Helena High. Looking back four years later, how of that bonds with teammates and coaches exist to this day?

Quirici: I’m very lucky to still be extremely close with my high school teammates as well as my coaches. Coach Brandon Farrell, who was my football and baseball coach during high school made the long trek up to Eugene, Oregon to watch one of my matches this year. Just this past week, I played in Boise, Idaho and was lucky enough to have three of my high school teammates come cheer me on. I was fortunate enough to grow up and play sports with a great group of guys. I’m grateful for all of our team success and the relationships I was able to build along the way.

D’Adamo: Having experienced life away from St. Helena, what is it like when you return to visit?

Quirici: It’s a really special treat when I get the chance to come back home. One of the biggest takeaways from going away to school is how lucky I am to grow up in a town like I did. Unfortunately, I don’t get home too much besides on long school breaks, but when I do return home I instantly realize how blessed I am to call St. Helena my home. I think you have to move away in order to really appreciate how special the valley is.

Stabler, Favre two legends we can relate to as people

As sports fans, we are guilty of putting our heroes on such a pedestal that we forget they are still regular human beings.

One thing I scratch my head at is when I hear people grovel, “They make millions, they should be able to deal with that!” To quote Lee Corso, “Not so fast, my friend!” As working middle-class stiffs, we can’t relate to making millions. However, if you are sitting in a restaurant having dinner with your family and someone asks for your autograph or picture, I doubt you would be in the best mood either.

I had a chance to cover sports at virtually every level, from NFL to youth. When I covered the Oakland Raiders for six years as a freelance writer (from 1999-2005), I would frequently get comments to the effect of, “You must be in awe being around those stars.” Honestly, nothing could be further from the truth. What I found is that if you treat them like regular human beings, they like it much better.

We think so much of how we can’t relate to professional athletes that we often lose sight of how we can. Take the two quarterbacks that will be enshrined into the Pro Football Hall of Fame in 2016 – Brett Favre and Ken Stabler.

Each one led their franchise to one Super Bowl title but their paths to Canton, Ohio, are a little different. Favre played for 20 seasons, was an 11-time Pro Bowler and three-time NFL MVP. Favre retired as the NFL’s all-time leading passer and was named first-team All-Pro three straight years. Favre’s resume was so off the charts that he is a first-ballot Hall-of-Famer.

Stabler played 15 NFL seasons and compiled an impressive winning percentage of .661. Stabler was the first quarterback since the NFL-AFL merger to lead his team to five consecutive conference title games. He was All-Pro and NFL MVP in 1974 and 1976. Stabler’s induction is sort of bitter-sweet in that it comes after passing away in July 2015.

I don’t think there’s any question that Stabler’s passing played a huge role in swaying voters that were against his candidacy in years past. However, I also think that because his resume is similar to Joe Namath’s, it begged the question of “If Namath is in the Hall of Fame, Stabler should be there as well.” I’m guilty of having such a stance.  

Like Stabler, Namath led his team to one Super Bowl championship that Namath is best known for “guaranteeing a win.” Namath was selected to four AFL All-Star Games and one Pro Bowl.

True, the average working class adult can’t relate to becoming NFL quarterbacks but when you look at how Stabler and Favre did it, they become much more relatable.

Think back to when you were a kid throwing the football around in the backyard. The scenarios you often played out in your mind was being a quarterback leading your team to victory on the last drive. When it came to baseball, you dreamed of hitting a game-winning home run in the bottom of the ninth inning. When it came to basketball, you dreamed of hitting that buzzard-beating shot to win the game.

When it came to quarterbacks, I pretended to be Joe Montana. I would take the imaginary snap from center and drop back to pass while uttering in my brain, “There goes D’Adamo back to pass.”

Long story as to why the common person can relate to doing what Favre and Stabler did is this, how many games did you watch Favre or Stabler throw a pass and say, “What the hell are you thinking?” Then when you need to go 80 yards with no time outs and two minutes left, those guys could flawlessly march their team down the field on the way to victory.

The average person, however, can’t fathom completing 28-of-35 passes for 375 yards and five touchdowns like Tom Brady or Peyton Manning.

However, you can relate to Favre and Stabler throwing back a few cold pilsners and, in Stabler’s case, lighting up a Marlboro, then going out the next day to play a game. 

Time machine: 1998 volleyball playoffs -- Ceres at Vintage

Sometimes the team that’s ahead is more vulnerable than the team that is behind. You hear so often about how momentum can be fragile in that once it is lost, it is hard to regain.

In 1998, I had a chance to witness that as the Vintage (Napa, CA) Crushers hosted the Ceres (Ceres, CA) Bulldogs in a CIF Sac Joaquin Section Div. I volleyball playoff match. Vintage was the No. 8 seed and Ceres was the No. 9 seed. The winner would face a trip to play No. 1 seeded Lincoln (Stockton, CA) two nights later, not what one would call a reward but if you are on the court, you might as well try to win and make memories. On this night, Vintage rallied for an 8-15, 9-15, 15-8, 15-4, 15-5 win over Ceres.

Setting the stage: The Crushers were in a ‘tweener like position throughout the season in that they were good enough to beat the lower end teams in the Monticello Empire League like Armijo, Fairfield, Vallejo, Hogan but had difficulty with the higher end teams like Napa and Vacaville. No shame there but it depicts the position Vintage faced.

The team’s resume wound up amounting to a No. 8 seed in a 16-team postseason bracket.

One other side note, high school volleyball in California was played under the sideout scoring format before going to the rally scoring formula a couple of years later. In the sideout format, only the serving team can score. In rally scoring, either the serving or receiving team can score.

Thumbnail sketch of the match: The first two games, Ceres’ athleticism shined in winning several long rallies. In Game 1, Vintage took a 7-5 lead before the Bulldogs scored 10 of the last 11 points. The wind continued to be at the Bulldogs’ back in Game 2 as Ceres took an 11-2 lead. Vintage rallied to cut the lead to 11-9 but got no closer.

Facing a 2-0 hole also meant that the Crushers faced elimination for the rest of the match. Vintage came out with a balanced attack as Kristen Max and Raquel Cantillon delivered blocks at the net. Lyzzy Barkas and Lisa Schwarze supplied the defense and setter Ashley Mason directed the offense and served in outstanding fashion.

The Crushers had two 5-0 runs in Game 3 on the way to a 15-8 win. What I remember most was thinking whoever wins Game 4 will win the match. If Ceres won, the match would have ended. If Vintage had won, I felt it would win Game 5 because the force was on its side.

In Game 4, the Crushers broke Ceres’ will. The game started with a Mason service ace and ended with a Cantillon kill as the Crushers won 15-5.

Vintage had momentum and the home crowd on its side. The Crushers dominated Game 5 with a 15-5 win. Ceres had the body language of a defeated club.

What it meant: In the long run, very little. Two nights later, Vintage lost in straight sets to a Lincoln team that steamrolled its way to an SJS Div. I title. No shame there. Vintage was behind the eight-ball from jump, both playing the No. 1 seed in their building and having to expend every last ounce of energy to get there.

The win over Ceres was a reminder in that as Yogi Berra once said, “it ain’t over until it’s over.” The match also served as a reminder that it’s a matter of perspective. From a Vintage point of view, the match could be seen as a great comeback. From a Ceres standpoint, it was a collapse.

The middle ground answer, however, is that momentum is fragile. While I am no volleyball expert, I find the comeback in rally scoring format even more impressive than had come in rally scoring format. With rally scoring, momentum is especially fragile. With sideout scoring, momentum is harder to build. 

Time Out with Dan Hayes (CSN Chicago)

Vince D’Adamo: What have you enjoyed most about being connected with athletics throughout your life either as an athlete or journalist?

Dan Hayes: I've always loved sports and even though this is a job that can be very stressful at times, it rarely feels like work. How can it be work when part of my job is to go grab a postgame beer to discuss baseball and that counts as preparation for the next day?  I know I'm very fortunate to work in a field that I love being around. Prior to working in sports journalism, I had a retail job and worked at a bank. I feel like those experiences have helped me to not take this job for granted.

D’Adamo: Which sports did you play competitively in high school?

Hayes: I was a terrible athlete. The furthest I went was trying out for my frosh basketball team and those dreams of a spot far down on the bench were wiped out by a severe ankle sprain several days before it was time for final cuts. My baseball career was done early and was forgettable at best.

D’Adamo: Even with the changing state of the media industry, what keeps you coming back every year?

Hayes: This one probably goes back to the first answer. But I'll say this, the changes in the industry have been a driving force for me. While I won't say I love change, it hasn't been so overwhelming that I refuse to make an effort. I remember when Twitter burst onto the scene and how I waited a while to jump on board. But it wasn't long before I realized that it gave me an equal voice. Even though my paper was 1/4 the size of our biggest competitor, I could break news and receive credit for it that was difficult before social media. Five years ago I worked for a newspaper and occasionally blogged. Now, I blog, do radio and TV hits and use Twitter, Facebook, Instagram to promote my work. I'm likely to add Periscope to my duties this season on occasion.

D’Adamo: You have covered a wide range of sports from high school to the NFL, how much have you enjoyed all for different reasons?

Hayes: Thirteen years ago I was the Bethel High football beat guy (just missed out on C.J. Anderson). I loved covering that team and the Vallejo High hoops team in the year after DeMarcus Nelson left. Loved that story and seeing the team make a strong run in the playoffs. High school sports offers you a level of access that you rarely find in pro sports.

I also did motor sports and MMA, which was interesting from the perspective of being a fish out of water. I knew nothing about either before I took over and really enjoyed learning on the fly.

Baseball is great, but it can be difficult because it's such a long season. Trying to find new ideas to write about in August for a 99-loss team is next to impossible. The travel schedule is just as difficult, though it has become easier now that I'm in the middle of the country as opposed to San Diego.

D’Adamo: What is it like covering sports in Chicago?

Hayes: It's pretty amazing. For the most part, people are very passionate about their sports teams. They tune out if teams stink, but they still seem to care. That's a nice change from San Diego, where if the team is done, people tune out early and instead focus on all the other things they could be doing. I can't blame them, San Diego is an amazing place to live and I'd much rather be hiking or riding a bike than paying attention to an offense that averaged under 4 runs a game when I was there.

D’Adamo: How much of a shadow do the 1985 Bears and 1990s Bulls still cast?

Hayes: They definitely still swing a big stick around here, but not as much with the Blackhawks having won three recent titles. That '85 Bears team will always be loved as will Jordan and Pippen and the rest. But you get the sense that people are tired of talking about the past and want some new memories made. You could see it with how hungry everyone was during the Cubs playoff run last year.

D’Adamo: Within your family who have been the most influential people?

Hayes: Easily my parents. Both were educators. My dad taught 7th/8th grade English and my mom was an administrator. And both are huge sports fans. Beyond that, my cousins were really good baseball players, both playing in college. That combination definitely influenced where I am now.

D’Adamo: Name a historical figure, dead or alive, in or out of sports, that you would most like to meet. What would intrigue you about meeting him or her?

Hayes: I'd love to meet President Obama when he gets out of office. He's a huge White Sox fan and fancies himself a basketball player. I'd love to talk to him about his thoughts on the White Sox and just how he has dealt (very nicely I might add) with all the hatred he has received over the years. Not only is he our first African American president, he's our first true Commander in Chief to be in office during the social media age. 

Time Out with Phil Barber (Santa Rosa Press Democrat sports reporter)

Vince D’Adamo: What have you enjoyed most about being connected with athletics throughout your life either as an athlete or journalist?

Phil Barber: I enjoy sorting out the drama of athletics -- and there is always drama. In the locker room, in the front office, and especially on the field or in the gym. Any game you cover, a narrative story line seems to emerge. Sometimes it's heartbreaking, sometimes comical, sometimes just exciting. But sports creates real drama more than almost any other subject you could cover.

D’Adamo: Which sports did you play competitively in high school?

Barber: I played football as a freshman and sophomore but gave up on that when I realized the practices were really hard, and that I wasn't going to play much. So after that I stuck to baseball. Good fielder. No power at the plate.

D’Adamo: Even with the declining state of the newspaper industry, what keeps you coming back every year?

Barber: In large part, the camaraderie. That's in the Press Democrat newsroom, where I see really talented and committed journalists trying like hell to cover the area we live in, despite our economic limitations. And that goes for the press box, too, where my colleagues always make me laugh and teach me things about sports.

D’Adamo: You cover such a wide range of sports from college to pro to high school? Do you enjoy each for different reasons?

Barber; I do, yes, but I will say this: When it comes to game coverage, I prefer the pros because there is so much more at stake, and I can feel comfortable criticizing them when warranted. When it comes to feature writing, though, a good story is a good story, whether it's about an Oakland Raider, a Sonoma State Seawolf or a kid at Montgomery High. And I love the emotion the high school kids put into their sports.

D’Adamo: Within your family who have been the most influential people?

Barber: My parents were both good people and eager sports fans, so they got me started, but two other relatives were integral to my career path. My Uncle, Rowland Barber, was a very successful writer; he wrote, among other notable books, Harpo Marx's autobiography (..."with Rowland Barber") and "Somebody Up There Likes Me," with the boxer Rocky Graziano. Uncle Rowland was nothing but encouraging about my writing, and he was a great sounding board. And my older brother, Stephan Blom-Cooper, was another writer who seemed to delight in every stupid thing I penned. Unfortunately, both are no longer with us.

D’Adamo: Name a historical figure, dead or alive, in or out of sports, that you would most like to meet. What would intrigue you about meeting him or her?

Barber: Hope you don't mind me going non-sports, but I would have loved to meet Woody Guthrie. He stood his ground and advocated tirelessly for the workers of America when it wasn't necessarily popular, and he did it with an acoustic guitar and a twinkle in his eye. And Woody did write a song about Joe DiMaggio.

Legislating social media a challenge even at younger levels of sports

For the longest time I was naïve enough to think that covering sports at the youth and high school levels are much different than college or pro.

To a certain extent that aspect is true, because while high school recruiting websites defy common sense, covering sports at that level still generally lends itself to having one-on-one interviews after games — as opposed to postgame press conferences that resemble state-of-the-union addresses with a beehive of hundreds of media outlets.

Let’s face it, any coach will feel much more comfortable talking to reporters in a one-on-one setting as opposed being in a crowd of hundreds of people. Now, social media outlets such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram have found their way to the youth sports setting.

For those not familiar, Facebook is a social networking website geared toward posting one’s personal background on the Internet for reasons that include — but are not limited to — meeting new people or reconnecting with those from other pockets of your life.

Anyhow, there are status updates that contain thoughts or simply what one is doing on that day. It can be things like, “I’m looking forward to going to the park with my kids,” or, “Why have our last two presidents been so bad?”

I joined the whole social media quagmire seven years ago. It all started one night when I could not fall back asleep after one of those night-time feedings to our then-infant twins who are now seven years old.

In hopes of drawing big crowds to games, it is pretty common for players, parents and coaches to invite fans to the game via Facebook.

For that matter, Facebook and Twitter are also used for things like score updates and youngsters signing letters of intent.

Welcome to the era of social media. It continues to grow, even in the world of high school athletics. These digital-age communication tools open the door to countless possibilities, but with both upside and downside.

When I was in high school, our idea of a text message was passing a note in class, and we had to wait until the teacher had their back turned.

In some ways, social media simplifies and is beneficial because teams can be promoted on and can update people to post game times, scores, cancellations and related news. It can be quicker than making phone calls, sending email or text messages.

The problem, however, is that some people can use social media for the wrong reasons. Therefore, healthy boundaries and valuing privacy still have their place.

Among the negatives for social media is that some youngsters might use it for trash talking, among other things. Anyone can sign up for a Twitter or Facebook account, then use it as a verbal weapon while possibly hiding their true identity.

When the communications reaches beyond team matters, you get into a dark area because too many players and coaches have gotten themselves into trouble with comments that become too personal. Players have a venue to bully one another, hidden beyond their keyboard.

However, social media is here to stay for the foreseeable future, but think before you hit that “send” button because once you post it, it’s live. You never know who is following you. On the flip side, you can use it in a constructive way.

So how do you legislate youngsters with social media? For openers, hold them responsible for everything they do. Having specific rules is a tough sell, but youngsters need to know how much of a slippery slope the social media can pose. All it takes is one bad picture or message, and a player’s career in high school could change forever.

Time Out with Bob Padecky (Long time Bay Area sports reporter)

Vince D’Adamo: What have you enjoyed most about being connected with athletics throughout your life either as an athlete or journalist?

Bob Padecky: Athletics has provided: Exhilaration – no, screaming I've heard matches the scream of a winning home run, basket or touchdown. Vanity - they feel special, are treated special and feel slighted if not angry when they are not treated special. Perspective - all at the same time a pro sport feels like a game also life and death. Dedication: No one prepares more or better than a true superstar. Character - Sports doesn't build character at the pro level; it reveals it.  Personalities - I have seen the gamut, from humble to egotistical, from shy to extroverted. Ballet - nothing is more beautiful than a gifted physical specimen soaring, swinging, running, catching.

D’Adamo: Which sports did you play competitively in high school?

I played basketball, baseball and football in high school, and baseball in college at Palm Beach Junior College and the University of Florida.

D’Adamo: Even with the declining state of the newspaper industry, what keeps you coming back every year?

Padecky: The immediacy for one thing. Well-rounded news coverage. No TV screamers. Detailed and thoughtful opinion or analysis. Newspapers feel more thorough and satisfying than the quick 30-second live TV shot.

D’Adamo: You cover such a wide range of sports from college to pro to high school? Do you enjoy each for different reasons?

Padecky: Yes, they all have their pleasures for me. Pros, because of the superb athletic gifts that are watched by millions, College, for the alumni raves and comparative innocence to the pros. High school, don't need lawyers or handlers to talk to the athletes; they are fresh and curious and not spoiled or worn out from interviews or TV cameras. My goal in the last 20-30 years was to interview someone who has never been interviewed before. That was much easier with high school kids or coaches or parents.

D’Adamo: Name a historical figure, dead or alive, in or out of sports, that you would most like to meet. What would intrigue you about meeting him or her?

Padecky: In sports, in order of importance: Jackie Robinson, Babe Ruth, Jim Thorpe (I've met everyone else). Outside of sports: Nelson Mandela, Shakespeare,  Einstein, Jesus if He existed. For all of them I'd start with the same question: When and where and why did you first realize you were going to make a difference?

Time machine: 2006 Clear Lake at St. Helena football

Some games you remember because it reminds you that not every victory is going to be a smooth and clean process. While coaches want wins, they are also notorious for emphasizing the importance of the process more so than the result.

The St. Helena Saints and Clear Lake Cardinals entered the 2006 season as favorites to battle for North Central League I South supremacy. The two teams would meet on Friday, Oct. 13, 2006. Yes, Friday the 13^th – and yes, the process was scary. Nevertheless, the Saints gained an early leg up in the NCL I South opener with an 18-8 homecoming win over the Cardinals despite committing five turnovers.

Setting the stage: St. Helena entered the game with 3-2 record. The Saints won their first two games (35-21 over Albany and 28-14 over Kelseyville). St. Helena then lost its next two games (32-28 to Fort Bragg and 15-13 over Willits). The Saints, however, rebounded the following week with a 34-6 win over Lower Lake.

Clear Lake also entered the game with a checkered season. The Cardinals won their opening game (19-13 over Pierce-Arbuckle) before losing their next three (19-0 to Willits, 10-0 to Middletown and 17-14 to Fort Bragg). Clear Lake, however, rebounded with a 13-8 win over Kelseyville entering its game at St. Helena with a 2-3 record.

Thumbnail sketch of the game: The game featured emotion, intensity and — fittingly — miscues on Friday the 13th.

St. Helena endured a rugged first half in generating just 37 yards of total offense and one first down, yet only trailed 8-0 after three quarters.

The Saints, however, allowed just one touchdown in three Cardinal red zone trips. Clear Lake, which had an average drive start of the Saints’ 49.5 yard line, got inside the St. Helena 30 on two other occasions only to be turned back.

Clear Lake’s lone score came on a 14-yard Nathan Vellez run on the first play of the second quarter. Jameson Holder added the two-point conversion.

Saints quarterback Jake Holguin, meanwhile, broke the ice for St. Helena when he scored on a 1-yard quarterback sneak on the first play of the fourth quarter. The extra point was no good but St. Helena trimmed the deficit to 8-6.

On the ensuing series, Saints cornerback Billy Joe Paulisich stopped Vellez on fourth and inches, giving St. Helena the ball at the Clear Lake 42. Two plays later, John Hudson scored on a 38-yard run off right guard. The extra point was no good but the Saints were in front to stay at 12-8.

Hudson accounted for 108 yards rushing on 11 carries while David Fanucci added 63 yards on 12 attempts.

Hudson later added a 14-yard run to widen St. Helena’s lead to 18-8.

The Saints’ defense generated three takeaways — two Holguin interceptions and a Chris Yeakey fumble recovery — and came up with timely stops to keep the self-destructing Cardinals from widening the lead further.

Clear Lake was flagged for 105 penalty yards.

Defensively for the Saints, Gino Trinchero recorded two sacks while Yeakey added one. Roberto Gonzalez, Homecoming King Alex Seyve, Tony Montelli, Yeakey and Aaron Guzman recorded tackles for lost yardage.

What it meant: Keep in mind, the NCL I was split between having a North and South division. That setup took effect from 2005-2010. The win over the Cardinals improved St. Helena to 4-2. The Saints held off Upper Lake 28-27 one week later before losing to Middletown 20-0. The Mustangs, however, were an NCL I North foe thus making it a nonleague contest. The Saints closed out the season win wins over Cloverdale (57-7) and St. Vincent (40-0) to seal the NCL I South title, marking the first league title since 1978.

St. Helena reached the CIF North Coast Section Class A playoffs, drawing the No. 7 seed and a trip to perennial power Ferndale, which was the No. 2 seed. The Saints lost that game in controversial fashion, 18-13. That game was also the last one in head coach Ian MacMillan’s three seasons.

Clear Lake dropped to 2-4 but won its last four games to finish 6-4. The Cardinals outscored the opposition by a combined 158-13. 

How much credence do you give to championship rings?

Super Bowl Sunday is on the horizon with the Carolina Panthers and Denver Broncos meeting at Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara, CA. Winning this game changes the perception of franchises and players.

Being a member of a championship team can change how a player is perceived and can effect one’s Hall-of-Fame candidacy. Broncos’ quarterback Peyton Manning owns astronomical numbers but only one Super Bowl ring despite this being his fourth appearance. While Manning will be a first-ballot Hall-of-Famer, getting another title would elevate him in stature among the all-time greats.

How much credence do you give to the idea of how many championship rings a player has when it comes to evaluating their greatness? Let’s not kid ourselves, they carry some value. If Ken Anderson, Steve McNair or Donovan McNabb quarterbacked one Super Bowl winner, they might be in Canton, Ohio today. If Phil Simms hadn’t gotten injured in 1990, he would have quarterbacked two Super Bowl winning teams, which might have led him to a bust in Canton, Ohio. Simms, who led the New York Giants to a Super Bowl title in 1986, sustained a broken foot and gave way to Jeff Hostetler, who then led the Giants to their second Super Bowl title.

However, championship rings alone do not make a player great. There are many Hall-of-Fame players that never got a championship victory shower: Dan Marino, Dan Fouts, Barry Bonds, Ernie Banks, Karl Malone, John Stockton and Charles Barkley to name a few.

Conversely, there are plenty of middle-of-the-road to bad players that have championship rings. For example, John Paxson has three NBA championship rings and John Stockton has zero but if you think the former is better than the latter because of that alone, you need to be institutionalized.

There are other ways I frame the championship rings evaluation. Joe Montana, Tom Brady and Terry Bradshaw each have four Super Bowl rings. Montana and Brady, however, are Hall-of-Famers on numbers alone. However, there are quarterbacks with fewer or even no rings I would rate ahead of Bradshaw. I don’t think Bradshaw is even the best Pittsburgh Steeler quarterback of all time.

Ben Roethlisberger has led Pittsburgh to two Lombardi trophies since. Sure, both played in different eras and with different rules but I can debunk that argument on two fronts. With Roethlisberger’s toughness, he could have played in any era. Secondly, Roethlisberger had far less talent around him than Bradshaw and had to carry the Steelers to more wins than Bradshaw ever did.

The other ways to layer this argument. Trade places with contemporaries:

Put Joe Montana on the Miami Dolphins and Dan Marino on the 49ers, what happens?

Marino was not surrounded with Hall of Fame talent. Those Dolphin teams were mediocre to bad defensively. On offense, he handed the ball off to guys like Tony Nathan, Woody Bennett, Ron Davenport and Lorenzo Hampton – not Larry Csonka or Mercury Morris. At receiver, he had the Marks Brothers (Duper and Clayton). For a couple years, those guys were dynamite but were just a flash in the fan. Translation, it’s not like Marino was throwing the ball to Paul Warfield.

Montana was blessed with better surrounding talent. Those 49er teams were underrated but great defensively led by Hall of Famers like Ronnie Lott, Fred Dean and Charles Haley. Montana also had Jerry Rice, who is in the Hall of Fame, and Roger Craig, who is a border-line Hall of Fame candidate. However, it would also be foolish to say Montana won only because he had such talent. He led the 49ers to two Super Bowls before Rice arrived and one before Craig arrived.

Put Montana on the Dolphins, he probably makes them better similarly if not more so than Marino but I doubt Miami wins a Super Bowl. Keep in mind, the NFC was the vastly superior conference to the AFC in those years. Put Marino on the 49ers, I think they still crush Miami in 1984 and Denver in 1989 because San Francisco was vastly superior to those teams. San Francisco also had two close Super Bowl wins over Cincinnati (26-21 in 1981; 20-16 in 1988). Would Marino have led the team to wins in those situations? You can’t definitively say yes or no.

Did the player do everything he could to put the team in position to win?

This is an argument I frequently think of with Barkley and Malone. I consider it bigger strike against Malone than Barkley. The former had one appearance in the NBA Finals, the latter had three.

Barkley’s Phoenix Suns reached the Finals in 1993, losing to the Chicago Bulls 4-2. The Suns reached the finals by beating Seattle 4-3 in the Western Conference Finals. In Game 7, the Suns won 123-100 with Barkley scoring 44 points and grabbing 24 rebounds. He also averaged 26.6 points and 13.3 rebounds the entire postseason. Those Suns were also making their first finals appearance. True, they had homecourt advantage but the Bulls were making their third straight finals appearance.

Malone’s Utah Jazz lost to the Bulls in both 1997 and 1998, both 4-2. I give the Jazz a mulligan for 1997. It was their first finals appearance and the Bulls were loaded with finals experience. In 1998, the stars were aligned. The Jazz beat the Bulls twice in the regular season, had homecourt advantage and a year of Finals experience. They also won Game 1 88-85 in overtime. The Jazz lost Game 2 93-88 and led 73-70 entering the fourth quarter. Malone’s finals numbers were good, averaging 25.5 points and 10.5 rebounds but he was awful in the first two games, converting on a combined 14 of 41 field goal attempts.

Malone finished his career with the Los Angeles Lakers, taking a minimum contract in an attempt to get a ring. The Lakers brought in Malone and Gary Payton to join Kobe Bryant and Shaquille O’Neal. That Lakers team reached the Finals but got boat-raced 4-1 by the Detroit Pistons. That Laker team embodied dysfunction while the Pistons embodied teamwork. Malone did not play the last two games because of a knee injury.

As for evaluating players based on having championship rings, it’s not a one size fits all argument.

Translation, whenever I hear someone say, “(insert random player/coach/team) can’t win the big one.” I say, “Let me know when there’s a little one.”

Newton's child-like enthusiasm very Favre-ian

Sometimes it is amazing the double-standards that exist. With the Denver Broncos and Carolina Panthers set to meet in Super Bowl L (50 for those not in-tuned with Roman Numerals) in Santa Clara, CA, on Sunday, the hot topics have centered on the quarterbacks, whether it is a) Can Denver’s Peyton Manning strengthen his legacy by winning his second Super Bowl ring? And b) Why is Carolina’s Cam Newton such a polarizing figure?

In this blog entry, I’ll focus on the former. Newton runs into the end zone, spikes the football and does his patented touchdown celebration. He and various Panther players have been known to give footballs to kids after scoring a touchdown. There is a segment of people that are rubbed the wrong way by Newton’s child-like passion as he routinely flashes a smile.

His aforementioned child-like enthusiasm is not much different than Brett Favre. 

Given how some players have puckered up rearends in games like the Super Bowl, Newton’s approach can be a plus or a minus. To refresh your memory, after touchdowns, Favre was notorious for running down the field with his helmet off and jumping on the backs of teammates. Yet the same people that take issue with Newton’s behavior had no issue with Favre. Newton also has been known to strike a Superman pose. Green Bay’s Aaron Rodgers does a “discount double check” pose. The former is called a showboat while the latter is celebrated and gets a commercial.

Some have even painted this as being an issue of race given than Newton is black and Favre and Rodgers are white. I am normally the first one to throw anything race card related under the bus because a) the term racist, while still legitimate, has been bastardized because it gets used to frequently and b) there are racist people in all nationalities, not just whites.

Whether race is a factor or not in Newton’s polarization is open for debate because a) it’s a matter of opinion, b) even if it is, the person with such beliefs will never admit it. However, I don’t think you can just toss it aside as not being a factor because white players like Rob Gronkowski and Clay Matthews are every bit as cerebral as Newton and they are celebrated while Newton is vilified.

Taking race out of the equation, I have also heard several people (fans and media) suggest we have never seen a quarterback like Newton.

I beg to differ.

Having already mentioned how his child-like enthusiasm is similar to Favre, as a player Newton’s skills are similar to John Elway and Randall Cunningham. Like Newton, when Elway and Cunningham entered the NFL, they had a flair for doing the spectacular but struggled with the routine plays. The former was inducted into the pro football Hall-of-Fame.

Translation, they were “athletes” as opposed to “quarterbacks.” Gradually, however, both evolved into quarterbacks. Newton, who is in his fifth NFL season, can still beat teams with his athleticism but continues to evolve into becoming a quarterback, which is exactly why he is likely to be the NFL MVP.

Newton has also evolved into becoming a leader. Though he was a Heisman Trophy winner who led his team to a National Championship at Auburn in 2011, I must say I was not a fan of Newton when he first entered the NFL. However, I must he has grown on me.

In his early seasons in the NFL, he showed a lack of leadership skills at a position that demands. He frequently pouted when things didn’t go right. Cameras would show him on the sideline with a towel over his head, not engaged with his teammates. Newton, however, has become a leader with his child-like enthusiasm being a big reason why his Panther teammates have followed his lead all the way to Santa Clara, one win away from hoisting the Vince Lombardi Trophy for the first time in the franchise’s 20-year history.

So Newton’s passion rubs some people the wrong way. I’m not here to change those people but food for thought, you don’t see Newton’s name littering the police blotter and he is a respected member of his community. Plus, he has worked hard to become a quarterback instead of just an athlete – so I have no problem with how he acts. 

College football recruiting hype absurd

There are plenty of examples of today being a much different world than even 10 years ago.

In August 2011, I had my 20-year high school reunion and one of my classmates was talking about how she had old notes that she used to pass in class saved up in a shoe box. She says, “That was the original text message.”

I responded by saying, “Yeah, and we had to wait until the teacher had their back turned to pass the note.”

Nowadays you have everything from iPhones, Instragram, Pintrest, Twitter, Facebook, etc.

With National Letter of Intent Day for college football taking place today, one discussion I find myself revisiting quite bit is the increased hype of college recruiting either as it pertains to signing day or just general media hype.

In my former career of sports reporting, I was fortunate enough to cover several high school football players that signed letters of intent to play at Div. I schools: Ed Blanton, Mike Gibson and John Boyett from Napa; Justin Clayton from Justin-Siena; Chris Seisay, Jomon Dotson and Jon Bade from American Canyon; Randy Tscharner from Calistoga; Carlo Trinchero and Gannon Laidlaw from St. Helena. Charles Bertoli (also from St. Helena) did not sign a letter of intent but eventually earned a scholarship after walking on to Boise State’s football program.

I could use examples of other sports but their signing letters of intent isn’t grossly overhyped like football. Go to any message board and you’ll hear, “School X, Y or Z just signed the No. 1-rated linebacker in the country.”

These kids haven’t even played a single down of college football — and in some cases, have yet to finish their high school career — and they are already being tabbed the savior of their program.

When you see these rankings, you wonder how much of it is truth and how much of it is conjecture.

Perhaps the best story I ever heard about recruiting rankings involved former San Francisco 49ers linebacker Patrick Willis, who is from Bruceton, Ten., population 1,400. You frequently hear the term “five-star recruit.” At one point in his high school career, Willis had just “one star” to his name. Well, we saw how much that mattered. All he did was enjoy a Hall-of-Fame worthy NFL career.

The one response I constantly have to recruiting hype is, “I get it, but I don’t quite get it.”

Is the excitement warranted? Well, perhaps so within reason. I understand the excitement for fans leading up to signing day. 

It’s a chance to celebrate the next generation of your favorite team and it’s a chance for the youngster’s high school to say, “he’s one of us.”

However, I do believe that the hysteria surrounding recruiting and signing day throughout the year has crossed the line of common sense.

There’s just way too much attention given to way too many kids, many of whom are not benefiting from the media crush.

The truth of the matter is that less than half of these athletes — and that’s probably a generous estimate — will not live up to all of the attention.

If you want to celebrate your school’s recruiting class, fine. Have a signing day party for all I care. Just spare me some of the media attention and the fixation on these young kids.

The truth of the matter is that signing day has become so overhyped that it’s anticlimactic. I don’t mind a few updates during the year, but phone calls out the wazoo to website publishers, network scouts and now the newspaper writers seems over the top.

It’s also got to be a pain in the butt for the kid to answer the same questions about 40 times — college lists, favorites, bench press numbers and when he is making a decision.

As a result, the athletes are becoming prima donnas at an accelerated stage. 

Not that it’s their entirely fault.

I guess I’m more than a little old school when it comes to recruiting coverage. I’m not opposed to acknowledging that a youngster is drawing interest from school X, Y or Z, I’m just not going to do any massive spreads until the ink is on the paper. 

Just another example of how college sports recruiting coverage has been grossly overhyped.