This is not 'Nam, this is Fandom; There are Rules

You know how people say "the clothes make the man?" Well, in a certain way (and if I'm permitted a shameless rhyme), you can amend it to say "the clothes make the fan." Those of us who call ourselves devoted sports fans end up dedicating a significant portion of our wardrobes to attire of our favorite teams. Just like anything else when it comes to fandom, there are rules to be followed when wearing fan attire. I've touched on this before, but at this point it seems something more along the lines of a manifesto is warranted. (And for the record, that is a picture of Brady Quinn's sister Laura, now married to AJ Hawk, at the Fiesta Bowl 5 years ago when she wore the half-Brady Quinn, half-AJ Hawk jersey you see there and became an overnight celebrity thanks to ABC's camera crew. I just wanted to include that picture because I find it funny that she and AJ Hawk probably pretend not to be home these days when Brady calls or wants to stop by. You can imagine it.)

-No cross-pollination, aka wearing two different teams' gear at the same time, unless extreme circumstances call for it. This especially goes out to people who wear an NFL jersey with the hat of the favorite MLB team. Focus on one at a time.
-If attending a game, positively do not wear something that depicts a team from a different sport from the one you are witnessing. No Eagles shirts at Phillies games, no Mark Sanchez or Eli Manning jerseys at Yankees games, etc. One exception would be if attending a college game and wearing apparel of a different program at the same school, i.e. an "XYZ University Basketball" hoodie at an XYZ University football game.
-Avoid wearing multiple articles of the same team's clothing on non-game days. The "decked out" look works for a kid, not an adult. Once again, this is only on non-game days.
-Keep things as authentic as possible, within budget of course. I'm not telling you to drop $175-$200 on an authentic baseball jersey that is so nice that you feel obligated to carry it around in a garment bag (although if you have the means, I highly recommend picking one up), but let's stay away from the Wal-Mart jerseys that make you look stupid. And if you happen to root for a pro team who goes NNOB (no name on back, in uniform speak), then you shall not wear a jersey with a player's name on the back. Obviously with NCAA jerseys it's a different story because you can't buy those jerseys with player names on the back. Since the other three major leagues mandate names on the backs of jerseys, baseball is the only sport where this really comes into play. Mainly, this is a memo to fellow Yankee fans out there: if Derek Jeter simply wears the #2 on his back, then all you should be wearing is the #2 on your back. I'll gladly make an exception for the player t-shirts with a name and number on the back - those are fine. But a jersey with an unwarranted name on the back? Not fine.
-Another big issue while we're on the topic of authenticity: no hats, jerseys, shirts, or anything else that is not in team colors. I can't stress this enough. It's fine if you're a girl and you like Shane Victorino and want to get his jersey or t-shirt; just make sure it's not pink, green, black, or any other color that Victorino himself does not wear out on the field. And do not get me started on the 67,000 different colors you can buy New Era baseball hats in now. I don't care if you want a jet-black Phillies hat because it looks better with most of the clothes you wear. The team chooses their colors, not you. You choose to root for that team, then you commit to those colors. End of story.
-I shouldn't have to say it, but personalized jerseys with your own name on the back are a no-no once you pass age 10.
-Since that last item was definitely the least original in this post, I'll now offer my most original. Say you own the jersey of a player who no longer plays for your team. As long as he is still active and playing for another team, you have to mothball the jersey. You give off an air of indirectly rooting for another team if you continue to wear the jersey. Once that player retires, you can go back to wearing that jersey if the player was worthy enough. As much as I loved my Jason Giambi Yankees t-shirt, it's just best for everyone if that thing stays at the bottom of the drawer while he's still playing elsewhere. Once he retires, the shirt can go back into the gym rotation. A major exception would be if you choose to wear the jersey as a silent protest of your team letting that player go. An example of this would be if you were a 49ers fan and kept wearing your Jerry Rice jersey during his "oh, I guess he wasn't washed up after all" productive few years in Oakland immediately following the end of his 49er days.
-On the matter of throwbacks: toe the line carefully. One time in college, I spotted a kid on campus with a sweet powder blue #19 Lance Alworth Chargers throwback. I stopped him to compliment him on the jersey, but more importantly to ask him what, if anything, he knew about Lance Alworth. I don't even need to tell you how underwhelmed I was by the response. If you are going to wear a throwback, then come prepared with a respectable level of knowledge about whichever player you're wearing. Can't guess within 20 of how many home runs Mike Schmidt hit in his career (548)? Don't know which Super Bowl Roger Staubach was named MVP of (VI)? Then don't wear the jersey. Because I'll find you.

I'm sure there are things that I've left off the list or that you may disagree with, so have at it below if you are so inclined.

The Trite Utterances of Subpar Sports "Fans," Revisited

By now you know about Braylon Edwards' DWI this past Monday night, in which he blew a .16 BAC. Nearly as bad as the act itself is the common man's reaction where he moans and groans about "oh, he gets to play on Sunday but I'd be fired if it happened at my job," or "who are my kids supposed to look up to?" Let's make it clear. There is no comparing your job to that of a professional athlete. None. They are in two different universes so let's keep them there. We've covered this before so no need to dive back in.

What annoys me is the whole "role model" thing, and don't worry, I'm not going to go Charles Barkley on you. I have a slightly different spin on the matter. If you ask "who are the kids supposed to look up to?" the obvious answer is their parents, but let's keep that aside for the moment. As kids, we all looked up to rock stars, actors, athletes, etc. in addition to our parents - you can't not want to be like the famous people you root for and see on TV or in movies. So let it be a given that kids are going to look up to other people in addition to their family.

The American without perspective says he can't in good conscience have his kids look up to pro athletes because of people like Braylon Edwards. And that's not incorrect, but I offer this counterpoint. What walk of life, what certain occupation, is totally clean of unsavory people? Police? Um, next. How about doctors and/or nurses? Maybe not. Elected politicians and statesmen? You already know where that one's going. How about the seemingly highest of all callings, the priesthood? Not exactly.

So are pro sports really that especially bad? Every certain sample of people is going to have its share of good and bad, a proportionate number of saints and dirtbags. If you say that you can't let 8 year old Timmy root for the Jets anymore since Braylon Edwards got a DWI, and you wonder who he can ever look up to, then by your logic, there is no one to look up to. And please don't say it's a pro athlete's responsibility to be a role model because of all the exposure and money. If anything, the Braylon Edwards fiasco this week provided an opportunity for parents to talk to their kids about how stupid he was to get behind the wheel, and discuss the hundreds of better ways to have handled the situation. Am I wrong?

You're Not Wrong, You're Just an Asshole

A few of us (actually, all three of us, Kevin, John, and I) were holding court over a few Guinness on Friday night and happened to see the clip of the most recent Carlos Zambrano dugout escapade, which took place during that afternoon's Cubs-White Sox game. Long story short, Zambrano got torched for four runs in the first inning and blamed it on first baseman Derrek Lee not diving to stop the grounder down the line hit by Juan Pierre, a grounder that became a leadoff double. A few snap judgments from this situation:

-Number 1, if a slap hitter like Juan Pierre pulls you down the line, it's on the pitcher, not the fielder.
-Number 2, I could almost understand if there were two outs and runners on base when it happened and Pierre's hit directly led to runs, but he was the leadoff man. Go earn your money and pitch around a leadoff hit like a #1 starter is supposed to be able to do.
-Number 3, it's idiotic to call out your fielders when you get hit the way he did in that inning. Kinda tough to catch the baseball when it's careening off the wall or landing 10 rows deep in the bleachers.
-Number 4, I'm not against confronting teammates when you feel their effort is lacking. It's been done effectively before. But keep it out of sight, and especially out of camera view. Players never win by showing up their teammates publicly. Coaches can do it occasionally (just ask Todd Haley, who practically owes his head coaching job with the Chiefs to a well-publicized sideline spat with Anquan Boldin in the NFC Championship Game), but even then it's not exactly advisable.
-Number 5, if you are going to try to use this type of motivation on your teammates, your performance itself had better be exemplary. Everyday players hardly ever want to hear it from a pitcher, so you can imagine what it feels like to be berated by a guy who had just nudged his way back into the starting rotation after an early-season bullpen banishment.

This is hardly the first time that Big Z has blown up like this. In fact, when we first saw the highlight, we weren't sure if it was something that happened that day or if it was a replay of a prior fracas. Zambrano has had several good seasons, yes. But recently he's gotten more publicity for his big mouth than for his big arm. You know how certain guys such as Derek Jeter, Ichiro, and Chipper Jones are known as the face of their respective franchises? Well, Carlos Zambrano has taken another big step in becoming the face of the Cubs franchise, and these days that's no compliment. Right now he is the portrait of overpaid and underperforming, of too much flash and too little substance. The Cubs have been a hot mess since the end of the 2008 regular season, and what they have in star power they more than match in volatility.

It's an interesting dynamic. For generations, the Cubbies were lovable losers, a team known as much for billy goats, black cats, and ill-fated foul popups down the left field line as for Ernie Banks, Harry Caray, and Ryne Sandberg. Now, judging by their record, the Cubs are certainly losers, but they are anything but lovable. Maybe it's the undue amount of attention they still get nationally. Maybe it's the fact that seeing Alfonso Soriano swing at (and try to pull) every freaking pitch gives me flashbacks to some of his prolonged slumps from his Yankee days. Maybe it's the party-first, baseball game-second atmosphere that's become prevalent at Wrigley Field. Or maybe not. Maybe we wouldn't be so quick to criticize all aspects of the Cub teams of recent years if its $18 million a year starting pitcher would ever learn to keep his mouth shut and stopped doing so much to turn his team into the media's canteen of water in the desert of the 24-hour news cycle. Oh well. I'll look at the bright side - as tired a story as a Carlos Zambrano controversy is, at least it takes a few minutes a day away from any more talk about vuvuzelas or LeBron sweepstakes speculation.

It's a League Game, Smokey

As we go further and further into the chasm of adulthood, many of us will try to find any way that we can to give ourselves a taste of being a kid. One of those ways to rekindle the good old days is signing up for recreational sports leagues, either an interoffice league at work or a weekend league with friends. When you get down to it, we're all there to try to recapture the time when our little league games where the highlights of the week, when being the guy who batted third or played shortstop was the most important thing in the world. Of course, nowadays it's just beer-league type stuff, a diversion from the routine, a few hours out of the week to scale back the hastiness of everyday life. And while above all else the name of the game (no matter what game you're playing) is having fun, that does not make it OK to blatantly suck and bear no regard for winning.

There's a few people like this on every team, whether it's softball, basketball, volleyball, you name it. They are there "just to have fun" and will remind everyone of that fact with a goofy smile and a shrug of the shoulders every time a botched play draws their teammates' glare. I'm sorry, but "just wanting to have fun" is not a blanket excuse for habitually poor play and/or disregard for fundamentals and strategy. You don't hear people say "wow, look at that, Joe out there has misplayed 3 fly balls this inning and somehow managed to strike out in slow pitch, but he's just here to have fun so it's OK." No, it's not OK. If you put the uniform on and step onto the field/court/rink, your job is to help your team. Fun is a by-product. You know what's fun? Playing well is fun. Winning is fun. Watching your team lose because a mongo wearing the same uniform as you forgot how many outs there were? That, my friends, is not fun.

I'm not saying to treat winning or losing like life or death, because that extreme is even worse than not caring. But just have a clue and take things somewhat seriously. If you fail to do that, you're wasting the time of others who actually care. You're probably the same guy who plays blackjack and doesn't hit a 14 when the dealer is showing a face card. Not to mention, playing on a company team can be politic city, so you can even be damaging your career. I think that's what grinds my gears the most about this matter - why do you sign up for something where you are, in essence, voluntarily embarrassing yourself in front of people whose opinions may matter? On the scale of office unpopularity, being that guy who everyone hopes isn't up to bat next or doesn't get the ball hit to him is only slightly better than being the smelly guy. That's right, the smelly guy. (this is where you nod your head and chuckle in agreement)

Bottom line? If it were just about fun we wouldn't keep score or standings. I'm not saying you have to be an A+ athlete to be on the field, because honestly if any of us were all that good we wouldn't be playing in a simple rec league. What I am saying is to know your limitations - I played intramural basketball in college and my only real value to the team was giving breathers to the guys who were actually good. So when it was a tight situation late in a game, I took myself out. If we lost, at least it wasn't going to be because I traveled. So if you are admittedly not that great a player (and being able to admit it is 90% of the battle), don't trot yourself out to left field in a tie game in the 7th inning, because the ball is going to find you, and odds are, you are not going to catch it.

I Like A Da YouTubes, Volume II

As promised, we are back with a few YouTube gems submitted for your approval.


This first one is watchable on many levels. Come for the comedy of bad draft picks, stay for Mel Kiper's hair and the fan reactions.


Our second video needs little introduction. It's The Big Lebowski in 30 seconds:

(Side note - there are a ton of hilarious "Movies in 5 Seconds" on YouTube, where they show you pretty much all you need to see to get what the movie is about. Do yourself a favor and watch Titanic in 5 seconds if you need any further illustration).

I leave you today with a bit of Brian Regan, aka the comedian whose stuff you need to get into. Dane Cook couldn't shine this guy's shoes.

Sh*t I Don't Understand: Fire Drills at Work

Got to work the other morning and opened up the ol' Outlook Express just to find a "Fire Drill at 10:00" email for the whole building to read. Great, so as soon as everyone really gets rolling on the day, a piercing buzz will emanate from God-knows-where and we'll be forced to go outside and stand in the parking lot for an indefinite period of time.

I have a problem with this on multiple levels. First, fire drills do not replicate a true fire situation. All it consists of is walking out of the building. I've never been in a building that has caught fire and hopefully never will be, but I bet the whole "remain calm, don't rush" stuff goes by the wayside pretty quickly once the smell of actual smoke or sight of actual flames come into play. And if it were a true fire, I don't know about anyone else, but I'd be getting in my car and driving away from the burning building, not congregating in an assigned section of a parking lot. Another thing about fire drills - their occurrence often depends on the weather. More than once at work we've had fire drills rescheduled for weather reasons. Not that I really mind being spared a pointless fire drill when it's cold and/or rainy, but it does make me chuckle a bit. Life does not stop and start at your convenience. You can't just cancel a fire because of the weather, but you can up and cancel a fire drill because of the weather - further evidence that a fire drill does very little in terms of replicating a real-life scenario.

But what gets me most of all is the fact that it's even deemed necessary for grown-up, college-educated individuals to go through a fire drill at work. I think we've all been through enough fire drills in the earlier stages of our lives to be able to handle things if a fire ever did happen (that is, of course, assuming that fire drills are effective in the first place). So you're telling me that if the building catches fire, I should get out in a timely fashion? Well, I'll be damned! I was just going to curl into the fetal position under my desk and cover my eyes, thank goodness someone told me I should get outside if there's a fire! I'd have been a goner for sure! Part of me wants to try to jump out the window (relax, I work on the 2nd floor) just to create a stir during the fire drill - hell, maybe it will make the whole effort seem worth it, like "hey look, there's someone that doesn't know what to do, he's panicking! This exercise in fire safety has been educational after all!"

I get it. I know what it boils down to - the building managers/company have to cover their asses, and having a few fire drills a year minimizes liability. What liability, you ask? Well, say there is an actual fire and some oblivious mongo gets a 2nd degree burn. You know they're going to try to sue whoever manages the building if they'd never had a fire drill, claiming they were never instructed on the proper evacuation procedures. Riiiiiight. This is the reason that new cars come with the seat belts already fastened (thus providing a built-in seat belt tutorial), because auto makers and dealerships have been sued by jackasses who got into accidents not wearing their seat belt and then claimed they were never instructed how to use this newfangled seat belt contraption. I wish I were making that up. Perhaps that's the essence of my disdain for the office fire drill: it's a snapshot of the things we must do in modern day America in order to protect ourselves from human stupidity. Common sense just ain't too common anymore, I suppose.

Things I Should Probably Do: Corporate Whore Tour

The best thing about working for [Name Redacted] is getting to travel with people your own age and staying in baller hotels. You're the man for your time and place. You can easily walk to the bars and hang out with your coworkers on command. It's college with a paycheck. It only happens during training sessions but its far more enjoyable then regular work. The work aspect is boring but when you BS with your coworkers it makes the day tolerable.

The Plan: Quit this job when the well runs dry and start at a new company. Find a place that will rotate a group possibly even overseas. Find out what kind of accomidations you will be staying in and the people you will be working with. Bounce from place to place and travel the world on the company dime. When the party stops at one place find another.

The Verdict: This is somewhat possible because being friends with your coworkers makes work far more enjoyable. Even if your working 12 hours days its far more tolerable amongst friends. Hint hint public accountants that are bitching. More research needs to be done to see who offers the best college atmosphere. Eventually you would need to settle in somewhere but one change might be in order.

There Are Basic Freedoms Here (And Let's Keep Them Basic)

A decent rule to live by is that you can do what you want, as long as it doesn't severely bother other people who are minding their own business. We have basic freedoms in this country. You can practice whatever religion you want, but just please keep it out of my face, ok? You can assemble in protest in front of a Hooters if you want, but don't get in my way if I'm trying to walk in. If I choose to take heed of your picketing and wailing about the plight du jour, I'll walk over to you myself and listen to what you have to say or read some of the literature I'm sure you brought along with you.

If you want to have a phone conversation while walking down a sidewalk or through a crowded mall, that's fine. It's a public place where people are mostly in transit anyway, and no one ends up being privy to your verbal exchanges for very long, so no harm (although you're still likely a douchebag, especially if you walk around talking on a Bluetooth. Ease up on the self-importance there, Mr. Lumbergh). But if you are on the phone in a place where others are planted for an extended period of time, like on a train or at the office, then you are committing a heinous social crime.

My desk is a place where I must be in order to accomplish the tasks of my job, just like my seat on a plane or train is a place where I am designated to be in order to serve the purpose of my being on such a conveyance in the first place. I am either there to work or to simply get from Point A to Point B. Overhearing your obnoxious cackle of a voice engaged in what you consider meaningful conversation was not what I came here for. If you are on the phone more than 2.5 minutes and it's not an emergency or other pressing situation, you've stepped over the line.

Most workplaces have a rule of thumb regarding personal phone calls and cell phone use, but some are most sternly enforced than others. Too many people think it's OK, while sitting at their desk within earshot of numerous others, to blabber on about how they started the wrong tight end in fantasy last week or whether someone needs to pick up bread on the way home or who's picking up their son JoJo the Idiot Circus Boy from practice tomorrow night. Most offices have break rooms or lounges or some place that you can carry on those conversations until the cows come home, or until the sun and moon align and you actually get your lazy ass back to work, whichever happens first.

And I hate to have to go in this direction, but I'd be holding something back if I didn't. General phone courtesy rules still apply to you if you speak another language. In fact, it's twice as annoying to listen to people at work thunder away on their phones in their foreign tongues. And it's not the foreign languages themselves; I don't want to give that impression. It's that, for some reason, whenever someone is speaking in a foreign language, their voice seems to amplify like they're James Hetfield or something. Holding a conversation in a language other than English does not exempt you from respecting those around you. Do they not have inside voices where you come from? I took four years of French and it was never presented as a linguistic norm to speak at a booming volume and pitch - I doubt any language really calls for this in its vernacular. I've had to listen to so much Russian at work in the past few years that I'm debating giving my first child the middle name Sputnik.

What gets me even more is the tolerance level a lot of people have for those who are on their phones way too much but speak in a different language. I get it if your family is on the other side of the world and you only have a certain window of time during the day that either party can talk to one another without interrupting sleep, but give me a break. Do you think if it were me, or any other English-speaking person talking on the phone for upwards of 30 minutes a day during time I'm supposed to be working, it would be looked upon the same way?

There are obviously exceptions to these rules, like if you have a family member serving in the military and any time you get a call from them, you take it and talk for as long as you can because you may only get to speak to them once a month or so. No one's ever going to take issue with that. Just like many other courtesies or small freedoms we have in day-to-day life, it's those who are given an inch and habitually take a yard that ruin it for everyone else. Just like we learn in 3rd grade social studies, every right has a responsibility that comes along with it.

New Years Resolutions Round 2

Lent is right around the corner. I have heard people say what they are giving up and it sounds and awful lot like New Years Eve.
Soda
Sugary Snacks
Candy bars
Dessert
Cigarettes
Masturbation (Good Luck)
I am admittedly somewhat out of touch with the practices of lent. However, to me it seems like you should give up something more meaningful. Something that won't necessarily benefit you but rather force you to sacrifice for 40 days in the spirit of the occasion. Let's see you give up something you actually might need instead of something that you consume daily because you lack discipline. Am I wrong?

Across This Line, You Do Not Cross

There are things that you can get away with at work. Several rules that you can break and you should if its worth it to you. There is a man in my office that refuses to wears anything but a polo and khakis to a bank even if the dress code dictates suit and tie. He has been questioned by bank presidents and field office supervisors yet he does not care. He will forever rock his polo while you or I suit up. I love that he fights this battle because we all need some sense of freedom at work. You see sometimes you can make your own rules at work because they are not worth firing people over or spending to much time on. Some things should not have to be done in the first place and these are the battles I fight.
I will not fill out a cost comparison sheet and send a memo to three different people explaining why its cheaper to drive from NJ to DC rather then fly on US Airways and take a cab. You can ask me over and over again and I won't do it because if you can't figure it why its cheaper Tommy over here will hit you with a tack hammer. I will defend common sense at work against all policies. Id like to think that everyone at work has things they do that bend the rules, the forum is open.