blogovich

Give it a rest, Jimmy, over Led Zeppelin reunion tour

The song remains the same for Jimmy Page. There he was in Tokyo earlier this week, once more pumping Robert Plant from afar — in the guise of promoting the Zep Mothership compilation — for a Led Zeppelin tour.

This has been going on for years; Page pining for a reunion while Plant just goes on doing his thing — this time touring with Alison Krauss — having in large measure left Zep in the past, as he’s reiterated time after time.

There was nothing in the reports coming from Page’s Tokyo presser that indicated anything has changed — Page as usual plowing the same old furrow about a possible tour because Zep is, essentially, all he’s ever done beyond session playing. I mean, name one memorable song Page has composed without Plant, excepting anything he or both of them stole. Radioactive, along with Paul Rodgers, by The Firm, anyone? Decent tune but hardly classic. Conversely, Plant's solo stuff is a worthy catalogue.

Zep under Page did a lot, obviously, as he did in sessions. But let it go, man, like Plant seems able to.

Maybe Page will be able to plead enough with Plant to get Zep to tour. Or maybe Zep, as one fan was quoted as saying at the O2, is one and done as far as full-concert reunions go.

Plant obviously doesn’t need anything further. Page obviously does. And it’s getting rather pathetic.

Of course the Clintons are a team; get over it, folks

I can understand the point of view, somewhat, but I’m not sure what the big deal is about whether the Clintons are a package deal as potential U.S. presidential candidates.

Why wouldn’t they be? They’re a couple — in fact in many ways the epitome of what many couples can aspire to, or at least wind up as: they’ve survived rocky times, chosen to stay together, and progressed to a new plane of existence, arrangement, what have you. Their way, their business.

Whether it’s all just an arrangement sustained for only one reason — the pursuit of power — is, well, of course it is in at least some measure. But that doesn’t mean that’s all it is. Only they know for sure and they couldn’t care less what the rest of the world thinks, nor should they.

And this notion that, should she become president, will Hillary consult Bill if and when the time comes to, say, push the nuclear button, well, why wouldn’t she? Why wouldn’t he have done the reverse when he was president? Don’t husbands consult wives, and vice-versa, on decisions both big and small? Isn’t it supposed to be a partnership? Are we really to believe that no male president (or Prime Minister) ever consulted his wife on a major decision? What kind of fairy tale nonsense are we trying to peddle here? Can we say with absolute certainty that, say, Harry Truman didn’t get the final word to drop the bomb on Hiroshima from his wife? He did, after all, refer to her as “The Boss.”

Voters knew, when they elected Bill president back in 1992, that they were getting Hillary as well in a role previously unheard of for a First Lady — and damned overdue. Much better that than the wax museum figurine that wallows in the background of George W. Bush.

Voters know, if and when they elect Hillary president in 2008, that they’ll be getting Bill as part of the package.

And if Barack Obama’s wife comes out sometime soon spewing against the Clintons, well, good for her. Why shouldn’t she?

So get real, people, and get over it.

The real reason for the ovation for Bush

Was it just me or did anyone else think the huge ovation George W. Bush received before his State of the Union address the other night was celebratory — not of him, but of the fact that it’s the last such speech Dubya will ever give.

Good riddance.

NHL all-star game nonsense

Let’s be honest. The NHL’s attempt to ape the NBA slam dunk contest (itself pretty passe by now) in its all-star game skills competition was pretty pathetic.

And would have been even if Alex Ovechkin had made contact on either of his two baseball-bat like attempts at hitting the puck.

Hockey just doesn’t lend itself to this. You see more creativity in a regular shootout.

Here were some of the world’s greatest athletes made to look contrived and, in so doing, silly. Judging? Give me a break. The depths to which the NHL continually sinks in its attempts to sell a product to folks (in the U.S.) who obviously aren't buying, and never will, are nothing but demeaning to the game.

Sad. Scrap this contrived nonsense.

Other stuff about the all-star game, being played as I write, and it’s already 1-1, oops, 2-1, in what looks to be another no-hit scorefest. There was a day, you know, when all-star games were “real’’ games and scores of 2-1 and 3-2 were common. Alas . . .

Back to my point:

• Might it not be an idea to ditch the all-star uniforms and have the players wear their team jerseys? One team wears their dark shirts, the other their whites. Shouldn’t be difficult to tell people apart and it would make players more identifiable.

• Why is Scott Niedermayer in the all-star game? He’s played 18 games this season after hemming and hawing about retirement. This is, in short, major b.s.
B.S. 1: this is becoming a trend that the NHL should put a stop to; that being stars who realize the season is a grind and decide to show up when they want, play 50 or so regular-season games and then have more left in the tank than anyone else come playoff time. And they’ll be praised for it. Dumb. Shouldn't be allowed and don't give me that stuff about not being able to make up your mind. Well, make a decision and live with it.
B.S. 2: How can a guy, no matter how good, be an all-star after playing just 18 games so far?
Ridiculous. Regardless what the reason/excuse might be.

Dazed by "at the end of the day, back in the day . . ."

Please, folks. Stop. Just stop. Stop the use of the phrases "at the end of the day" and "back in the day".

I was just watching a sports highlight/report show. I swear, the talking heads and those they interviewed must have used the phrase "at the end of the day" at least once a minute during the 30-minute broadcast.

This day is over. End it. And take this idiotic expression with you.

As for "back in the day" . . . What day, praytell, are you talking about?

The Toronto Maple Leafs: So much attention . . . for what?

Given the news today of the firing of John Ferguson Jr. as Toronto Maple Leafs general manager, replaced by retread Cliff Fletcher of “draft, schmaft” fame, we invoke and paraphrase Winston Churchill with respect to the Toronto Maple Leafs, post-1967.

Never in the field of human athletic endeavour has so much attention been paid to so many whose achievements are so few.

And regarding Fletcher: What in heck is an “interim” general manager? Interim coach, one can understand. Happens all the time. Sometimes, interim coaches become permanent ones.

But interim GM? At age 72? Unlikely he’ll become a permanent GM.

Meanwhile, as interim head honcho in charge of running the club, is Fletcher supposed to make trades? Change coaches? If so, then he’s saddling his (apparently) permanent (as much as things in sports are permanent) successor and the current/future coach with possible mistakes, people who don’t fit in with a future vision, and so on.

Makes no sense, if you think about it, beyond just making a move because ownership wants to be seen as doing something. Anything.

But then when since 1967 have the Toronto Maple Leafs made any sense? Unless you’re tallking about making billions and billions of cents adding up to milliions and millions of dollars at the box office.

Beyond all of that, if the Leafs as an organization had any brains, they'd (intentionally-unintentionally) tank the rest of this season, and a few more, acquire as a result a bevy of No. 1 draft picks, and rebuild. The organization will tell you that Toronto fans won't stand for last-place finishes, but that is utter b.s. Just look at The Record's current poll, up right now at www.therecord.com

Aside from the tongue-in-cheek selection (mine, I'm web editor) of sending the entire franchise down to the American Hockey League, the top pick is to blow it up, as the saying goes, and start over. A Sportsnet TV poll tonight suggests the same thing.

Had the team done that, just once, over the last 40 years, Toronto might, just might, have had a Stanley Cup or Cup final appearance to show for it.

Instead, what you are left with is four-plus decades of managed mediocrity.

I'll be baaack. Soon, I hope

Conventional wisdom in the blogosphere, such as it is, suggests that one must blog often to maintain reader interest.

(I've found, however, that topics matter more in terms of hits). You can't lose blogging on rock music.

Anyway, back soon. Other duties -- the usual management concept of putting out fires, juggling 6,593 balls etc. -- have precluded me posting for more than a week.

But who knows, this might lead to a torrent in one go.

Yours in frustration (at not being able to find/make the time lately...if anyone cares). And, yes, I know; in the time I took to write this, I could have written on something topical.

Blogovich

Halls of Fame vs. Hall of Achievement

The current performance-enhancement drugs scandal in baseball invariably brings out the sanctimonious suggestions from all manner of media types that Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Mark McGwire, whoever, don't belong in the Hall of Fame.

Which, of course, said media types vote for. Quick aside here: Where and when in the world did the notion that guys sitting on their duffs in press boxes the world over get to determine which guys sweating it out on the fields below get to enter halls of fame in any sport has always been beyond me. And I'm one of those media members, though without a vote.

But we digress.

Point is, the whole concept of halls of fame is flawed. What determines entry? For the most part, people argue about athletes' candidacies by citing statistics. Which leads to people like pitcher Don Sutton, for just one example, who hang around and hang around building up 15-12 won-lost seasons just so they can total 300 victories, which has been somehow designated long ago as the minimum required benchmark for a starting pitchers' entry into the baseball Hall of Fame.

More likely, it should be called the Hall of Endurance or Hall of Mediocre Longevity.

Here's the solution I've long proposed in print before entering the cyberspace blogosphere. Establish Halls of Achievement in all sports for statistical benchmarks in the various sports. Establish Halls of Fame for the truly famous athletes, i.e those who transcend their sports and are recognized by both the rabid and casual fan. The Wayne Gretzkys, Michael Jordans and so on.

And, given the current state of sports, we may as well establish Halls of Infamy for those like Bonds, Clemens and so on, those whose reputations and achievements have been tainted by alleged use of performance-enhancement aids.

That way, all sports will have every base covered and we can put a stop to the endless, sanctimonious moralizing.

Saunders has solution for NHL all-star game: Play it outdoors

Nobody really cares about the NHL all-star game as currently constituted. For the longest time now, it’s been a boring score-fest bereft of the things that make regular-season and playoff hockey great — passion, hitting and so on.

So, how to fix it? Here’s a good suggestion from John Saunders, Canadian, last weekend on ESPN’s The Reporters program.

Turn the NHL all-star game into the Winter Classic outdoor game. The all-star game is, ultimately, an exhibition game, which under the current format the Winter Classic, though successful, is not with all the vagaries the poor weather could bring upon the game and, ultimately, the final NHL regular season standings (don’t get me started on overtime and shootout losses and the points system, been there, done that in previous Blogovich installments).

While I disagree with Saunders’ thought that the NHL should do four or five outdoor games per year (that would be major overkill and the games would quickly lose their lustre), he’s right on with the all-star game concept.

Right now, the all-star game is a meaningless, out of the usual hockey charcter blight on the schedule. Played outdoors, it would be, by any measure including the temperature and the weather, entertainment on a grand scale.

And it might even help the NHL in its ongoing (and currently unsuccessful) pursuit of acceptance in the United States.

The new sports trend: Test positive, say you'll never play again

We could be on the cusp of the end of sports as we know it. No athletes left to play them.

I got to thinking this after hearing Roger Clemens, he who has been accused of taking assorted needles up the butt, tell 60 Minutes that having to answer such questions will likely drive him out of the game. Permanently (we can only hope; this mercenary keeps coming back and back and back and I don't even much care whether he or others do drugs, just shut up already).

Didn't this just happen with tennis player Martina Hingis? Different drug, coke, but she packed it in, under protest, after testing positive and at her still young age of 27 could have kept going for years. But she didn't want the hassle.

Neither, apparently, does Roger.

If this trend continues, who will be left to play the games? What, praytell, will millions of people then do with their time?

Ah, I have the answer. We'll all play video sports games. After all, let's face it: Athletes don't know this, their egos probably can't bear it, but they've become nothing more than fodder for video games and sports fantasy pools.

How do I know this? Here's how. I'll never forget the day Vince Carter was traded to the New Jersey Nets from the Toronto Raptors. That's when it all came clear to me. What did my son do once he learned the trade particulars? Did he sit down and analyze it with me? No. He went to his video game, made the deal and picked up the controller.

"Nuff said.