Practice Makes, Well, Better

Two weeks ago I went to my first Stanford basketball game against Washington State and, admittedly as usual, I was somewhat critical.  The team hadn't won a game since that night (having lost four in a row, all in conference), so when I decided to head back to Maples Pavilion last night for the game against the Oregon State Beavers, I had very low expectations.  But while the team still struggled at times and still has a long way to go before being consistently competitive in the PAC-10 (let alone nationally), I enjoyed my second Maples experience way more than my first.

First off, a few notes on the arena (as promised in my previous Stanford hoops post).  I like the facility - or at least 60% of it, anyway.  The pros? The court has a nice simple design to it, the student section is well placed (from the mediocre camera phone photo below, you can tell that we were right on top of the action), and the lower section of seating is on par with any major college basketball gym.  I really love the look of the cardinal red seats in the main section; you feel like you're on Stanford's campus when you're in the gym.  While it happened to be somewhat cold and uncomfortable last night, in general I like the fact that the concourses of the arena are partially outside (covered, of course, yet exposed to the outside air) - very California, very laid back, very Stanford.  The con is the upper level, where I assume the most recent iteration of the Maples renovation just "stopped."  The bleacher seating, dim lighting and stained concrete of the upper section resembles something you might find at Lafayette or Binghampton, and cheapens the rest of the arena in my opinion.  Luckily there aren't many fans sitting up there to make noise or distract you from the lower-level action.

Stanford plays almost exclusively above the rim.

For my second run at Stanford basketball, I got a bit more into the bizarre Stanford student section (dubbed the Sixth Man Club) routines - during pregame introductions, during free throws, etc.  While I've never been a huge fan of the overly elaborate and unique student section chants and rituals - I'd rather the fans focus on the nuances of the game rather than their rehearsed antics - trying to participate with the rest of the (unfortunately sparcely populated, at tip-off anyway) student section made me feel more involved than last time.  As the game went on, the crowd seemed to fill out and get louder, making the second half (when Stanford pulled away with an impressive run) a lot better than the first.

And, while the team isn't good, they are extremely athletic, young and fun - Stanford scored almost exclusively on a combination of deep threes and alley-oops, exactly what casual basketball fans love to see.  The athletic department might not be able to sell students on the team's competitiveness this season (though, given the athletes they have on the floor, that may be coming in a couple years), but they might want to try letting people know that the team's offense resembles that of the Harlem Globetrotters.  The dunks, alley-oops and blocks from Saturday night's Oregon State game alone could have filled up a Sportscenter Top 10 segment (or at least a Top 5 segment . . .) - while the team is still only 4-5 in conference, at least they're giving the people what they want.

Inside the Sports Dome

Like most American twenty-somethings with a sense of humor, I've always been a fan of The Onion.  I spent a summer working in Richmond, Virginia during which I read the fake news source cover to cover each week (it was a boring summer internship), and still log on to read some articles when I have a few spare minutes at the computer.  Perhaps not surprisingly, I really enjoy the magazine's sports-related humor.  The Onion frequently pokes fun at the world of professional sports; just this week, a friend forwarded me this article about Europeans in the NBA (I suggest you read it), and there are a lot worse ways to spend a few hours than flipping through the website's sports news archives.

When I recently read in Sports Illustrated that the creators of The Onion were bringing a Sportscenter-esque spoof to Comedy Central (Tuesdays at 10:30 PM ET / PT), I was pumped.  The 30-minute weekly program, entitled Sports Dome, certainly had potential - Sportscenter, while still entertaining, has become so over the top that it's ripe for parody, and I was confident that the fine people at The Onion could deliver.  While I've made some bad TV predictions in the past (I could have sworn that Sit Down, Shut Up was going to be the next Family Guy . . .), I'd been pitching Sports Dome to all of my fellow sports fans throughout the week, even before I had seen an episode.  After finally watching the show last night I'm glad I got on the bandwagon early, because the Sports Dome might surpass Outsourced as my favorite new show of the year.

Tuesdays at 10:30 ET / PT on Comedy Central.  Watch it now, thank me later.

You really have to tune in and watch Sports Dome for yourself, but trust me - through two episodes, it's been great.  Not only does the show make fun of professional sports teams and leagues like the news articles do, but the way the show makes fun of Sportscenter (and its anchors) is absolutely brilliant.  Like the ESPN staple, Sports Dome features a mix of (fake) news stories, (fake) human interest stories, (fake) fan polls and (fake) top plays.  This weeks episode reported that the NHL Hall of Fame had been acquired by Ripley's Believe It Or Not, that the Clippers traded $4 million in cash to Portland in exchange for $6 million in cash, and that Ken Griffey Jr. was coming out of retirement to go after one last hamstring injury.  In addition, the show had a mini-documentary about a small Texas town whose football team was about to break the record for most times featured as the subject of a sports documentary.  The "One Second Challenge" lets fans make a video pleading their cases for free Super Bowl tickets.  The catch?  Each video can only be one-second long.  Not only was each of these segments hilarious, they all did a great job of making fun of what ESPN's Sportscenter has become.

If you like sports on any level, I would highly recommend the Sports Dome on Comedy Central.  With a DVR you can run through an entire episode in about twenty minutes, and you won't be disappointed.  While I'm not sure if the writers can come up with enough material for the long run, I'm not worried about that now.  I'll be tuning in each week until the show stops being funny.  Judging based on how long I've enjoyed The Onion articles online, I have a feeling it might take a while. 

Made in Cambodia, Made for the NFL

As many of you know, I spent two December weeks in Southeast Asia last month, traveling across Cambodia and Thailand (and a brief stay in Hong Kong) with a number of my classmates on a community service-oriented trip.  I wanted to have a trip-related post ready when I came back, but two weeks of touring rural Cambodian villages, non-profits dedicated to improving the lives of trafficked women and children, and charities focused on bringing modern ammenities to the urban poor didn't spark any brilliant sports-related insights.  I had all but given up on finding something about the trip worthy of posting here, when an avid Caught Looking reader pointed me to this article.

Of the many quirky and interesting products for sale that we came across while traveling through the two countries, the weirdest might have been something called Special Muscle Wine, a Cambodian product that, on its box (yes, it comes in a bottle that comes in a box), says it includes deer antler and other Chinese herbs among its many ingredients.  Though the product said it could help improve one's physique, or something along those lines, we all naturally assumed that the Special Muscle Wine couldn't deliver on its promise - few things in the country of Cambodia do, after all.  But, based on the article I linked to above, it seems like the crafty Cambodians might have something here.

The benefits of deer antler – or more specifically the substance IGF-1 that comes from it – are clear. IGF-1 is banned by everyone.  “It’s one of the proteins that is increased in human growth hormone … it’s considered performance-enhancing,” Danaceau said.  “It’s similar to HGH in that it aids in recovery. It helps build tissue, and strengthen tissue – more than you can ever do by training alone. Any preparation that is not naturally occurring is banned. Taking IGF-1 through deer antler is banned as well.”

So, you're telling me the Special Muscle Wine includes a banned substance that can't be detected through any currently-implemented drug testing technology (no major U.S. sports league is yet allowed to do blood testing, and the IGF-1 can't be found in urine samples) AND is a potent alcoholic beverage?  Where can we find a huge market for under-the-radar Performance Enhancing Drugs that get you drunk?  The NFL of course!  When Plaxico Burress is peddling Cambodian Special Muscle Wine as part of his NFL comeback next season, I want my 10% agency fee.

Replace the Cambodian woman with Plaxico and this billboard's ready for the NJ Turnpike.

What's Missing from Maples?

I've spent enough time here railing on the lackluster ambiance at Stanford football games, and now that the NCAA football season is over and the Cardinal are Orange Bowl champs, it's time to move on to some new things.  Today, it's time to talk about the lackluster ambiance at Stanford basketball games.  I want to write more about Maples Pavilion itself at a later date; I went to Saturday night's game vs. Washington State on relatively short notice, and didn't think to bring my camera.  For now, though, just know that the arena is a solid college basketball facility that, under the right set of circumstances, seems like it could be an exciting and fun place to watch a college basketball game.

Saturday night's game was apparently not the right set of circumstances.  There were a lot of possible explanations for why the energy level at the Washington State game could have been unusually low.  It was MLK Day weekend, so a lot of potential fans might have been out of town for the weekend.  Washington State isn't a Stanford rival (and isn't a very exciting team to watch this season), so borderline fans who only come to a game or two each season are likely waiting for UCLA or Oregon to roll into town.  And, despite a solid 3-1 start in PAC-10 play entering the game, Stanford hoops isn't that good (though they have potential to be a force in a year or two), and the fact that they blew a double-digit lead during a collapse that everyone saw coming didn't help matters.  So when I say that the atmosphere at the game was lacking, maybe I shouldn't have been surprised.  Still, I was expecting more.

I think what was most disappointing about the game was what it seems like a Stanford game at Maples could be (and, according to friends who were Stanford undergraduates, was just a few seasons ago).  Maples is a good facility that's the right combination of intimate and intimidating.  Like the Ivy League (yes, I'm biased), The PAC-10 schedule is well structured and predictable, making it easy for fans to remember when games are and who they're against.  Stanford basketball's Sixth Man club has a strong tradition, and apparently was a key part of the team's Sweet Sixteen trip just three seasons ago.  While the game was far from awful (I did have a lot of fun standing on the risers in the student section just a few feet from the sideline - it brought me back to my days as a member of the "Jadwin Jungle"), I was expecting more from my third PAC-10 arena experience (I've been to games at UCLA and USC before).

I definitely plan to go to more games this year - both because I love college basketball and because I think the scene will be a lot better when the Cardinal play some more interesting opponents - and I hope what may turn out to be a rebuilding year for Stanford basketball doesn't turn fans away.  If we've learned anything from the Stanford football team (honored at center court during halftime of the Washington State game), it's that on-field / on-court performances can turn around quickly here.  Let's hope that the same can be said about the performances of the Stanford basketball fans.

The Right Way to Lose

Given how close the game was, college football's National Championship game on Monday night was extremely disappointing.  Despite being decided on a last-second field goal, 95% of the game was a sloppy mess that did little to convince NCAA football fans that either Auburn or Oregon were better than undefeated Rose Bowl champions TCU.  The part of the game I found most interesting actually occured after the final whistle blew.  Seconds after his team lost the game, Oregon's QB Darron Thomas seemed surprisingly happy.  After what could be considered, at best, an inconsistent performance and, at worst, a complete choke-job, Thomas was all smiles and laughter when greeting and congratulating the Auburn players at midfield.

This got me thinking about a question sports fans often face: How do we want our favorite athletes and coaches to react after a loss?  While Thomas can rightfully (in my opinion) be criticized for his happy-go-lucky attitude, other players who have acted much more negatively have received equal amounts of (if not more) flack.  It's hard to forget Adam Morrison's crying fit after his Gonzaga Bulldogs were bounced from the NCAA tournament, and Dennis Green's angry meltdown (now one of the most famous postgame tirades in sports history) that ultimately helped him get fired from his post as head coach of the Arizona Cardinals.  While these three reactions marked dramatically different points on the postgame reaction spectrum (from relieved to heartbroken to enraged), all three subjects were ripped apart by fans and the media alike.

    

Thomas and Morrison's reactions were polar opposites, but both were criticized. 

So what do we expect from our heroes in defeat?  It seems like most fans want some perhaps unattainable combination of humility, frustration, professionalism and disappointment.  When athletes are too upset or angry, we label them as loose cannons, hot heads or crybabies.  When they accept a loss with a positive attitude as Thomas did on Monday, it comes across as arrogant, nonchalant or uncompetitive.  While it's hard to remember an athlete who accepted defeat "the right way," we can all think of countless examples of stars who were too giddy / angry / [insert polarizing adjective] after a game.  Personally, I'd rather have athletes err on the side of angry; I want to feel like they gave the game everything they had and are completely unwilling to accept defeat, but I admit that it's a tough line to walk.  The border between too dismissive and too passioniate is quite blurry, and it's tough to figure out where the Oregon QB's "time-to-move-on" attitude fits in.