The Other Side of MLS

For some reason, cold weather and harsh winds seem to follow me across the world from soccer stadium to soccer stadium.  I had to bundle up many times this summer to attend World Cup games in South Africa (particularly in Johannesburg), and Saturday night's San Jose Earthquakes game versus the Columbus Crew was another windy, rainy match.  The rough weather couldn't keep me away from Buck Shaw Stadium on the campus of Santa Clara University, though; the Earthquakes game would put me 4/7 of the way towards my goal of seeing all of the Bay Area professional sports teams live and at home (I'll be at an Athletics game later this month, and will hit up the 49ers and Raiders in the fall).

In the interest of trying to be constructive and positive, let me start with the good things about the San Jose Earthquakes.  First, despite the bad weather and the fact that the Earthquakes aren't very good (they were last in the MLS's Western Conference heading into the weekend), the team has a solid and passionate (albeit small) fan base.  The supporter section behind one of the goals was loud throughout the game and sang well-orchestrated soccer chants for all ninety minutes.  In addition to the diehards, the team also had a nice mix of families and young adults in attendance, suggesting that soccer in the Bay Area is popular with a younger crowd and is poised to grow as these fans increase their disposable income levels.  Unlike most U.S. sporting events, it was a relatively no-frills atmosphere - the stadium let the fans make the noise and didn't mess up a good game by piping in a ton of music or sound effects.

On this last point, I'm not sure if the absence of music was out of respect for soccer tradition, or because Buck Shaw Stadium is too crappy to have a sound system.  While it might be satisfactory for college soccer and is certainly large enough to support a decently-sized MLS crowd, Buck Shaw stadium is, to put it mildly, a dump.  Whereas other MLS teams have built beautiful new soccer-specific stadiums in New York, Los Angeles, Toronto and Seattle (to name a few), the Earthquakes are stuck in an embarrassingly crappy venue that makes it seem as if they are a minor league soccer club.  The bathrooms were sparse and poorly-designed, the concessions were primarily provided by mobile food trucks parked in a dirt lot adjacent to the stadium, and the seats were cold, uncomfortable bleachers.  Even the pitch (or field, for you ignorant Americans out there) was pretty chewed up, with players losing their footing throughout the game.

A "new" scoreboard to the left of the goal wasn't fooling anyone.

When I focused on the soccer itself, I was pretty impressed.  The Earthquakes won 3-0 on three pretty nice goals, and it was clear that the quality of play in the MLS continues to rise with each season.  While it was far from World Cup caliber, I enjoyed watching the game and came away pleased with how far the league has come since I last attended live MLS games in Los Angeles back in 2006 and 2007.  It was only when I looked up and scanned the surroundings that I remembered how much the MLS, and the Earthquakes in particular, still have to do in order to compete with other U.S. sports and European soccer.

That being said, I would still recommend going to an Earthquakes game.  For $30 including ticket fees, I sat in literally the first row of the stadium, right behind the Columbus bench.  Even in bad weather, we got to see some pretty good soccer in a fun atmosphere, and I'm sure as the weather gets nicer and the crowds get bigger it'll be even more fun.  To top it all off, for the first time in my life I won a section giveaway.  Everyone sitting in section 102 was given a tote bag in which to dispose of used oil filters / motor oil, sponsored by the Santa Clara County "Hazardous Waste Recycling and Disposal" department and Cal Recycle (I can't make this stuff up).  Next time I have to handle some hazardous waste, I'll think back fondly on my first trip to Buck Shaw Stadium.

$30 can get you a seat directly behind the visitng team's bench.

J.J. Barea, the Anti-Flopper

Tomorrow evening I'll be heading down to Santa Clara to attend my first San Jose Earthquakes game (and my first soccer game of any kind since the World Cup this past summer), and I'm looking forward to checking in on the growth of professional soccer in the U.S.  Among all of the challenges associated with converting Americans into soccer fans, one of the most difficult will be convincing viewers to embrace a sport where flopping plays a major role.  While I don't see a need for sports to be overly ruthless, it may be hard for MLS to attract the same people who are used to watching running backs take punishing hits and baseball players get beaned by 100 mph fastballs.

Soccer isn't the only sport that's been plagued by the evils of the flop.  Basketball, too, has seen a dramatic increase in on-court acting, lead in large part by an inflow of undoubtedly-soccer-influenced European players.  A 2007 article in the Orlando Sentinel noted that "the recent flood of foreign-born players has increased this distraction to the game," a trend that has only increased over the last four years.  When the article speaks of "foreign-born players," though, it's referring to Europeans.  Puerto Rican native J.J. Barea, on the other hand, is the anti-flopper.

Barea is now most famous for the vicious hit he took from Los Angeles center Andrew Bynum during the fourth quarter of Game Four of the Mavericks' second round sweep over the Lakers.  Even before this, though, Barea had taken a ton of hard fouls and, given that he's (maybe) 6-feet tall and weighs just 175 lbs., I'm sure they all hurt a lot.  Despite his size, Barea goes right at the rim constantly, with utter disregard for the seven-footers standing in his way.  And while a Sports Illustrated player poll had Barea rated as the ninth worst (or best?) flopper in the NBA, I think the reputation is completely unwarranted.  Just because the guy is short, white and has a foreign name doesn't mean he's flopping when he hits the deck.  Instead, the hits Barea takes are very much real, and his moxie has played a large role in Dallas' run to the Western Conference Finals.

When Barea's lying in a heap, you know it was a dirty foul.

As my (sixth ever) post on Lou Amundson suggests, I have a soft spot in my heart for under-athletic NBA players who get by on hustle, energy and toughness.  After watching a lot of the 2011 NBA playoffs, J.J. Barea just might be my new favorite non-Knick NBA player.  In a country that values aggressive and tough athletes, it's a Puerto Rican who's showing the league how to play hard.  Plus, the guy is dating a former Miss Universe, so he must be doing something right.

What's In A Name?

The complaint I hear most often about my blog has nothing to do with the subject matter, the quality of the writing or the frequency of the posts.  Instead, the only thing readers ever question is the name. Caught Looking.  When I came up with it, I thought it was incredibly clever.  It's a common baseball term for taking a called third strike, but also refers to the fact that I'm always watching or reading about (in other words, looking at) sports.  Perfect.

Never once did I think about a possible association between Caught Looking and anything risque; at least not until some of my loyal readers suggested it.  Sometimes people forget the blog's URL, type "caught looking" into the Google search bar, and are less than thrilled by the results they get.  It appears that the general internet-using  public more commonly associates the phrase with smut than with sports, too.

The icing on the name-controversy cake came earlier this week, when a loyal Caught Looking reader told me that while she was browsing in her local Victoria's Secret she came across a display of Major League Baseball / PINK-branded apparel and found the following product:

The first thought that went through my mind when I heard about these was "Do they make them with the Braves logo?" (They don't.)  Next, I wondered "Can I sue Victoria's Secret for stealing my blog title?" ( I can't, and I'm already stealing my logo from MLB, so I'd be wise to keep my mouth shut.)  Finally, I came to terms with the fact that the readers linking the blog title to adult subject matter were right all along, and Victoria's Secret has the panties to prove it.

That being said, the blog name is obviously here to stay.  We all know that sex sells, so maybe the new Victoria's Secret line will generate some incremental readership and one day I'll have my very own line of underwear.  Until then, just save the URL in your favorites and think innocent thoughts.  

The Most Advertised Two Minutes In Sports

I'll admit upfront that I don't know much about horse racing or the Kentucky Derby.  I've been to Saratoga and Belmont a couple times each and once took a trip out to Santa Anita, always placing no more than a couple bucks on random horses and usually coming out about even.  I like the idea of horse racing more than I enjoy the "sport" itself - more than anything, a day at the track can be a good excuse to get outside for a few hours and do something different.  Accordingly, I don't really understand the appeal of watching a horse race on TV.  Without the fresh air and the roaring sound of the horses sprinting around the track, what's there to see?

The answer, based on Saturday's Kentucky Derby, is a whole lot of ads plastered absolutely everywhere.  Most people associate the Derby with high society and class - women in their oversized hats and men in searsucker suits drinking mint juleps and talking politics.  Having never been to Churchill Downs, I can't say if this is what the Kentucky Derby is really like in person, but I can tell you that the TV coverage was almost the exact opposite of what I would have expected it to be.

Yum! Brands (the publicly-traded holding company that owns KFC, Pizza Hut and Taco Bell) had ads everywhere, from logos painted on the starting gate to commercial spots at nearly every break in the coverage (and, given that the race lasts two minutes but the TV coverage lasts hours, there were a lot of them).  Dodge had a giant logo painted on the roof of the main building at Churchill Downs, and all of the horse handlers wore green jackets bearing the Dodge Ram logo.  The jockeys sold space on their pants to a variety of different advertisers, just like NASCAR drivers sell space on their cars and suits.  Not only were there ads everywhere, but they weren't even for luxury brands.  At least Wimbeldon is sponsored by Rolex, Ralph Lauren and Evian . . .

Just like at Citi Field, the advertisements were all I could help but notice while watching the TV coverage of the Kentucky Derby.  The event's website claims that "the Kentucky Derby is America's original, extravagant springtime sports party. While a horse race is at the heart of the spectacle, there are many intriguing aspects of the Derby Experience . . ."  Unfortunately for fans tuning in to see something special, the most intriguing aspect of the race was how much signage the event organizers could cram around one 1.25 mile-long track. 

No Hitters Are Overrated

Yesterday, Francisco Liriano of the Minnesota Twins threw a no hitter against the struggling Chicago White Sox.  Today, Tim Hudson of the Atlanta Braves pitched a one-hit complete game shutout to complete a doubleheader sweep over the potent Milwaukee Brewers.  Sports media covered Liriano's no-no extensively, and he's received tons of recognition (deservedly so) for his accomplishment over the past 24 hours.  Hudson, on the other hand, will get a few compliments from Buster Olney on Baseball Tonight before his gem gets lost in a sea of other complete game shutouts. 

But which game was more impressive?  I'm not trying to take anything away from Liriano - he held a major league baseball team without a hit for nine innings and single-handedly gave his team a 1-0 intra-division win.  But other than the big ole' zero under "hits" in the box score, Liriano's game paled in comparison to Hudson's.  Liriano scattered six walks over his nine innings, and allowed several hard hit balls that the Twins defense turned into outs thanks to a number of impressive plays.  He only struck out two batters (not that strikeouts are a great measure of pitching dominance, either), labored through 123 pitches (and only 66 strikes) and had a 9:5 groundout to flyout ratio.  In short, it was an "ugly" and improbable no hitter, but a no hitter nonetheless.

Contrast this with Hudson who, despite allowing one hit (a solid double by Rickie Weeks), struck out six and walked only one.  He threw only 102 pitches (74 for strikes) and induced 15 groundouts versus only 4 flyouts.  In short, he was completely in control of the entire game, forcing the Brewer batters to put the ball in play and hit weak ground balls to the infielders.  There was no luck involved in his masterpiece - Hudson owned Milwaukee today.  Can Liriano say the same about his game versus the South Siders?

You can (and I will) argue that Hudson's shutout was more impressive than Lirano's.

Some of the most impressive games I can recall watching in my lifetime weren't perfect games or even no hitters (though I will admit that Randy Johnson's perfect game against Atlanta was the best I've ever seen).  Greg Maddux needed only 76 pitches to get through a complete game over the Chicago Cubs on July 22, 1997; he did allow five hits and a run, but threw only 13 balls the entire game.  A 20-year-old Kerry Wood allowed one single to the Astros on May 6, 1998 - he also struck out 20 batters in that game and walked zero (you should check out the box score for that one because it's amazing to look at).  The point?  While we shouldn't discredit no hitters, we have to realize that starts that do involve hits (and even runs) allowed can be just as, if not more, impressive.