A Tale of Two Airports

I spent the Memorial Day weekend visiting friends and doing some sightseeing down in Los Angeles, so my sports consumption has been pretty limited over the past few days.  By the time I got home last night in time to catch the Monday night SportsCenter, I realized I had missed tons of good weekend baseball action, some intriguing pre-NBA Finals build-up, the Indianapolis 500 and a chunk of the French Open.  Despite my weekend of pleasant distractions, though, I didn't escape the holiday completely void of sports-related observations.

While walking through the Delta terminals at both LAX and SFO last night, the differences between the current states of affairs of the rival Dodgers and Giants couldn't have been more obvious.  The Dodgers' current struggles have been well documented - with the team's owners Frank and Jamie McCourt in the middle of some messy divorce litigation, the Dodgers have been in financial trouble.  As a result, there is little positive buzz around Dodgers baseball, and the scene at LAX reflected that.  Whereas a few years ago you would see dozens of Dodgers hats scattered across the terminal on Memorial Day, yesterday I only spotted a few in the hour before I boarded my flight.  The Dodgers team store in the airport was totally empty, and the one at Universal Citywalk (where I was earlier in the afternoon) wasn't any more crowded. 

On the flip side, you can spot a seemingly-endless sea of black and orange Giants caps wherever you go in San Francisco right now.  Coming off the high of their 2010 World Series victory, Giants fans are wearing their colors more than ever this year, and the scene at SFO was no exception.  Even though I landed at 10 PM and the airport was pretty quiet by then, I still passed by entire families clad in Giants gear, seemingly eager to have returned home to watch some San Francisco baseball.  Whereas LAX was a baseball apparel wasteland, SFO was overflowing with Giants hats, t-shirts and even authentic jerseys.

Giants caps were everywhere at SFO.  Dodgers caps at LAX?  Not so much.

One of the fun parts of traveling (for me, anyway), is checking out the local fan presence - not only at sporting events, but also in more "secular" locations such as airports.  Since I moved to the Bay Area, I've been impressed with the Giants fan base.  San Francisco fans have truly soaked up the defending World Series Champion experience, and are enjoying their title defense as if it might be their last for quite some time (and, with Buster Posey potentially out for the season, it might be).  While in LA for the weekend, it was clear that the current incarnation of the Dodgers is only a shell of what was recently a strong, proud franchise.  Hopefully the Los Angeles situation gets resolved soon, so that baseball fans can once again enjoy one of MLB's greatest rivalries to its fullest extent.

The Coaching Carousel Chugs Along

What's more amazing: the fact that the Los Angeles Lakers hired former Cleveland Cavaliers head coach Mike Brown to replace the legendary Phil Jackson on the bench, or the fact that some sports writers are actually praising the move?  I have absolutely nothing against Brown personally; by all accounts he's a great guy and an extremely likeable person, and he's certainly had his share of success at the NBA level.  But at this point, isn't it clear that he struggles when matched up against great coaches and players under the spotlight?  Don't the Lakers aspire to continue contending for NBA titles over the next four seasons (the length of Brown's contract) while Kobe Bryant is still around?  Assuming we take those two things as truth, how does this make sense for the Lakers?

The answer, of course, is that this is a safe move, and for some reason sports and conservativism go hand in hand.  It's the reason why NFL coaches are always punting on 4th-and-1, even though there is overwhelming statistical analysis that says they should go for it.  It's the reason why MLB managers stick with one closer (even a bad one) rather than play the matchups with their bullpens, despite the fact that the latter strategy makes a whole lot more sense.  And it's definitely the reason why teams keep hiring the same recently-fired coaches to fill their vacant positions.  Taking a chance on a new-but-enticing head coaching candidate is risky, and sports executives and coaches are unfairly punished for taking on risk.  Hiring a known quantity like Brown is safe and, even though it's highly unlikely to work out, Lakers GM Mitch Kupchak won't be punished for the mistake when it inevitably doesn't.

Sports are filled with unknowns, and that's what makes them so great.  We watch games precisely because we don't know what's going to happen next.  When it comes to hiring coaches, however, teams love to ride the coaching carousel and select the guys with the most proven track records.  However, guys with stellar resumes like Phil Jackson and Bobby Cox are rarely, if ever, available to be signed.  Instead, available head coaching candidates fall into two categories: unproven newcomers and mediocre veterans.  While the former have all of the upside, GMs mind-bogglingly prefer the latter.  Apparently the Lakers would rather lock in four straight flameouts in the second or third round of the playoffs (the Mike Brown special) than roll the dice on someone who could potentially do something special with a talented roster.

Enjoy four years of confusion, Laker fans.  Mike Brown is coming to Los Angeles. 

It's true that Brown has experience working with top-tier talent, and that may help him coach a Kobe Bryant-led team.  It's also true that Rick Carlisle, another guy dogged by the "can't win the big one" label, led his Dallas Mavericks club to the NBA Finals earlier tonight.  It's definitely possible that Mike Brown will be successful with L.A., but I'm willing to bet that history repeats itself and he fails to get the Lakers back into the NBA Finals.  Maybe one day GMs will get bold and start taking well-calculated risks on intriguing up-and-coming coaching candidates.  Until that day comes, though, we'll just have to listen to the metaphorical Wurlitzer Organ music annoyingly blaring from the coaching carousel.

Performance Enhancing Burgers

Each week, I dedicate some time to watching TV that isn't sports-related.  After a week's worth of scores, highlights and news, it's nice to clear my head with a few hours of mindless comedy.  One of my primary go-to's is FOX's Sunday night "Animation Domination" lineup, and with the Heat game over by 8 PM PST last night, I flipped the channel just in time for one of my new favorite shows, Bob's Burgers.  Little did I know that this week's episode would not only be dedicated to sports, but would also get me thinking about a serious and extremely topical athletics-related subject.

In short, the episode asked if cheating is ever justified.  One character argued that people went to baseball games for the same reason they went to an amusement part - namely, to be entertained.  As long as people were enjoying what they were seeing, he went on, then any sort of cheating (in this case, greasing a baseball) was acceptable, and even noble.  Bob, the show's main character, disagreed, disgusted with the thought that one of his heroes was tainted.  While it's just a TV show, the ethical sports dilemma posed by Bob's Burgers is a very real one, and is especially relevant this week given the recurring press coverage around Lance Armstrong's alleged doping.

Armstrong is perhaps the best example we have of an athlete using his power and notoriety for good.  Thanks to his cycling prowess, Armstrong has been able to raise millions of dollars for cancer research, and has become a symbol of hope and a better future.  So, how does everything shift if Armstrong's success had more to do with performance enhancing drugs than hard work and sacrifice?  Does that change the fact that he entertained millions of people with his cycling and dedicated much of his life to saving lives?  In this particular case, would the ends justify the means, even if the means were unethical and / or illegal?

I spent some time thinking about how I can put a nice little bow around this issue, and I've realized that I can't.  In fact, I'm not even sure how I feel about it.  While, as a true lover of sports, I could never turn the other cheek on cheating during competition, in Armstrong's case maybe his alleged PED use was a good thing for society as a whole.  In a weird way, I almost hope we never find out about Lance Armstrong's true doping history.  That way, the believers (like myself) can claim that he was innocent, and the haters can maintain their skepticism.  It's a win-win situation; especially for all of the people helped by the Livestrong fundraising efforts. 

A Twist On Tennis

As participation sports go, tennis is near the top of my list.  It's an exhausting workout, you don't have to be great to enjoy playing and, unlike pickup basketball, it allows you to take advantage of the great weather you often get here in Northern California.  I've played tennis off and on since I was young, but my tours through Southern and now Northern California have correlated with a jump in my time on the courts.

You'll notice, however, that this is the first time I've ever covered anything tennis-related on Caught Looking, and that's because this blog is about sports viewership, not participation.  While watching tennis both in person and TV can be enjoyable, it's missing a key aspect that other popular sports such as baseball, basketball and football thrive on - a captivating team dynamic.  I find tennis fans in general to be too "classy" for my liking, and while I can appreciate the fact that they're rooting for good matches more than they are for any particular outcome, their player agnosticism damages an even big time tennis atmosphere.

Wouldn't it be great if we had high-quality team-based tennis to watch?  Enter this week's Men's Team Tennis National Championships, conveniently located at Stanford through next Tuesday.  I made the short walk down to the tennis courts yesterday to catch some of the Florida Gators highly competitive match versus the Kentucky Wildcats, and really enjoyed the hour I spent in the sun.  While during play the crowd was nearly silent, each point concluded with an eruption from half of the fans and groans from the others.  The breaks between points and games were filled with "Let's Go Gators!" and "Let's Go Wildcats!" chants, and most of the crowd (present company excluded) was decked out in either Florida blue and orange or Kentucky blue and white.

The fans along the sideline brought their school spirit all the way from Lexington and Gainesville.

Given the favorable weather forecast for the rest of the South Bay Area week, I'm hoping to get back down to the courts later this weekend to catch some more men's team tennis action. If you're a Stanford fan, you can catch the Cardinal take on Virginia in the round-of-eight on Saturday at 7 PM (it's free for Stanford students, too).  Let's just hope the support for Stanford at the tennis national championships will be stronger than at football or basketball games. 

Kyrie Irving Is Doomed

Once the Knicks got knocked out of the first round of the NBA playoffs, my spring basketball priorities shifted to a) rooting for J.J. Barea to continue to destroy defenses with an array of utterly improbable moves and b) hope for the Miami Heat and LeBron James to implode.  Like many other NBA fans, I became an instant LeBron-hater after "The Decision," and even though some hoops fans have begun to praise King James's choice now that his Heat are in the Eastern Conference Finals, I'm as Anti-LeBron as ever.  Just when I thought I reached my boiling point with Miami on the verge of the NBA Finals, yesterday James had the balls to say that the he was happy with the Cleveland Cavaliers winning the NBA Draft Lottery and that it "is a good step for them."

I've tried to avoid using this space as a vehicle for some of my anger-induced rants, but hopefully you'll excuse me this one time.  Where do I even start ripping into LeBron for this one?  There are so many things to criticize that it's almost overwhelming.  Let's begin with the insightfulness of James's pre-draft analysis.  Really, LeBron?  You think that winning the lottery was a good step for the Cavs?  Are you saying that picking earlier in the draft, therefore increasing your available options, is better than picking later and have your choice restricted?  What a novel concept!  Maybe that's why the NBA gives teams with the worst records the best chance of getting the top picks - thanks for clearing that up for us!

Next, didn't LeBron forfeit his right to represent the Cavaliers and the city of Cleveland when he jumped ship last summer?  I understand that James is always getting asked about the Cavs (I'm not accusing him of offering up his analysis unprovoked), but shouldn't he be trying to deflect the Cleveland-related questions out of respect for both his former team and his current one?  Isn't a response tailored around his commitment to the Miami Heat and his focus on the Eastern Conference Finals more appropriate than his obviously-false happiness for the Cavs?  It's bad enough that we have to hear about the Heat's playoff run on SportsCenter every morning.  It would be nice if LeBron could stay out of the spotlight for a few hours while the post-James Cavaliers enjoy the glimmer of hope that accompanies having the first and fourth overall picks in the draft.

Finally, is there any NBA player less qualified at this point to talk about good roster moves than LeBron?  James says he thinks former Duke point guard Kyrie Irving will be a great fit for the Cavs.  At the same time, LeBron also thought that Mo Williams, Antawn Jamison and Shaquille O'Neal would be great fits for the Cavs, so much so that he insisted that team managament mortgage the club's future to acquire those guys.  The result?  Zero NBA Championships, several playoff disappointments and a 2010-11 Cavaliers team that, without LeBron but with both Williams (when healthy) and Jamison, was among the worst in NBA history.  Having LeBron praise Irving's game might be the kiss of death for the young point guard if The King's track record holds.  Why doesn't LeBron just appoint himself Cavs GM while he's at it?

LeBron James and the Miami Heat might very well win the NBA Championship this year, and if they do they will have earned it.  The NBA playoff picture was extremely competitive and crowded this season, and the team that emerges holding the Larry O'Brien trophy will have marched through a war zone to get it.  If it is indeed the Heat, LeBron will have gotten everything he ever asked for - an NBA title, additional sponsorship opportunities and a huge monkey off of his back.  There's no reason he has to take what's left of the Cleveland-related sports media coverage, too.