Joey Votto IS An All-Star And Colin Cowherd Again Proves His Idiocy

Yesterday at noon was the straw that broke the camel's back in regards to the present-day selection of "All-Star" teams. The fan vote needs to be stopped because, like 90% of people who vote in the governmental elections, they don't know, as Jim Mora once said, "diddly-poo." This is just not me being a fanatical Reds fan but Joey Votto deserved to be on the team and as a starter, however, he got jipped by the voters.

For years now, the starting 1B spot on the All-Star team has been hard to come by. You have to out vote Pujols, Howard, Fielder, and others. If the teams were selected by you know, on-field performance, which truly makes someone an All-Star, than Votto would be starting on the 13th at 1B. He is Top 5 in the NL in BA, HR, RBI, OBP, SLG, and OPS. Not to mention he is in the midst of a 41-game streak of reaching base safely. However, based on the fan vote, Pujols gets the start... and Votto is completely left out because Adrian Gonzalez and Ryan Howard got the other 1B spots. Therefore, Votto is left off and now has to be voted in by the fans along with 4 other players. I'm not going to hold my breath. Look at the numbers and tell me who the real All-Star is:

Player AVG/HR/RBI - OBP/SLG/AB per HR

Votto: .312/19/57 - .412/.572/15

Pujols: .305/20/60 - .413/.567/14.9

Howard: .293/15/59 - .349/.502/21.13

Gonzalez: .291/16/51 - .386/.517/19.73

Clearly, Votto is the 1st or 2nd most deserving of the 4 players - not only due to the stats, but what he has meant to his team this year. Oh, and the Reds currently lead the Cardinals by 1.5 games in the NL Central. The MLB All-Star game is just a microcosm of how flawed fan voting has been. How many years does Yao Ming get voted to start at C for the Western Conference in the NBA All-Star Game or Tracy McGrady when he played for the Rockets? The All-Star teams should not be based on fan voting - they show they can't be trusted to stay informed and choose based on merit and achievement rather than name and prestige.

Colin Cowherd: You freaking dumb@$$. You believe that Joey Votto does not deserve to make the team because:

A. Nobody outside of Ohio knows who he is.

B. He doesn't have the name recognition of Pujols, therefore he is not a true All-Star.

C. He doesn't rank high on Google Trends.

The name recognition thing is just incredulous and is just another example of why Cowherd is a blowhard. If that is the case Colin, then how does your name recognition compared to Mike and Mike? Dan Patrick? Jim Rome? You are at least 4th in the rankings based on those 3 and probably lower because I'm sure your show has turned many listeners off of ESPN Radio to listen to some real sports talk. Sadly, compared to you, Jim Rome IS real sports talk.

PHE-NO-ME-NAL! Cowherd's last point is laughable. Since he does not rank high on Google Trends, he is not an All-Star worthy player?? Using that logic, Colin, you aren't a popular sports talk host. I see the 1812 Overture ranks higher than you as does "rent a friend." How does that make you feel Colin? People would rather search a discreet escort service than your name on Google. Of course, to most of them, a good, stiff rod in the @$$ is probably more comfortable than listening to your sham of a radio show.

The All-Star Game is where people become recognizable! It's where deserving players from places like Cincinnati and Milwaukee get their moment to show the nation how good they are outside their fanbase. With Cowherd's logic, you would never get to be a breakthrough star unless you played in Boston, New York, or LA. Votto deserves to make the team. I will vote for him and so should you: http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com.

Till next time, be careful out there.

Breaking News: McGwire Admits Steroid Use

What we had long suspected was confirmed today. Just this afternoon, former Cards slugger and single season home run king Mark McGwire admitted to the AP that he used steroids.

My first reaction?

Wow.

My second reaction?

Thanks for finally coming clean.

My third reaction?

Disgust, resentment, and sadness.

It takes a big man to admit his mistakes, it takes a much lesser man to admit his mistakes nearly a decade later. Remember how we all thought Pete Rose's admission of gambling would allow him to be inducted into the Hall of Fame? Yea, right. While this news is just breaking, the reports from the major news outlets are that McGwire has admitted to using steroids throughout the 90's, including his record breaking season of 1998. Here are some of his more startling quotes from SI's piece and our reaction...

"After all this time, I want to come clean," he said. "I was not in a position to do that five years ago in my congressional testimony, but now I feel an obligation to discuss this and to answer questions about it. I'll do that, and then I just want to help my team."

You weren't in a position to come clean in front of congress? What does that say about McGwire's character? McGwire only feels an obligation to answer questions now that he is back in baseball as the Cardinals hitting coach? Seriously? You have to wonder if Bud Selig or other high ups in MLB are behind this admission now so as to not make it an issue during the season. This gives the appearance that baseball is strong in cleaning up its past, present, and future.

"I'm sure people will wonder if I could have hit all those home runs had I never taken steroids," McGwire said. "I had good years when I didn't take any, and I had bad years when I didn't take any. I had good years when I took steroids, and I had bad years when I took steroids. But no matter what, I shouldn't have done it and for that I'm truly sorry."

Yes Mark, we do wonder. His confession puts him in a better spot than villains such as Bonds and Clemens who have never come clean, but why wait this long? Is this comment supposed to be directed to those Hall of Fame voters that are blocking your entry into Cooperstown? Sure, you know what, we believe you this time. Maybe you would have only hit 500 home runs without steroids - and maybe you would have been a career AAA player. We're the ones who are sorry Mark, sorry that we thought you were something you clearly weren't.

"I wish I had never touched steroids," McGwire said in a statement. "It was foolish and it was a mistake. I truly apologize. Looking back, I wish I had never played during the steroid era."

When all is said and done, there is nothing but sadness. Looking back at the Summer of '98, those memories are never the same now that we know McGwire cheated. But, I also feel sad for McGwire and others. Maybe we'll never know why these players felt the need to take steroids, but this is a man that will never be able to live down his past as an admitted cheat. For what appeared to be one of the great players of a sporting generation to regret his career at the top is perhaps the greatest condemnation of the Steroid Era, and the most stunning of his admissions.

So what we have to ask ourselves as fans is this - was it worth it? Was it worth it to bring baseball back from the '94 strike with presumably 2 roided up cheats who broke one of sport's most hallowed records by shooting needles in their butts? Was it worth it to pretend that what we were watching was the greatest thing we've ever seen instead of something as fake as pro wrestling? Was it worth it for the American pastime to turn a blind eye to steroids as the sport reached new levels of popularity?

McGwire might regret the steroid era, and some fans that believe in fairness and sport might regret the steroid era, but that might not be the universal feeling. I'm sure some fans and people involved in baseball could care less as long as the entertainment value is high and money keeps rolling in. But, some day I'll have to explain to my kid how the most American of sports cheated their fans and themselves. I'll have to explain why the top home run sluggers of my generation are blackballed from the Hall of Fame. And, I'll have to explain why one of the greatest athletes of my childhood regretted everything about his career.

ESPN's MNF Postgame Wants To Make Me Drive Flaming Poison Darts Into My Eyes And Ears

My God this is unbearable.

I'm currently watching Karl Ravech, Scott Van Pelt, and Trent Dilfer psychoanalyze, make excuses for, and try and sugarcoat the Vikings' loss to the Bears on Monday Night Football. I think what I'm really watching is three Vikings fans sitting around a bar in Duluth, MN try to rationalize what happened tonight. I think what I'm watching is a network in shock that their favorite son couldn't pull out a heroic victory. I think what I'm really watching is ESPN trying to spin this Vikings loss like Fox News spun a George W press conference.

Let me fill you in to what really happened: the Vikings.... and Brett Favre.... lost... to the crappy Bears!

They blew a chance at the #1 seed.

They blew a chance to have a 1st Round Bye in their hands.

They let Jay Cutler throw 4, yes 4, Touchdowns!

But, watching this postgame coverage, you would have never guessed that in a million years. There were so many positives to take from this game for Minnesota. And boy, these full postgame press conferences from Favre and Childress are compelling. This love affair with Favre and the media has been the scorn of this blog and many sports fans across the country - but this may be the most excruciating night for those of us sensible, level-headed sports fans, who don't wake up every morning, face to the north, and pray to the almighty Brett.

This isn't even mentioning the three cheerleaders in the booth that announced the game for cripe's sake. Wow, I'm glad I only caught the last 2 minutes and overtime (although you can see from the tweets at the upper right that my brother had to suffer through it all, thank God for me the Bears actually won).

Please, after the sleepwalking press conference, give me some brilliant insight Karl Ravech. "You can't win when you allow more than you score." Wow. Thanks Karl. Go back into your hole with Tim Kurkjan until Baseball Tonight begins.

I would rather take a bubble bath in sulphuric acid then have to sit through another season of Brett Favre playing NFL football and listen to the collective sports media gravel at his feet. At this point, it's not even about Favre himself. Yes, he's ego-driven and incredibly selfish. But the coverage of him is 1,000 times more embarrassing and frustrating. Please, let the Vikings lose in their first playoff game, and let Brett Favre go away for good - before I have to boycott all sports for the next 10 years.

If you're a jubilant Bears fan - you've come to the wrong place if you want to hear about Jay Cutler's great MNF performance. You've come to the wrong place for analysis of whether this win saved Lovie Smith's job. You've come to the wrong place if you want a look at the big picture and how this affects the Saints, Eagles, Cowboys, and Cardinals. If you are a fan of football that is looking for impartial coverage of a Monday Night classic - you've come to the wrong place. If you have 17 Brett Favre and Minnesota Vikings fathead posters on your wall - well, enjoy the rest of the evening.

You know, maybe I'm being too hard, maybe I should give them a chance when they come back from commercial. Let's see what they have to say going into the break...

"The non-Viking part of the program will actually involve more about the Vikings."

Now where do I keep those flaming, poison darts again...

Quick Hits: The Truth About Big 10 Expansion

Its Big 10 hater time again. Can you smell it in the air? We'll be the first to tell you that the whole conference supremacy debate is pointless. But, when Midwestern sensibilities and pride are under attack, don't think that the Yoders in the heartland of Columbus, OH are going to sit by idly and let our people be bullied around! Since I have a self-imposed boycott of listening to Colin Cowherd (find out why here), Y2 informed me this morning that the USC song boy was kicking around new nicknames for the expanded Big 10 such as the Tiny 12, The USC Is My Daddy Conference, and the Tanking 12 (shhhhh.... he still doesn't know yet that USC is playing in the Emerald Bowl, don't tell him, it will be a surprise).

But, what these morons like Cowherd in the mainstream media don't realize is that the Big 10 leads the world in BCS appearances. Maybe they are just too lazy and want to live off of stereotypes. (Don't tell him that the only team to beat Tim Tebow in a Bowl Game is Michigan) Oh, and the Big 10 has had 2 teams appear in the BCS each year in the last 5 years, the SEC or any other conference has not. (Don't tell him that Ohio State has a better BCS record than Alabama or Oklahoma... see if he actually has someone on his show that does research, I doubt it).

Enough wasting my own time on that pencil necked geek... what is surprising is that semi-sensible voices in the college football world like SI's Stewart Mandel are pushing back on Big 10 expansion as seen here. Mandel argues that expansion doesn't make sense dollars and cents wise because of the risk to Big 10 BCS berths and the distribution of money to each team lessening.

Is that the best argument there is? Trust me, money would not be an issue for Big 10 teams. The +/- on the money end would be negligible and making the argument about money is the wrong thing. The Big 10 needs to expand and add a championship game to be relevant in the month of December. Ohio State and Michigan played almost a month ago. The conference goes into hibernation for 6 weeks before meaningful football is played again. The Big 10 has seen conferences like the Big 12 and the SEC thrive on Championship weekend and they want a piece of the action.

The biggest real concern would be the effect on rivalry games at the end of the season and how divisions are split, but that should be figured out along the way. I would expect it to be done right though and not have a situation like the Big 12 where Nebraska and Oklahoma don't play every year.

Think of the possibilities with an open mind though. Could you imagine Ohio State and Michigan playing in a Big 10 Title Game in primetime at Soldier Field in Chicago? What about Notre Dame playing the Buckeyes at Ford Field in Detroit? Are those not glamour games that any conference would want?

The question is why are there so many voices trying to put down Big 10 expansion? Is it because the mainstream sports media wants to keep the Midwest in their place? The Big 10 isn't a threat right now in the last month without a championship game, and they can be brushed to the side. Why would these college football pundits want a showcase game for the conference when it is more comfortable and easy to live off of stereotypes and inaccuracies.

Clearly, expansion is in the best interest of the Big 10. But who is the best candidate for Big 10 expansion? Obviously it's Notre Dame, but that's not a realistic expectation. Pittsburgh would make sense, but it doesn't expand the market and Penn State wouldn't exactly be in favor of it. The same is true for Cincinnati. There has been talk of adding Rutgers or Syracuse to get in the New York market, but neither of those two schools are a fit geographically or ideologically. So who is the ideal candidate...

Missouri.

Gary Pinkel's team is now a consistent contender (they were ranked #1 2 seasons ago heading into the Big 12 title game remember). Also, they open up new markets in St. Louis and Kansas City. Furthermore, the Tigers have a natural rival in Illinois already in the conference and athletic success across different sports. And, they have a good university and program that keep in step with the Big 10's Midwestern roots. Missouri would have to leave behind their rich history in the Big 8/12, but they are a perfect compliment to the Western edge of Big 10 territory. Besides ND, they are the team that makes the most sense in every way.

So let the jesters have their fun, but don't think that Big 10 expansion is a joke. Getting a 12th team and a conference championship is central to the success of the conference moving forward. With their own network to showcase even more games and an improved presence on the national stage, the Big 10 can certainly rebound after a couple tough years in big games.

Now we just need to think of a name.... The Big 10 +2? Thoughts? Anyone?

The Myth of the Hot Stove League

Finally, the Hot Stove League is in full gear. The Yankees and Red Sox have made their opening salvos, and the Phillies have swapped Cliff Lee for Roy Halladay. For the unknowing, the "Hot Stove League" is code for MLB's offseason. Why the Hot Stove League you may ask? Evidently it means that fans of certain teams gather around hot stoves and discuss their teams moves during the offseason. Pretty sweet nickname eh? How it got to be the only sport with a nickname for its offseason is beyond me. Of course, this is only the case if you live in cities like New York, Los Angeles, Boston, Philadelphia, or other major markets.

Do you think Pirates fans are gathering together around the water cooler in the Winter months to discuss what utility players Pittsburgh will sign or what prospects will be traded next? Oh, yea, they're watching the Steelers.

Do you think that fans in San Diego are gathering on the beaches to discuss the thrilling blockbusters that the Padres will pull off next?

Do you think that the good people of Kansas City are captivated with the ins and outs of the Royals' offseason?

I didn't think so.

The Hot Stove League is a myth for 95% of baseball fans. Let's not kid ourselves... the only teams that have any meaningful offseason activity are the big market elites. Let's take a look at the 4 biggest moves of the offseason so far, see if you sense a theme...

1) Phillies swap Lee for Halladay

2) Yankees get Granderson

3) Red Sox sign Lackey

4) Angels get Matsui

Do you sense a theme here? Besides the Mariners accepting Cliff Lee from Philly (don't kid yourselves into thinking he's going to stay there for more than a year), what team outside of the big market elites do you see making a big move this offseason? Heck, at this point, I'd even get off the couch and cheer for Billy Beane to make a moneyball trade. Oh, sorry, I forgot the Brewers signing Randy Wolf and Craig Counsell are "big moves."

The Hot Stove League is nothing more than the big guns stocking up on more ammunition every offseason. The HSL only exits for 6 or 7 teams, while the rest of the baseball world waits impatiently to fool themselves into thinking that this is the year that they will compete and win with less money and talent.

This isn't a condemnation of the big market teams. Clubs like the Red Sox (ironically now just as much of an evil empire as the Yankees), Angels, Phillies, Yankees, Cubs, Mets, Dodgers, and others are doing what they have to do to win while working within the system. Baseball needs to do something about this perpetuation of distribution of talent from the poor to the rich every year. (I would make a political joke here, but I'll leave that up to you depending on if you fall along a side of the aisle) Sure, there will be teams like Florida, Tampa Bay, and Minnesota that can buck the trend or have relative success, but nothing that lasts. And they are a mere flicker in the Hot Stove League.

Hopefully Toronto fans have fun convincing themselves that this crop of projects will more than make up for the loss of Roy Halladay. Hopefully White Sox fans talk themselves into Juan Pierre as the missing piece. Hopefully Natinals fans talk themselves into thinking that keeping Scott Olsen and signing 50 year old Pudge Rodriguez is a sign that the franchise is moving in the right direction. Hopefully baseball fans in Cincinnati and Pittsburgh have something else to do to occupy the hibernation time that is their team's offseasons.

Hopefully there will come a day when these small-market fanbases can actually have real hope in the national pastime.

Boomer Bust: Exposing Oklahoma Football

Which team has been the most underachieving program in college football this decade? Which team has lost big game after big game? Which team has been upset at home, road, and neutral venues repeatedly? Which elite program has a losing record in bowl games this decade? Which team hasn't won a national title in 9 years despite a gaggle of 1st Round NFL picks and multiple Heisman Trophy winners?

See... you would think that the answer to this question would be the Ohio State Buckeyes. They are the villains of college football, right? The hateable losers that everybody loves to, well, hate. Can't win a big game, can't beat an SEC team, can't beat Michigan (oh, wait, they can), and their coach wears that stupid sweater vest. Oh, and they play in the deplorable Big Ten. Why is it deplorable you ask? Well, it's not the SEC, it's not USC, and it's not on the East Coast... I guess that's good enough of a reason, right? Those Midwestern people just ain't right, ya know.

But, the true answer to this question is... the Oklahoma Sooners. While Ohio State and the Big 10 continue to get ramrodded by the Mainstream Media (this is a dangerous path I'm going down, I'm sounding like Glenn Beck again... ), the Sooners have somehow quietly gone the last 6 years as one of the most miserable elite teams in the country. Of course, here at RSS I could just give you mere opinion and conjecture, but I show you the facts. Let's look at Oklahoma's "resume" since 2003.

-2003: A team that beat A&M 77-0 and Texas 65-13, lost to Kansas State in the Big XII Title game 35-7. Quite a turnaround, eh? Oh, they had the Heisman winner in Jason White too. Somehow, after getting blown out by 28 in their Conference Championship, they got a crack at the BCS title game, and were dominated by LSU, getting a consolation TD to make the score 21-14. Billed as one of the best teams ever, they played more like Tulsa down the stretch instead of OU.

-2004: A 12-0 season brought the Sooners back to the National Title game. They met USC, led by Matt Leinart and Reggie Bush. In what was billed as the Game of the Century, Oklahoma lost 55-19. Let that sink in. 55-19. With a Heisman winner, and Adrian Peterson, and a powerhouse defense, they lost by 36 points.

TIMEOUT!

Wait a second, Oklahoma lost two straight National Title games??? Isn't that like an automatic ban from ever being allowed back into the national title picture? Isn't that eternal damnation for your team and your conference? Isn't that even more embarrassing than Charlie Weis? (They beat Nevada!! ND is back!!) If you're Ohio State, yes. If you're Oklahoma, no. Not that this column is meant to prove any double standards, or hypocrisy or anything... back to the facts.

-2005: Lost home opener to TCU, finished 8-4, but won only Bowl game in this stretch by winning the Holiday Bowl, yea! Team was led by new QB Rhett Bomar, yes, Rhett Bomar who was kicked out of the program. At least Coach Stoops can balance crappy on-field performances with NCAA violations and players getting kickbacks.

-2006: Lost to Texas. Came back to win Big XII at 12-2. Then there was that little Fiesta Bowl game against Boise State. Losing to a WAC School in a BCS game? If you're Oklahoma, just sweep it under the rug. Hey, at least Stoops didn't fall for any school yard trick plays though right?

-2007: Another 11-2 season. Another Big XII Championship. Another embarrassing Fiesta Bowl loss. This time, Pat White and West Virginia destroyed the Sooners 48-28. Notice a trend here?

-2008: Another loss to Texas. Another Big XII Championship. Another Heisman Winner in Sam Bradford. Another BCS Title Game loss, this time to Florida. The Heisman winner managed 14 points of offense in the title game.

-2009: A marquee home opener at Jerry Jones Palace in Dallas becomes just the latest big game Oklahoma choke job. They lost to BYU 14-13. Sure, Sam Bradford was hurt, but it's not like he tore the house down while in the game. Oh, and you lost to B Y F*&#@n' U!

So, for a brief recap. Since 2003, Oklahoma has lost 3 National Title games (including 1 embarrassing blowout), lost to 3 WAC/Mountain West schools, (including in a BCS game), and went 1-5 in Bowl Games despite 4 Big XII titles and 2 Heisman Winners.

Compare this to an Ohio State program since 2003 which lost 2 National Title games (including 1 blowout), lost to 0 mid-majors, blew out Brady Quinn's Notre Dame and that KSU team who beat OU 35-7 in 2003, split 2 games vs Texas, went 3-3 in Bowl Games, won at least a share of 4 Big 10 Titles and 1 Heisman Winner, and according to most pundits deserve to be relegated to the MAC, along with 4/5 of the Big 10.

You tell me which program should be under fire from the MSM more.

So, in the coming week, you'll hear everyone make excuses for another OU choke job against BYU. You'll hear that a loss at the beginning of the season doesn't hurt as much as later ones. You'll hear that once Sam Bradford comes back everything will be fine. You'll hear that Bob Stoops is still a great coach, and OU is still a great program.

You'll also hear about how Ohio State is going to get trounced by USC next Saturday. You'll hear how terribly they played against Navy (SI's Stewart Mandel had the obligatory Big 10 Sucks column up seconds after that game, even though OSU won). You'll hear how great the Trojans are and how sorry the Bucks are. You'll hear about the wretched Big 10. You'll hear that even if the Bucks win this game, they still have a long way to go before they can reach national respect again. You'll hear that they only won because they played a freshman QB.

What you won't hear is the truth. Saturday's loss to BYU is just another embarrassing loss for an OU program that has had its share this decade. You won't hear that OU and Bob Stoops should be under fire for their repeated losses in big games to inferior competition. You won't hear how OU has been outplayed and outcoached repeatedly in the last 6 years. You won't hear anyone calling out Oklahoma or Bob Stoops from the College Football Media. You won't hear anything about the Oklahoma Sooners being the true underachievers of College Football.

Bob Stoops should count his blessings that he coaches in Norman, OK instead of Columbus, OH.

Remember to check back at RSS for our YCS and Heisman Watch... OU free of course.