Weekly Sporties

-I think it was apparent to everyone watching this year's version that the NBA dunk contest held during All-Star weekend had pretty much run its course. Back in the day it was the biggest event of the weekend, but people are starting to wonder if every dunk has been done and it's hard to dispute that claim. How many times have we seen guys go between their legs on dunks at this point? It's practically pedestrian. The bigger problem is more likely that the star power has really been lacking in the last few attempts. The field is being filled with end-of-the-bench guys that only the hardest of hardcore fans are even aware of. Meanwhile, Lebron James has been using pre-game warm-ups to perform dunks which would win in most years. This is what has prompted Magic Johnson to offer James $1 million if we would enter the contest next year. James has said he would think about it, but I really hope he was kidding and only saying that out of respect for Magic. After winning a championship last year James has finally gotten his popularity back to pre-"The Decision" levels and I think demanding what amounts to a $1 million appearance fee for a league-sponsored event is just going to make him appear selfish in many people's eyes. The last thing the average fans wants to hear from an athlete making $16 million a year, plus the untold millions in endorsement money, is that they will only do something if the price is right. If I were around James I would ask him if that money was worth all the grief he would take from some circles who are just waiting for him to mess up again so they can pounce on his next screw-up. James has every right to not want to participate in the dunk contest and the adulation he would get for winning (because he would) wouldn't outweigh the cons. This is how bad the dunk contest has gotten - now it has started to annoy the people who aren't even participating.

-There is nothing worse than seeing a person keep making the same mistakes time and time again. Even if you don't like that person, after a while you start to feel bad that they can't quite figure something out. That is the case with Lakers center Dwight Howard. Despite giving numerous interviews this year in which he has put his foot in his mouth, he just keeps talking. At some point you would think he would know that he doesn't have to answer every question that is asked of him, especially since he can't seem to answer any questions without making himself look bad. This week Howard was asked about the Orlando Magic team which made it to the 2009 NBA Finals. Rather than speak about how the team made a great and unexpected run, Howard took the opportunity to prop himself up while downgrading all his former teammates, saying the Magic consisted of a roster "full of people nobody wanted... and I led them with a smile on my face." Really? The way I remember it Howard had to be taken out of the end of games because he couldn't hit a free-throw to save his life. Also, anyone who burns every bridge on his way out of town is not someone I would want leading me anywhere. Howard quickly apologized for his comments (again, he has to apologize a lot and yet they never sound sincere), but the damage was done. I'm sure there will still be a market for Howard this summer, but if I ran a team he would no longer be at the top of my list. I've been racking my brain in the last week to see if I can think of a person who has done more harm to his image in as short an amount of time as Howard and I have to say I am having a hard time coming up with anyone. Everyone says guys like Tim Duncan are boring because they don't say anything and Howard's main priority is to be well-liked, but unless he gets smarter about what he says in interviews he would be better off acting more like Duncan both on and off the court. Boring may not get you a ton of endorsement deals, but Duncan also never had to worry about his next long-term contract either.

-One of the oldest debates in sports is who is tougher - football players or hockey players. No matter which side you come down everyone agrees that both games are extremely violent, which is why I am somewhat amused that for all the hand wringing about how we need to make football safer for the kids, no one seems too concerned about hockey, even though they play five times as many games in a season and catching a puck to the face will do a lot more damage than a football bouncing off your dome. No one knows that better than New York Rangers defenseman Marc Staal, who took a puck to the face on Tuesday night, causing a huge gash just above his eye which left a pool of blood on the ice that looked very bad but could have been a lot worse. This has restarted a long-dormant debate about whether or not hockey should start making visors a standard part of the equipment. It is a little crazy to think about how much grief football takes about being unsafe and yet no one makes a peep about how hockey still allows players to wear helmets that don't have visors. Obviously, no one is saying that wearing a tiny visor will make you safe, but it would increase your odds a little. Some players do, but it is entirely up to them and a lot of players think the visors distort their vision. Others won't wear it for that oldest of sporting traditions - they are afraid it will make them look like a wimp. That is why hockey was slow to demand everyone wear helmets and even then the rule was grandfathered in so that old-school players could still get all the brain damage they wanted (proving it is not just football players who need to be saved from themselves). I fully suspect hockey will eventually adapt to the current climate and start mandating that every helmet comes equipped with a visor. After all, it is literally the least they could do, considering the full face mask worn by kids until through college would actually be the best move. We may never know which sport is tougher, but I certainly can tell which sport is better at pretending it cares.

-It has not been a great few months for the Texas Rangers. First they were unceremoniously bounced from the playoffs and then Josh Hamilton, the face of their franchise, left for a division rival. Now comes reports that Nolan Ryan, team President and still the most beloved player in franchise history, may be on his way out. This week the Rangers release a bizarre statement elevating people in the organization which made it seem an awful lot like Ryan's power was being taken away from him. Now come rumors that Ryan, who also owns a chunk of the team, may be selling and heading to join the Houston Astros, where he is also still beloved from his playing days. (Seriously, I don't know how he pulled it off, but he is a god in the entire state of Texas. He is like the anti-Roger Clemens.) There have been whispers that John Daniels, the Rangers' general manager, has some philosophical differences with Ryan, the biggest of which Ryan gets all the credit for putting together the team which went to two consecutive World Series, even though most of the work was done by Daniels. (It should be noted this Daniels is not the first person to clash with Ryan. The only reason Ryan owns as much of the Rangers does is because he drove other members of his ownership group crazy and Ryan almost seemed to want to help Hamilton out the door.) Now, owners and general managers clashing is nothing new. General managers are only worried about winning while owners would like to win, but are mostly concerned with making money and those two things can often conflict. Still, I have to say this is the first time an owner and general manger have clashed and people think the owner is the one who will leave. The Rangers need to be careful here - they've establish a foothold in the city, but if they backslide they could lose those fans in a hurry. I'll just say having the most popular player in the team's history leave for another Texas franchise does not seem like a good start.

-Before the start of this season, NASCAR introduced its new Generation-6 car. Designed to look more like the street versions of the cars they are based off of (which is how NASCAR got started, after all), these newest cars are supposed to be safer but also produce better racing results. While that may happen eventually, so far it appears that most drivers and teams aren't comfortable with them and it has resulted in a lot of single-file racing, which annoys both drivers and fans. Following the last race in Phoenix Denny Hamlin was one of the most vocal critics of the car, saying pretty much what everyone else was thinking - so far the new car is a dud. Since NASCAR doesn't like it when drivers criticize its policy changes, they fined Hamlin $25,000 for his comments about the new car. Hamlin responded by saying he simply will not pay the fine. First off, I totally side with Hamlin on this one. Not only does he have every right to say something critical if he wants to, I read the comments and didn't think they were that bad. Certainly no worse than what you would hear if you listened to the driver's communication during a race. You would think a good 'ol boy network like NASCAR would appreciate his honesty. Instead they responded to Hamlin's refusal to pay the fine by saying while he had the right to appeal his fine, but if he lost that appeal they could simply take the fine out from his race winnings or Hamlin would be suspended. A one-race suspension seems a little steep considering nothing happened to Jeff Gordon for intentionally wrecking a car last season and starting a brawl between two teams. Just seems like a very unbalance penalty system. That means if Hamlin does get suspended he should spend his off weekend starting fights in the pit area. I mean, if you can't race you may as well get your money's worth.

-One of the sports theories I firmly believe is that it is not the worst thing to be the basketball coach at a football school. Seriously, if you win everyone takes your success as found money and if you are having a bad season no one is paying attention because they are too busy looking at recruiting class rankings and waiting for Spring Football practice. That is why I thought Tim Floyd screwed up a sweet deal when he got into some trouble while the head coach at USC regarding the recruitment of current NBA player OJ Mayo. Apparently there were some questions regarding Floyd paying one of Mayo's business associates and Floyd resigned before an investigation ever got that far, reportedly at the hand of former AD. However, that AD has since been replaced by Pat Haden and Haden's choice to lead the basketball team was fired earlier this season. Now there are reports that USC contacted Tim Floyd, who is currently the coach at UTEP, and the two sides talked for three hours about Floyd returning. I think this is a big mistake for USC. This is the coaching equivalent of calling an ex after breaking up with your rebound. Everyone involved knows it's a bad idea and yet they do it anyway. I obviously have no love for that school, but I seriously think USC can do better. Floyd is a good coach, but doesn't exactly light the world on fire in relation to the baggage he brings with him. Plus, while the NCAA never found any wrongdoing in the recruiting of OJ Mayo, innocent men don't simply quit, which makes me think there was something there. USC should be able to get a coach who can win just as many games without turning the NCAA spotlight back on them like Floyd would by returning to the scene of the alleged crime. Considering the football team is just now getting off probation, this is not the time for USC to start attracting their attention again. Because you see, that is the only downside of being a basketball coach at a football school - no members of the administration are willing to stick their neck out for you and the first tiny infraction Floyd will be out of work again. Plus, no one will miss the basketball coach when he is gone, unless he mess with the football program on the way out, which is attention you do not want.

-Because the International Olympic Committee likes to plan ahead (plus, they need to bank their bribe money before the investigations start), it is almost time for potential host cities to start putting in applications for the 2024 Summer Olympics. During this process someone pointed out that America hasn't hosted an Olympics in a while and hasn't even put in a serious bid for the last couple of games, which lead to a rumor being floated out there that said Boston is preparing to bid for the 2024 Olympics. I can only hope this is not true. Yes, as a sports-crazy city Boston already has a lot of great facilities to hold Olympic events and it would be cool if baseball were back in the games so we could see it played at Fenway (because we all know it will still be standing in 2024). Also, it is not like Boston can't handle a lot of tourists and the city looks great in the summer. However, the Olympics have started to take on a reputation as a bit of a money pit - they come in, screw everything up for a couple of years and then leave you with a huge bill for a bunch of buildings which will never get used again. It really seems like the Olympics are one of those things which are amazing... as long as they are being held somewhere else and you can go visit them, then return to your unblemished home once they are finished. Not to mention I feel like traffic would be a nightmare. Fortunately this rumor was quickly shot down by Mayor Tom Menino, who said any thoughts that Boston would bid on the Olympics were "far-fetched." The problem is that Menino may not be Mayor much longer and who knows what the next person's thoughts on the matter are going to be. Maybe they will allow this matter to be decided by a popular vote, because if there is one thing Bostonians enjoy it is letting their displeasure be known. Fortunately, that alone should be enough to make sure the Olympics are in another city for the foreseeable future.