Hang 'em Up

On Saturday November 21, I watched the rematch between Forrest Griffin and Tito Ortiz at UFC 106. While watching the match it became apparent to me that Tito Ortiz was clearly past his prime. One thing that led me to this conclusion was the fact that he seemed to take on the role of a human punching bag in the third round, by taking strikes and not delivering any back. A young Tito Ortiz would have had the energy and desire to fight back. This led me to ask the question: Why do athletes, such as Tito Ortiz, continue to compete when their best years are clearly behind them?

The obvious answer to this question of why athletes hang on past their prime is money. With owners of teams and leagues willing to pay athletes millions of dollars for their services, it is easy to see why athletes might try to squeeze a few extra years out of their careers. However, it is not only the owners who supply these athletes with money. Major companies still give athletes huge endorsement deals despite their increasing age and decreasing performance. A company might do this to try to sell their product using a known face, rather than an up and coming one. A perfect example of this is LaDainian Tomlinson, who was the 5th overall pick in the 2001 NFL draft. As running back for the San Diego Chargers, Tomlinson’s performance peaked during the 2006 season when he won the MVP and set the single season touchdown record at 31. Over the past few years, Tomlinson’s production has drastically declined, yet he is still making loads of money from his endorsements with companies such as Nike, Campbell Soup, and AT&T.

There are several other less obvious reasons why an athlete would continue to play when it has become clear that their time has passed. One reason is that playing and competing in their sport could be all that an athlete has known for their entire lives. Most athletes have an extreme love of their sport. This makes the transition to a more regular life difficult for many and perhaps even frightening to some. Another reason why it is hard for athletes to walk away is could be because of inflated egos. This is not meant as a negative, as athletes need to have some kind of ego in order to survive the harsh criticism that they receive from the media and the fans. However, this ego can turn into a negative when it blinds an athlete to their decreasing ability. A third reason why it may be hard for athletes to “call it quits” is the reluctance to feel old. Athletes spend their entire lives playing “kids games,” so it may be hard for them to face their real age when they finally retire. A final reason why some athletes hang on for a few extra years is to make one last run at the championship. This is certainly understandable, as it is nice to go out on top. One example of this is Jerome Bettis who was not the every-down-back that he used to be in 2006. Despite his declining abilities he remained with Pittsburgh for that season and they went on to win the championship.

While sometimes an older player can be an asset to a team by providing veteran leadership and experience, they can also be a burden. For reasons ranging from the lure of the money to the love of the game, it is easy to see why many athletes find it hard to “call it quits”.

Top Ten College Football Teams of the Decade

With the decade soon coming to a close, now is a great time to look back and reflect on the past ten years. It is inevitable that critics and pundits will rank anything and everything from the past years, ranging from the best movies to the top albums and artists. However, one ranking that piqued my interest was a list of the top ten college football programs from the past ten years.

The list that I found took all opinion out of the equation and ranked the teams based solely on their winning percentages. Based on this criterion the list turned out as such:
10-Tennessee
9-8 (Tie)-Michigan and USC
7-Miami
6-Georgia
5-Virginia Tech
4-Ohio State
3-Oklahoma
2-Texas
1-Boise State
After examining this list it became clear to me that while the idea of ranking teams based purely on winning percentage is a compelling idea, it is very ineffective.

One big problem that I have with this list is that both Florida and LSU are not included. Florida and LSU each won two National Championships over the past decade. The idea that a team can win two championships in a decade and yet not make the list of the decade’s best teams is outrageous. Both Florida and LSU should not only be on this list, but should be strongly considered for the number one spot. Another thing that troubles me about this list is that the number one team is Boise State. In my opinion, a team that hasn’t even played in the National Championship game should not be considered for the number one spot. Although some may argue that Boise State should have had that opportunity in 2006 when they were the only team in the country to go undefeated, the fact remains that many other schools have made multiple appearances in the title game. These schools include Oklahoma, USC, LSU, and Florida, with USC, LSU, and Florida having won multiple National Championships. A final reason why Boise State should not be number one is because of the conference in which they play. They are a part of the Western Athletic Conference, or the WAC for short. The level of competition in the WAC pales in comparison to that in the conferences that other teams in this list belong to such as the SEC, Big 12, and Pac 10.

I would like to conclude by proposing my own list of the top college football programs of the decade. The list goes as follows:
10-Boise State
9-Georgia
8-Michigan
7-Miami
6-Ohio State
5-Texas
4-Oklahoma
3-Florida
2-LSU
1-USC
My list is based off of several criteria. First and perhaps most importantly, is the consistency of the football program. This is why I have USC as number one on my list. They have, in my opinion, been the most consistently great team of the decade. Second is the number and quality of bowl games played in by a given team, including National Championships. This is why I have LSU and Florida very high on my list, as they both won two National Championships in the decade. Lastly was the level of competition played against. This is why I have only one team on my list, number 10 Boise State, which belongs to a non-BCS conference. I believe that my list helps to prove that a much more accurate list of the top college football teams of the decade can be made by looking at more than just winning percentage.

Lehigh Wrestling

This past Saturday, November 13, I decided to go to the wrestling meet between #17 Lehigh and #15 Penn State. I wanted to go to this meet because I knew that the teams were closely ranked, so it was bound to be a competitive match. Having never been to a wrestling meet before, I wasn’t sure what to expect. However, after my experience at this match, it is now safe to say that I am a fan of the sport.

When I first arrived at Stabler Arena, the place was mobbed. Despite this, my friends and I were able to sit matside for the meet. The seats were amazing, as we were literally only feet away from the outside of the boundary line of the wrestling circle. Adding to the atmosphere was the fact that most of the Lehigh fans in attendance were wearing white. This “white-out” was a mockery of Penn State’s tradition of “whiting-out” sporting events in support of their team. I have to admit I thought it was awesome to see the Lehigh fans unite in that way. The total crowd in attendance numbered approximately 5,250 people, the second largest attendance in the arena’s history. With that many people in crowd, you can imagine how loud it was in the place. I was extremely impressed by how knowledgeable the fans were about the sport of wrestling. I heard fans talking in great detail about the matches as they were in progress, mentioning words that would soon become familiar to me such as shoot and sprawl. Going into the first match I had no idea of how the scoring system in wrestling worked, but based on the crowd cheering it was very easy to catch on. I soon learned that a wrestler scored two points for a takedown, one point for an escape, and so on. A final thing that impressed me at the wrestling match was the respect that the athletes showed each other. Before and after every match, the two combatants shook hands. It was obvious that the respect went far beyond the symbolism of the handshake. For example, when one wrestler was losing his headgear or was accidentally poked in the eye, the other wrestler would allow him to recover instead of taking advantage of the situation, without even being prompted to do so by the referee. To me this spoke volumes about the sport of wrestling and what it is all about.

Prior to Saturday I had no real knowledge about the sport of wrestling. However, after attending this one meet, I have now become a fan of the sport, and I look forward to attending many more matches in the future.

Boxing vs. Mixed Martial Arts

Prior to the last 10 years, boxing has been considered the world’s premier combat sport. From the days of the 1940’s with stars such as Jake Lamotta and Willie Pep to the 80’s with the likes of Sugar Ray Leonard and Marvelous Marvin Hagler, boxing has always been the most watched and talked about combat sport. However, within the past 10 years, boxing’s popularity has been surpassed by a new monster know as Mixed Martial Arts (MMA). Mixed Martial Arts has gained the edge on boxing due to the quality and quantity of fights, as well as the superior promotion of the sport.

Over the long and storied history of boxing, one constant has always been quality fights. Boxing’s superstars have seemingly never been afraid to fight each other. A great example of this is Jake Lamotta and Sugar Ray Robinsons’ epic rivalry from 1942 to 1951, during which time the fighters met an unprecedented six times. Despite the fact that Robinson won a remarkable five out of six of these bouts, neither he nor Lamotta ever backed down from each other. This is one thing that the sport of boxing is dearly lacking today; great fighters who are not only willing, but eager to fight other great fighters. Floyd Mayweather, Jr. arguably the number one pound-for-pound boxer in the world today, is as guilty as anybody of this. Mayweather has been rightfully criticized by many for handpicking his opponents and avoiding any fighter who poses a legitimate threat to him. A perfect example of this was seen recently when he chose to fight Juan Manuel Marquez. Despite the fact that Marquez was considered by many as a top five pound-for-pound fighter, he had never competed above the lightweight limit of 135 pounds. Mayweather was used to welterweight class of 147 pounds and is a natural for that division. The fight between Mayweather and Marquez was a catch weight bout originally to take place at 144 pounds, but eventually occurred at a limit of 146 pounds because of Mayweather failing to make the original limit. From the opening bell it was evident that Marquez did not belong in the same ring as Mayweather. The additional eleven pounds was just too much for Marquez to overcome, as Mayweather easily earned a unanimous decision. Instead of taking the fight against Marquez who had to rise up two weight classes, Mayweather could have chose to fight someone who is also a natural welterweight, like Shane Mosley or Paul Williams.

The sport of Mixed Martial Arts has none of these problems. In Mixed Martial Arts, the best of each weight class routinely fight each other. A great example of a fighter who embodies the willingness to fight anyone at anytime is Chuck Liddell, who is commonly referred to as “The Iceman.” Liddell has never ducked anyone in his career, quite a contrast to someone like Floyd Mayweather, Jr. Liddell has fought a “who’s who” list of fighters such as Quinton Jackson, Randy Couture, Vitor Belfort, Tito Ortiz, and Wanderlei Silva, just to name a few. Another reason why MMA has seen a rise in popularity over boxing is due to the higher number of times its superstars fight. In boxing it is typical for stars to only fight twice per year. In Mixed Martial Arts it is common for a superstar to fight three times a year. For example since 2002 Mayweather has only fought three times a year once, while Liddell has done it four times. While this may not seem like a significant number, it is. This means that the fans have more opportunities to see MMA fighters fight in the prime of their careers, which helps to boost Mixed Martial Arts’ popularity as a whole. Yet another reason why MMA has dominated boxing over the past few years is the superior promotion of Mixed Martial Arts cards over boxing cards. The Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) is the premier MMA organization and is a great example of MMA’s superior promotion. In general, the UFC holds one pay-per-view card per month. This gives the viewers many opportunities over the course of the year to watch their favorite fighters and to get to know the up and coming fighters of tomorrow. The quality of the pay-per-view cards is also very important. UFC cards typically have five fights if there is no championship bout, and four if there is one. There are also many great fighters and recognizable names on the undercard bouts. Compare that to boxing, where pay-per-view events are scattered throughout the year, and don’t provide undercards worth watching. It is easy to see that you get more bang for your buck with MMA. A final comment about promotion is that MMA greatly benefits from having agreements with network and cable television channels such as CBS and Spike TV. Strikeforce, another MMA organization, broadcast a free event on CBS on November 7, 2009. This event featured Fedor Emelianenko who is considered to be the one of the greatest MMA fighters of all time. This could never happen in boxing, as all of the events featuring superstars are either on premium channels such as HBO and Showtime, or pay-per-view.

In conclusion, Mixed Martial Arts has taken over boxing as the world’s most popular combat sport. They have achieved this success through a combination of superior promotion and visibility. However, boxing has also contributed to MMA’s rise due to its lack of big time fights. If boxing ever wants to be on top again it should look to not only it’s storied past, but also to what MMA is doing right now as firm examples of how to succeed.

The Bank Job

One of my favorite movies set in another time and location is The Bank Job. The Bank Job was released in 2007, but the setting was 1971 in London, England. The movie depicts the infamous 1971 Baker Street robbery in which small-time thieves managed to pull off one of the biggest bank heists in history, walking away with £1.5 million cash and £3m overall. The setting of this movie is very well done, and helps to make the plot and thus the movie very believable.
All aspects of the setting in The Bank Job are well done, and greatly help to immerse the audience into the movie. One example of how the setting helps to engross the audience in the movie occurs during the scene where the London Police are frantically trying to figure out which bank is being robbed. In this scene, the viewer gets to see the streets of London, which accurately reflect the era that is being portrayed. There is an authentic feel of the period in the scenery details, from the clothing style to the automobiles, which are representative of London during the 1970’s. Despite its general accuracy the fashion also has a modern twist to it. Some of the suits worn by the government agents in the movie look very contemporary, and up to today’s style, not the 1970’s. Another example of how the viewer is immersed into the movie lies within the actors' depiction of the characters’ attributes, such as tone of voice, inflection and intonation. It seems obvious, but a good accent can make or break a movie’s credibility; and the accents in The Bank Job were done perfectly.
Although it is true that many movies may give a good general overview of a place and time period, it is the subtle details that can leave one misinformed. Many directors of movies are more concerned with taking creative liberties and entertaining their audiences than they are with being 100 percent accurate to the details of a time period. If one wants to gain a basic understanding of a certain time and place, movies aren’t a bad place to start. However subtle inaccuracies, like the aforementioned, are why I believe that movies are not a very good way to learn the true particulars of a time period.