This is a column I never expected to write. Even as recently as a few months ago, the chances of me saying a single nice thing about Rafael Nadal were about the same as me writing a two-part WNBA Finals preview. It wasn’t happening.

You see, I’m a Roger Federer guy. He’s the one who brought me back to tennis after I stopped paying attention about a decade ago, and the one who has kept me watching since. I owe my livelihood as a tennis fan to him.

And for all the number of reasons I've grown to love Federer these last couple years, there are the same number of reasons to loathe Nadal. 

Federer is quiet. Nadal is loud. Federer is calm. Nadal is emotional. Federer is graceful. Nadal is big, bulky and powerful. Simply put, Nadal is everything Federer is not. So to me, rooting for Nadal these last couple years would've been like rooting for the Joker to overtake Batman in the Dark Knight: Not only would it never happen, I’d just feel wrong doing it.

Which was why Monday night was so strange.

Because after spending the last two weeks watching Nadal dominate the U.S. Open like an oversized Little Leaguer, I couldn’t help but have a newfound appreciation for the guy. He might still be everything that Federer's not, but they do have one big thing in common. They're both phenomenal tennis players. And as crazy as it sounds, I’ve kinda grown to like him.

(To follow Aaron on Twitter please click here)

Of course like any other tennis fan, I was still hoping that Nadal would have to go through Federer to get his U.S. Open title. It was nothing personal against Novak Djokovic, but there was something symbolic about a Federer-Nadal final.

For one, it’s never happened in the U.S. Open. Sure we’ve seen it in Australia, Paris and at Wimbledon, not to mention a million other tour stops worldwide. But there was something special about the thought of it happening to end the season, in New York, at the U.S. Open.

More importantly though, it was about history. 

Nadal may have already supplanted Federer as No. 1 in the world a few months ago, but it seemed only right that he have to go through his biggest rival to get the career Grand Slam. If Nadal won, it would have been a literal passing of the torch, almost like tennis' organic way of saying, "Rafael Nadal is the best player alive. Period." 

And of course if Roger could’ve somehow pulled off a win, well there wouldn't be a better story in recent tennis history. Yes Federer is the greatest player of the modern era (and maybe any era), but there's no doubt his biological tennis clock is ticking. Because of that, how cool would it have been to see Federer beat Nadal to claim maybe his last Grand Slam title? Disney could’ve even started production on the movie tomorrow.

Instead, we were left with a Novak Djokovic-Nadal final that was nice, but was still a little bit of a buzz kill. Not terrible, but not what we were expecting. Almost like when you go on a really awesome date with a girl, and think you’ll be going upstairs at the end of the night, only to be stopped by her at the front door. Yes the date was nice, but you were this close to something even better. That's how Monday night felt.

In the end though, we were still lucky enough to see something special. Djokovic-Nadal may not have had the name cache that Federer-Nadal would have had. But I doubt that the match could have been any better regardless of who was playing.

For Djokovic, this was a coming out party of his own. To the casual fan, Djokovic has always good, occasionally great, and definitely the third best player in the world. But he's never been quite done enough to get mentioned in the same breath as Federer and Nadal. His reputation was that of a phyically strong, but mentally weak player, a guy melted down when conditions (weather, injuries, whatever), weren’t ideal. After all, there’s a reason that Andy Roddick once said of Novak, “He’s either quick to call the trainer, or the most courageous man of all-time. I think it’s up to you guys to decide.”

Well whatever Novak was, he isn’t now.

It started in his opening round match, when he was down two sets to one, and playing in conditions that could best be described as “hotter than the core of the Earth.” I don’t think I’m the only one who thought he’d lose that day. Instead he battled back, won the final two sets, and it seemed like he was on a free roll since. 

Saturday’s semifinal win over Federer shut up the doubters for good. Believe me, I turned off football Saturday afternoon to watch the whole thing, and that never happens. But Djokovic-Federer demanded it, as Novak came back from down 5-4 in the fifth set for the stunning win. All these days later, I’m still not sure exactly how it happened, but it was incredible to watch. Nobody handed Novak a spot in Monday’s final. He earned it.

And in that final, he was outstanding.

Even though his energy was still tapped from Saturday afternoon, he played his heart out. He broke Nadal’s serve more times than the rest of the field had combined over the last two weeks, and even became the only player all tournament to take a set off him. Djokovic may not have won on Monday night, but he played as well- if not better- than anyone expected him to. Even when accepting the runner-up trophy, it was almost like Novak was at peace with himself. He seemed to have a confidence that I've never seen from him, like he knew that he'd played his absolute best tennis and just ran into a better player. I'm convinced that if Djokovic had played anyone but Nadal Monday night, he would’ve won.

As for Nadal, well it was hard not to fall for his game these last two weeks. And if not fall for it, at least grow to appreciate it.

Everybody talks about his serve being the big difference in New York, and with good reason, he’s never hit it harder. But truthfully, it wasn’t just a big serve. You don’t drop one set over the course of seven matches because of a big serve.

Beyond just his pure tennis skill, my newfound appreciation for Nadal lies in his spirit. I know that sounds like a cheesy line out of a bad sports movie, but I’m being serious. I watched more tennis these last two weeks than I have in a long time, and Nadal didn’t win just because he was the best player, but because he  justwanted it more than everyone else. Nobody plays harder. Nobody kills themselves on every single point like he does. Nadal is like Kobe Bryant in the sense that his will to win overrides everything else. He only wants to beat you. That's it. And at the very least, he gives the fans their money’s worth every time he steps on the court. What more can you ask for from an athlete than that?

Yet beyond that skill and spirit, it seemed like to me, Nadal’s biggest stride was in his off the court demeanor. Maybe it’s because he’s never won this tournament before. Or that he entered the tournament as the No. 1 seed. Or that New Yorkers just came to appreciate him this year like they hadn't previously. Or that he's more comfortable in front of the cameras. Or something as simple as that he just speaks English better. I don’t know. Whatever it was, Nadal just seemed more likeable this year than he ever has been in the past. 

(After his semifinal win on Saturday, Nadal made a comment about remembering and respecting those lost in the September 11 tragedy. That's what put it over the top for me. It was totally unexpected, and seemed totally from the heart. I don't care what he acts like on the court. The guy is a class act.)

Going forward, it’s no doubt that tennis is Nadal’s sport now. 

He’s done it in all four majors, and on all three court surfaces. On Monday, he became the first male since Rod Laver in 1969 to win three straight Grand Slam tournaments in a calendar year. Not too shabby.

(Granted, I still stand by the fact that Federer's 2006 and 2007 season's, when he won three majors and lost in the final of the French to Nadal- maybe the greatest clay court player ever- were better than what Nadal accomplished this year.

What? I’m a homer, what can I say. Still, that’s another conversation for another day.)

Most importantly though, Rafa has wised up. He doesn't kill himself for 12 straight months now, but instead has limited his schedule to stay healthy, and focus on the Grand Slam's. To his credit, Nadal finally figured out that he’ll be judged by how he performs in four tournaments a year, and while it’s nice to win others, they ultimately don’t matter. That’s as a big a reason as any why he won his U.S. Open this year. He just wasn't broken down like he usually is by the end of August. And it’s as big a reason as any, why I think he’ll get pretty close to Federer’s mark of 16 Grand Slam titles eventually.

Regardless, I said this on Twitter after Wimbledon, and I’ll say it again now: These next 2-3 years are Rafael Nadal’s time in tennis. Djokovic will be there, and so will Andy Murray. Federer might still steal a match at times. And if Juan Martin Del Potro can come back healthy, he might be the only guy on tour that'll be able to out-power the powerful Nadal. 

But for the time being, Rafael Nadal is at the top of the game, and nobody is close to catching him. Monday night was just the beginning.

Personally, I'm just glad I wised up, and decided to sit back and actually enjoy it.

(Love the article? Hate it? Disagree with something Aaron said? Let him know by commenting below or e-mailing him at  This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .

Also, for updates on all his articles and podcasts, be sure to follow him on Twitter @Aaron_Torres,Facebook.com/AaronTorresSports and by downloading the AaronTorres-Sports APP for FREE for your iPhone or Android phone)

no comments

Calvin Johnson caught that football yesterday.  He went up, grabbed it with two hands, put the ball in one of his massive bear claws so that he could break his fall with his other massive bear claw.  He made sure to get both feet down.  Then his other hand hit the ground, then his rear end.  End of play.  Whether or not he dropped the ball after he made the catch is irrelevant.  The referee who was in perfect position to make the call put his hands up to signify touchdown just as he should.  Then the call was over-turned.  Then reviewed.  And the flawed overturned call was upheld by a flawed, ambiguous, contradictory rule:

If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

Calvin Johnson didn't lose control of the ball until the play was over.  The right call was made, then over-turned, then the faulty over-turning of the call was upheld.  Does that sound familiar?  It should.  Remember this?

That's Jimmy Howard stopping a Steve Ott shoot-out attempt.  The referee (the guy with his nose 6 inches from the net) made the correct call that the puck never crossed the line.  The other referee (the one who can't be seen in this frame because he's at least 50 feet away) over-turned the correct call made by the ref who was in perfect position.  The NHL then reviewed the play based on the flawed over-turning of the call and could not reverse the flawed call because the evidence was inconclusive.  Detroit loses the game.  The NHL got it wrong.

...Don't even get me started on the Brad May goal that was a goal but wasn't.

Just like the NFL got it wrong yesterday.  If that wasn't a touchdown catch by Calvin Johnson, then the RULE is to be blamed, not Calvin Johnson.  The only people who are saying "get over it, Detroit" are the people who know that we're right in complaining because we got screwed.  I have officially dubbed yesterday's play "the catch that wasn't a catch - even though it was a catch."

Just wait and see when they change that rule.

But at least the NHL isn't the only one blowing calls that cost Detroit games.

---UPDATED 9:00 AM---

And how could I forget about this little blown call recently by the MLB?

Call us whiners, the Tinfoil Hat Society, whatever you would like, but in the past 12 months we've lost...

1. An extra point in a shootout
2. A perfect game by a pitcher
3. A divisional football game

...all because of bad calls.

no comments

no comments

Tennis fans are on the verge of a U.S. Open final for the ages with both Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal one win away from reviving their Grand Slam rivalry. Tennis provides well-reasoned analysis of the game of tennis. In addition the site will share the mental perspective and coaching lessons needed to be successful in the sport. Visit Tennis Diary Federer must overcome a very difficult opponent in Novak Djokovic while Nadal needs to defeat Russian Mikhail Youzhny. Federer and Djokovic have met several times during their careers with the Swiss super-star holding a 10-5 advantage in their head-to-head battles. It seemed for a while in 2009 that Djokovic was gaining momentum in his encounters with Federer, but Roger has won three of their last four meetings, all of which came on hard courts. Remarkably this is the fourth year in a row that the pair has met in the late stages of the U.S. Open. In 2007 Federer beat Djokovic in the finals in straight sets, 7-6(4), 7-6(2), 6-4. In 2008 he took him down in four sets in the semi-finals by a score of 6-3, 5-7, 7-5, 6-2 and a year ago Roger won in three sets, 7-6(3), 7-5, 7-5. Both players are coming in with nice momentum, but the advantage is still tilted in Federer's favor. The world number two looked stellar in defeating Robin Soderling the other night and prior to that polished off Jurgen Melzer, Paul-Henri Mathieu, Andreas Beck and Brian Dabul without ever being pressured. Federer's stellar rebound since quarter-final loses at the French Open and Wimbledon has included the finals of the Masters 1000 event in Toronto and a victory in the following Masters tournament in Cincinnati. He has avenged both of his surprising Grand Slam loses to Tomas Berdych and Soderling in the past month and looks as confident as ever on the court. Djokovic represents a step up from all of those foes so Roger will have to be ready for a much bigger challenge. The Serbian has had an impressive run in New York as well, with wins over far tougher hard-court opponents in Gael Monfils, Mardy Fish, James Blake, Phillip Petzschner and Viktor Troicki. His first round battle with compatriot Troicki was the most difficult. In that match he was down two sets to one and a break in the fourth before mounting an impressive comeback. His victory against Mardy Fish is also quite remarkable given the fact that Fish has been one of the hottest players on tour all summer. Djokovic trounced the American 6-3, 6-4, 6-1. Roger's experience against Djokovic in key matches in New York gives him the edge in my opinion, although he will have his hands full no doubt. Djokovic is capable of pulling off the victory if he can keep  his cool and use smart shot selection which at times is a challenge for him in big matches. The other semi-final is a match that is harder to predict that most might think between Rafael Nadal and Mikhail Youhzny. The talented Russian is the most surprising of semi-finalists, although he did reach this stage of the tournament in 2006. Ranked 14th in the world at the moment, he holds an impressive 4-3 edge over Nadal in hard-court matches. The last time they squared off on this surface, Youzhny dusted the Spaniard off 6-0, 6-1 in 2008. Nadal has been playing his best tennis ever at the Open, as he has been tearing through opponents like Fernando Verdasco, Feliciano Lopez, Gilles Simon, Denis Istomin and Teymuraz Gabashvili without dropping a set. Having avoided being pushed in any of his matches clearly works to his advantage and bodes well for his chances against Youzhny. The Russian has been pushed in most of his matches yet has found a way to dig-out the difficult victories. To advance to this stage he has required a five set quarter-final against Stan Wawrinka, four set win against Tommy Robredo, four sets to take care of John Isner, four again versus Dudi Sela and his only three set win in the opening round against Andrey Golubev. In total he has spent 20 sets on court compared to only 15 for Nadal. How much does he have left in the tank? The dream final of Federer against Nadal would be the first time the two have played against each other on hard-courts since the Aussie Open final of 2009 that Nadal won in a dramatic five set match. It is virtually impossible to say what might happen this time if the two face each other on Sunday at Flushing Meadows. Regardless of who hoists the trophy, a collision between the two greatest tennis players of the last decade will provide the sport of tennis with yet another special moment that will certainly enthrall anyone who watches. Read more great tennis content at Tennis Diary

no comments

 

In the below NSFW video, Mayweather indulges in his trademark homophobia but adds some racism to it when talking about Manny Pacquiao, an Asian, making him a “sushi roll,” referring to eating “cats and dogs” and calling him “yellow.”

If Mayweather has any fans left after the last couple months, it would be hard to understand why. Some of his fans have tried to play up that he’s a good person, and that the villain thing is all an act. What I know is that he’s a convicted woman-beater who is also either A. an actual homophobe and racist (which would be ironic, given his accusations toward HBO and others of racism) or B. the kind of person who would use homophobic remarks and racist remarks to sell himself. Even if it’s B., what kind of good person does that? And besides, you’re still stuck with the woman-beater thing.

In recently discussing the nature of fandom, I allowed that someone could be a fan of a performer without being a fan of the person. Yet, Mayweather isn’t performing. He had a chance to fight Pacquiao in the biggest fight in decades, turned it down, and then goes on a despicable trash-talking rant toward the very person he’s apparently afraid to fight. He’s not even sure he wants to fight anymore, he said. If that’s the case, then all Mayweather is, to me, is a gifted former boxer who’s now merely a racist, homophobe woman-beater. Nothing to be a fan of there, either.

There’s another thing. Here we have one of the richest athletes in the world uttering racist, homophobic remarks, and it’s gotten nary a whiff of the kind of national repudiation you’d see if an NFL player said anything similar to what Mayweather did. There have been no demands for apologies. Maybe it’s because news of it just really surfaced yesterday? Maybe it’s because boxing is that irrelevant? Maybe it’s because people know Mayweather is so disreputable and so frequently phony that repudiating him it would be a waste of breath? Maybe boxing just doesn’t register as warranting any kind of outrage of that scope, since it’s the red light district of sports, no matter how big the boxer? Maybe it’s because boxing is the last segment of boxing fandom where tribal allegiances are tolerated?

I don’t know. But that’s my two cents worth of repudiation. I’d be interested in your thoughts. And this being Open Thread, I’d be interested in your thoughts on whatever else is on your mind.

To offset the horribleness of the video above, for this month’s music selection here are two of my favorite artists doing a sloppy, but fun, rendition of Black Sabbath’s “War Pigs.”

no comments

(Naazim Richardson was the only thing stopping Antonio Margarito from fighting Shane Mosley with loaded gloves. Richardson was not in Miguel Cotto’s corner when Cotto fought Margarito in the fight prior. Cotto looked like this after facing Margarito.)

To answer the headline, I could probably just say, “Antonio Margarito,” and about 90 percent of my work would be done.

However, in an affront to all good writers, I’ve always subscribed to the “why use one word when a thousand will do” school, so I thought I would expound.

 

I do not think Antonio Margarito should be fighting on November 13, not against Manny Pacquiao and not against anyone else. I do not think Margarito should ever fight professionally again.

Without intervention from Naazim Richardson, Shane Mosley’s trainer, Margarito would have fought at the Staples Center on January 24, 2009 with the elements of Plaster of Paris in his hand wraps. To date, nobody has successfully disputed this fact.

Until they do, any extraneous argument about this case is moot. Loaded gloves have no place in boxing.

Bob Arum, a repugnant but very intelligent man, does not dispute this fact. He does not even talk about this fact. Arum was a lawyer before he was a successful and disgraceful boxing promoter, and he knows how to frame an argument a lot better than most people in the sport.

So he doesn’t talk about what Margarito did wrong, which was wear loaded gloves with the intent of using them in a professional fight. He talks about what Margarito may or may not have *known*, which is subject to much more debate. Only Margarito knows what Margarito knew, at least until Philip K. Dick stories start coming true.

When the argument is framed this way, it’s hard to say what, exactly, Margarito knew about the situation. Manny Pacquiao said that he believes that Margarito had to know. Arum cites trainers who say they could slip a loaded pad into a glove without their fighters knowing.

This leads to a gray area, a point of debate, where Arum can dig in his heels and reframe the discussion away from the repulsive act Margarito attempted to commit and towards what Margarito did and did not know.

The problem is that Arum is a defense attorney without a prosecutor (except Karen Chappelle, and he doesn’t have to deal with her anymore, thanks to the so-appropriately-named Mr. Kuntz). Arum is the promoter for this fight, Arum is the primary source for too many half-assed writers, so Arum gets to dictate the terms of the argument. So we talk about what Margarito knew, and not what he did.

What Margarito knew was irrelevant. What Margarito did was the worst thing a fighter can do in boxing.

My position has not changed since Margarito’s indiscretion was revealed. Since then, fans, writers, and Arum and his crew have attacked my position. Tim has chronicled and refuted their attacks more thoroughly and more reasonably than I ever could. Regardless, they persist, and are seemingly drowning out the voices of protest.

If the majority in boxing, from promoters to fighters to fans, are more interested in fleecing the sport like bank robbers than improving the sport for its long-term health, I see little point in continuing to follow and cover and promote the sport like I have for the past few years.

The fact is, right now, I don’t like boxing. The Margarito situation makes plain everything I find repellant about the sport: the lack of central authority; the failure of the media to provide balanced and thoughtful coverage; the imbalanced power that allows promoters like Arum and Golden Boy and networks like HBO to run the sport like feudal lords; the sad but real willful ignorance of fans who would rather root for a flag than an honorable man; everything about the sport right now makes me want to throw up my hands and say, “Fuck it.”

Well, consider this the written equivalent of my throwing up my hands and saying, “Fuck it.”

For years, HBO, Top Rank, Golden Boy, and everyone else could rely on me to purchase each and every card they aired on pay-per-view; not anymore. They could count on me to go to fights in my area, often on my own dime, and provide detailed online coverage of cards of a variety of size and prominence; not anymore. They could expect me to check in on all the major boxing Web sites and anticipate upcoming fights and try to bug some of my non-boxing friends to check them out when I felt they were worth it; not anymore.

In return for the considerable time and money I have given this sport, I can cherish fond memories of incredible feats inside the ring that I’ve seen. I can also say, without a shred of doubt in my body, that boxing is far and away the most cynical, hateful, disgusting, mismanaged major professional sport that has any sort of following in the United States.

I’ve said it before, but I’ll say it again: Bud Selig would never, ever tell his fans to go fuck themselves. Nor would Roger Goodell or David Stern. Nor would Dana White. Only Bob Arum would do that. Only boxing would let a powerful figure express his absolute disregard for the wishes of his paying customers. Forget sports; no other minimally competent businessman would ever express such a sentiment about his or her paying customers.

Except in boxing.

That quote, in response to reporters asking Arum about matching up Yuriorkis Gamboa and Juan Manuel Lopez (you know, the kind of fight that would make me go out and tell my friends, “I know you guys don’t watch many fights, but you have to see this one,” also known as the kind of fight Arum is loathe to make), embodies everything that is literally repelling me from the sport. A rich, spoiled, selfish, temperamental egomaniac holds the fate of the sport in his hands. Anybody with any power to stop him can either be bought off or avoided. Can’t fight in California? We’ll fight in Texas. Can’t fight in the United States? We’ll fight in Mexico. It’s the shameful reality of a shameful sport.

I’m absolutely certain that this post will be met with scorn, derision, and heaping platefuls of sarcasm (apparently PacLand is bulging with refugees from Homerpalooza) in the comments. I welcome those responses. I’m sure that some boxing writers who may stumble upon this may either laugh condescendingly at my naiveté or angrily refute my claims. I welcome that too.

In the past month, I’ve moved into a new apartment. Our company softball team, which I play for and support with the type of insanity that used to mark my support for boxing, won its first championship, after several of the most exciting and fun games I have ever played in. I lucked out and got the first pick in my fantasy draft. I went with my Dad to the U.S. Open on Monday and lucked out again, as my favorite player, Andy Roddick, was featured on center court that day. I had a really, really good month.

Compare that to boxing, which only annoys, frustrates and outright enrages me these days. Even Ivan Calderon and Giovanni Segura’s Fight of the Year candidate was marred slightly by the shadow of Capetillo. Life is too short, and boxing is too cruel.

Not long ago, I wrote a blog entry about how boxing is broken, with numerous references to HBO’s The Wire. One line from that show serves as the perfect epitaph for my time on the fringes of boxing: “You cannot lose if you do not play.”

I’ve been playing and losing too long, boxing. It’s time for me to find a new game. Preferably one that does not treat its most ardent followers like worthless scum.

no comments

When Randy Couture easily submitted former multi-weight class boxing champion James Toney in the co-main event of UFC 118, MMA fans rejoiced at the perception that their sport bested boxing.  The problem is that there is blatant fallacy in such simplistic thinking.  Yet, none the less the build up to this fight was not that of two supremely gifted warriors on the tell end of their respective careers.  Rather, the UFC, along with fans, and some media outlets took this as a chance to trumpet the argument surrounding which sport is superior: boxing or MMA.

It’s a senseless argument given that the sports are completely different from each oher.  It’s not like an argument comparing the NFC to the AFC in professional football.  While there are some similarities in the basics of MMA with that of the techniques found in boxing, the sports’ similarities truly end there.  MMA is a sport comprised of various aspects of combative sports: boxing, kicks, wrestling, jiu-jitsu, et cetera.  Boxing is, well, boxing.  To compare the two would be like comparing a basketball player to a soccer player.  After all, those two sports are comprised of running and passing, right?

Sure, it’s silly to compare the sports of basketball and soccer against each other, but that type of improbable comparison is exactly what the debate between boxing and MMA is.  Boxing and MMA may both be combative sports; sports were you are allowed to pummel your opponent senseless.  But, just because a fighter is a boxer it does not mean that a transition into MMA would be smooth sailing.  James Toney proved that this past Saturday.  Likewise, an MMA fighter would struggle in the ring against skilled boxers.  The differences between the sports are so great that debating which is better is lesson in futility.

Look, the argument is simple, do you as an individual prefer boxing, or is MMA your type of thing. Both sports offer up fans distinctly unique experiences.  Personal preference is all that should be taken into consideration between the two sports.  Boxing versus MMA is an argument that needs to be put to rest.  The fact of the matter is that there is room in the world for both sports, neither is “better” than the other; it is as simple as that.

no comments

No doubt about it, Randy Couture vs James Toney is going to make the UFC some money at UFC 118.  The hype and buzz surrounding this match has even overshadowed the night's main event, Frankie Edgar vs B.J. Penn - Volume 2.  I hate to rain on everyone's parade, but the short-term benefits of Toney vs Couture are far outweighed by the long-term damage it could do to the sport.  So why is Randy Couture vs James Toney bad for the sport of mixed martial arts?  Let me count the ways:

 

1) Boxing vs MMA

Not surprisingly, Couture vs Toney has been billed as the be-all-and-end-all in the ongoing 'boxing  vs MMA' debate.  This is a very wrong, and very dangerous, assumption.  There are no mixed martial artists or boxers that represent their sport as a whole, especially not two fighters past their prime as Randy Couture and James Toney are.  Especially not a punch-drunk, flabby boxer with 83 pro fights under his belt (not to mention multiple failed steroid tests) or a 47-year-old mixed martial artist who hasn't beaten a top-rated opponent in over three years.  This matchup will settle nothing more than determining who is the best MMA fighter, Couture or Toney.

2) No-Win Situation

This is a no-win situation for MMA and for Randy Couture.  Couture HAS to beat James Toney, but when he does he won't be praised for it - he is supposed to win.  But, if somehow Toney figures out a way to beat Couture in the cage, the damage to the sport and Couture is immense.  Captain America's legacy is forever tarnished for losing to an out of shape, 42-year-old boxer making his MMA debut, and MMA will be deemed the redheaded stepchild to boxing.

3) Captain America Hangs Up His Cape

While it seems like the day will never come, Randy Couture eventually has to retire (doesn't he?!).  He is now 47-years-old and has been in the sport for 13 years.  As much as we all hate to admit it, Couture is very close to retirement.  So why waste precious time fighting a rookie like James Toney?  If we are to believe that Couture is still a legitimate contender for the UFC's light heavyweight crown, he shouldn't be wasting time with the James Toneys of the world.  He should be fighting other top contenders to see if he really can make another run to the top of the 205lb division.

4) 1993 All Over Again

Usually its a positive thing if something is labelled 'reto' or a 'throwback'.  That is not the case with Couture vs Toney.  It is retro and a throwback, but that definitely is not a good thing.  This match harkens back to the Stone Age period of MMA, back to UFC 1 in 1993.  Back in the days where matches were not much more than bar brawls.  Back where a tough guy off the street could enter the sport and have success.  Supposedly mixed martial arts has advanced significantly from its dark ages.  If so, then why is a guy who has never competed in the sport allowed to fight a legend like Randy Couture as a co-headliner on a major pay-per-view?  I have no problem with James Toney competing in the sport - I actually respect his courage for doing it - but he should have to work his way up, just like every other fighter.  It was bad enough when a guy fresh from a career in pro wrestling had the UFC Heavyweight Championship belt around his waist after his fourth fight - at least he had a stellar amateur wrestling career.  If mixed martial artists are to be respected as the hardworking, highly skilled professional athletes that they are, then allowing James Toney to co-headline an event just sends the wrong message to the masses.

5) This Is Not Japan

Randy Couture vs James Toney is nothing more than a gimmick fight; a circus sideshow.  These type of matches happen all the time in Japan or smaller organizations, but they don't happen in the UFC.  The UFC is supposed to be the 'major leagues' of MMA, where the best of the best go at it to determine the king of the hill.  What's next for the UFC - Jose Canseco vs Shaq?  Let's leave the freak show matches to our friends in the minor leagues and in the Far East.

This isn't to say I'm not interested in watching Couture vs Toney tomorrow night.  Here's hoping Couture makes quick work of him and Toney can disappear as quickly as he burst onto the scene.  I'm just saying that if Dana White plans on making MMA the biggest sport in the world in the next decade (like he claims), he should be looking at things long-term.  Then again, White comes off as more of a gambler than an investor, so this is par for the course.

no comments

California and Nevada decided Antonio Margarito hadn't learned enough from getting caught with loaded hand wraps before his 2009 fight with Shane Mosley. Texas, apparently, has no such qualms.

As predicted by those in the know, Texas granted Margarito a license today, ironically clearing the way for what will almost certainly be the biggest money fight of his career just a year and a half after the hand wrap controversy. That's because it will be against Manny Pacquiao in palatial Cowboys Stadium outside of Dallas on November 13.

Promoter Bob Arum had mentioned Las Vegas, Atlantic City and even Abu Dhabi as potential hosts for a Pacquiao-Margarito fight, but it was clear from early on that the site would be dependent on which state would be the first to grant Margarito a chance to fight again. The WBA light middleweight titleholder has fought just once since getting suspended following the Mosley fight, and that was in Mexico three months ago.

Though Nevada decided to punt on a decision to license Margarito and California barely even seemed to deliberate before denying him, Texas was equally quick to say he was okay to fight. Arum's smug confidence that his fighter would be good to go looks justified now, for better or worse.

So everyone wins: Margarito gets to fight again, Pacquiao has a chance to win another title in another weight class (however dubious) and Arum gets another event to put on in Cowboys Stadium - and without having to negotiate with another promoter. It remains to be seen if the fans will come around, since people haven't exactly been clamoring to see this match-up.

But in a year that has featured one of the least exciting boxing slates in recent memory, they just might.

no comments

Although this hasn't been 100% confirmed at this hour, it looks like Ballhype.com along with its sister site Showhype.com as well as Daily Radar have been shuttered by their parent company, Future US. Above is the screenshot of what you get when you try to reach all 3 of the sites.

Some bloggers are holding out hope that maybe the site has just been hacked but former Advisory Board member Alana G seems to confirm on Twitter that the site is done. I'll concentrate most of this blog on strictly BallHype opposed to the other properties that are being retired with them as my knowledge of the other properties is very scant.

The move seems to be oddly timed considering the return of football is a couple weeks away in addition to the fact that the site just underwent a redesign. Ballhype also seemed like a site that didn't need too much resources as the content and voting was all done by users and not editors. Most of the work behind the scenes I am guessing was on the technology front.

In the end there is no doubt in my mind that this decision was financially motivated. If you recall, Ballhype and Showhype were purchased for reportedly about $3 million in 2008 by Future US, which is primarily a niche magazine company. Some thought it would have been wise to holdout for a larger payday, but given BallHype was founded by a couple who had not raised any venture capital and the site had no revenue because they didn't have advertising programs, in retrospect it was a well timed exit. In the first 90 days after the acquisition the economy collapsed and I think its unlikely to think it could have garnered a higher valuation since.

For those unfamiliar with BallHype, it was essentially "Digg For Sports" an expression that was bestowed on them by many publications which also was thrown around in the early days of  my former employer, Yardbarker,  when their homepage had a similar community voting system. At its core, Ball Hype was a democratic way to promote content. If you thought you had great content, then depending on the subject matter and your ability to round up votes,  users could "hype" your content allowing it to be showcased higher on ballhype.com.

Some of my finest traffic days here at benkoo.com came with some help from Ballhype and a lot of the bloggers on Bloguin and guys I've worked with at Yardbarker were heavy users of the site, so it certainly is a sad day as many will lose this resource in their arsenal of ways to promote content.

I think the closing of Ballhype is especially tragic due to the fact that it was bought out and is now closing only a hair over 24 months later. A lot of hot startups break their backs trying to get an exit to a larger media company thinking it will allow them to continue to grow. The truth is many larger companies just don't have a good feel for operating a startup and often have cultural issues with the community or the niche area in which they are operating in. As more sports blog entities find their way to greener pastures like The 700 Level, The Basketball Jones, The Big Lead, etc, you have to keep your fingers crossed that those entities continue to thrive and that corporate politics and cost cutting don't lead to the demise of some this genre's biggest success stories which seems to be the case here.

Below are 5 Reasons Why Ball Hype Seems to be Done for Now

1- Decling Traffic and Community Shift

First and foremost, the site was slipping in terms of its significance. See charts below.

The chart above is the total amount of monthly visitors BallHype attracted. As you can see its been mostly in decline and clocks in at about 1/3 of its peak audience on October of just last year. While some of this may have just been seasonal declines, the chart seems to show that the audience is about half of where it was a year ago. Obviously this was probably a big part of the decision although nearly 800k unique visitors is still very significant and you'd think with the return of the football and other sports they'd be likely to get back to a million. Below is a look at the page views which paints a similar negative trend. Only averaging 2 page-views per visitor is also not an encouraging stat.

I think another item to mention in relation to this drop in traffic is that the effects are really felt in multiple ways. Less traffic means Ballhype can't send as much traffic to blogs that promote their content. Less outbound traffic means bloggers are less motivated to use the site.  With quality bloggers not using Ballhype and the decrease of traffic you also have not as many votes on the site meaning the content filtering is not as good. All of these issues are intertwined and probably helped lead to the death spiral. Also similar to Digg, many users complained that mainstream media entities like ESPN was getting a lot of the promotion when the initial appeal of the site was to help promote content away from major portals.

Another thing is that I believe Ballhype after the acquisition started even smaller niche sites covering things like Fantasy Sports on its on hype style website which only further fragmented their core audience.

2- Unappealing to Advertisors

Out of the aggregation sites, really only Digg has been successful from an advertising perspective. I can't recall what type of advertising programs BallHype had if any, but can attest that BallHype failed to garner a lot of buzz in the advertising world. Whether that was a failure on their advertising partners and sales team or aggregators are just unpopular as a whole, BallHype seemed to be stuck at a low level of revenue per page comparative to other emerging entities like SB Nation, Yardbarker, Bloguin, and Bleacher Report.

3- Other Sharing Options

Twitter's really blew up right around the time BallHype was acquired. Many in this business think Twitter is this biggest traffic driver for blogs and certainly it displaced Ballhype for many bloggers as their primary focus in terms of promotion. Facebook too has revamped their ability to connect users to external content (fan pages, like plugins) and with the usage of plugins and API's a lot of this ability to promote is done automatically and to a wider audience.

Meanwhile general plugins that allow you to promote via tools like Reddit, StumbleUpon, FanFeedr, and Twackle have also encroached on BallHype's turf over time. SI's Hot Clicks and Bleacher Report's Newsletters are also now very popular in terms of finding new content.  Essentially although promotion of sports content is a niche field, it got oversaturated very quickly.

4- They Couldn't Find a Buyer

I would think that Future US made some type of effort to gauge interest in a buyer. While 1.5 million page views is probably not enough to really excite a lot of companies, I do think BallHype is significant enough from a brand, technology, community, and traffic standpoint that it had value.

My guess is that either they wanted to pull the chord quickly and didn't bother to really investigate finding a buyer or more likely they couldn't find an entity who would really keep the site on a similar path the original vision of the founders.

5- The Internal Support Eroded

For any large acquisition, there is an internal champion. Someone who says "Let's do this" and attaches their name to the strategic move. That person has to mobilize support, capital, and plan out the post acquisition fit into the bigger company. Once the smoke clears, you have a smaller startup that is hopefully well assimilated in a larger company who understands its needs.

But all too often it goes the other way and the acquiring company grows skeptical of their new asset. Resources that are needed can be withheld, decisions can be vetod, and focus can drift to other areas of the business.

The fact that on the surface its pretty clear that BallHype was losing money, its relevance was eroding, and potentially a lot of people involved on the acquisition on both sides may have left the company as time went on ,was most likely the larger driving factor that got us here today.

Where Do We Go From Here?

There could still be hope for a BallHype relaunch either with Future US or maybe a buyer comes to the table because of the shutdown. That would be ideal imo, to have some really sharp folks who get the space to come in and roll up the sleeves to make it a viable entity and valuable asset to the blogosphere.

If not, its unclear if anyone will ever fill this void. Digg does have a sports area, Yardbarker used to have a competing voting system, and Twackle seems to be getting some level of traction, but to recapture the adoption, goodwill, and significance BallHype would likely be a very uphill battle.

Another thing to consider is that really BallHype was just democratically curated sports portal. While its a great concept, each sports fan can tap into many great bloggers daily link dumps/roundups as a lot of bloggers have shown great ability to find and promote great content from around the web.

In the end it didn't feel like someone pulling the plug but more like someone pulling the rug underneath a large amount of bloggers who had a connection with the site whether that connection was in the past or still alive. You have to wonder what Future US's expectations were for BallHype when they bought it and how much money they are really saving by making this move. I think its possible that similar to Family Guy, there may be enough community support to have the site make a comeback but at the same token its going to be a lot of work and an investment so this really could be the end of a historic cog in the rise of sports blogs.

RIP BallHype. Like all good things, you went too soon.

no comments