"I'm not into comparing and contrasting," Wade said. "Coop's a great baseball man, but things got rough from a win-loss standpoint last year. We're facing forward at this point and building off the strengths that Millsy brings to the table." (Emphasis Added)
Taken from a recent article on the Astros new manager, Brad Mills, this quote exemplifies a distressing trend in major league baseball: the need to add "y" onto everything.
Millsy? Are you kidding me? I can't even say that word out loud without feeling ridiculous. The guys name is Brad. Or Mills. Or Mr. Mills. It isn't "Millsy".
In the immortal words of Gob Bluth: "Come on!"
In other news... The Saints won the Super Bowl. Good for Drew Brees. Though this does mean I am going to have to endure ten more years of explaining to people why Peyton Manning is the greatest quarterback to ever play, as opposed to them simply admitting this. Alas. Of course, argumentatively convincing someone of a sports-related factoid is one of my strong-suits, so... I guess this could be a hidden boon. (Are "boon" and "bane" related in any way? They should be, even if they aren't. They mean almost the opposite thing and they sound eerily similar.)
Only a week until pitchers and catchers report. I'm salivating.
~The Sports Maunderer~
Friday, February 12, 2010
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
The Worst Nicknames Ever
This is pretty simple. Clearly the Red Sox are badly named (why would we want images of sweaty, stinky socks to come to mind when thinking of a team), and clearly the Yankees are elegantly, felicitously named. But who has the worst nickname of all? After much (or a bit less than much) careful consideration, I have determined there are only a few candidates. And the winner (of the worst) is nigh indisputable.
5. White Sox/ Red Sox. This isn’t even a bias. I mean, I would find a way to get the Red Sox on here if it weren’t so painfully easy, but it was and is painfully easy. Who, on what day, in what city, at what hour, thought to themselves: “let’s name our team after socks!”
Socks.
4. Steelers. Naming your sports team after you city’s predominant occupation is silly enough (I’m looking at you Brewers… if that is your real predominant occupation…) Not thinking about the days when it no longer would be the predominant occupation, and in fact is doing nothing but holding back the image of a city that is well past its lung-choking days of industry and non-stop polluting machinations—also very dumb. But trying to turn a piece of metal into a verb? This is like naming a San Jose team the Siliconers. This is like naming a team from an area with lots of vineyards, the Winers. This is like naming a team from St. Louis (home to an Anheuser-Busch factory) the Beerers.
The Beerers.
3. Jazz. This name would be a spectacular one, if it were still where it belonged. In New Orleans. In Utah, it makes as much sense as a Latin Vulgate at a King James Only Convention. (As an aside, this name would quickly have become inane for New Orleans as well if they changed it to the “Jazzers.”) But instead, we have the Hornets in New Orleans. Which makes so much sense, because when I think of New Orleans, I think of Hornets.
2. Just leaving this spot open because no other name could possibly come close to the idiocy of the final name. The final name combines the hideous aspects of all the other names on here.
1. Lakers. First off, it tries to turn a noun into a verb again, where it just doesn’t work. (Laker? LAKER?! What in Tanzania is a “laker”?) Second, why, when playing basketball, would you want to be thinking of lakes? Or water, in general? Having played basketball, I can tell you, thinking of water makes you want to go get water. But lastly, and most importantly:
Anyone who has ever 1) been to Los Angeles, 2) Seen Chinatown or 3) looked at a map, knows this: Los Angeles is in the middle of a freaking desert. They made an entire movie about the fact that Los Angeles is in the middle of a freaking desert. Maps will attest to the fact that Los Angeles is in the middle of a freaking desert. There aren’t lakes anywhere nearby. The closest thing they have to a lake is the cavernous depths of Kobe Bryant’s ego, but that isn’t filled by water, it is filled with self-absorption, Nike shoes, and puppets of himself.
I’ll admit, the puppets are funny. But they don’t have a clue what a “laker” is, either.
~The Sports Maunderer~
5. White Sox/ Red Sox. This isn’t even a bias. I mean, I would find a way to get the Red Sox on here if it weren’t so painfully easy, but it was and is painfully easy. Who, on what day, in what city, at what hour, thought to themselves: “let’s name our team after socks!”
Socks.
4. Steelers. Naming your sports team after you city’s predominant occupation is silly enough (I’m looking at you Brewers… if that is your real predominant occupation…) Not thinking about the days when it no longer would be the predominant occupation, and in fact is doing nothing but holding back the image of a city that is well past its lung-choking days of industry and non-stop polluting machinations—also very dumb. But trying to turn a piece of metal into a verb? This is like naming a San Jose team the Siliconers. This is like naming a team from an area with lots of vineyards, the Winers. This is like naming a team from St. Louis (home to an Anheuser-Busch factory) the Beerers.
The Beerers.
3. Jazz. This name would be a spectacular one, if it were still where it belonged. In New Orleans. In Utah, it makes as much sense as a Latin Vulgate at a King James Only Convention. (As an aside, this name would quickly have become inane for New Orleans as well if they changed it to the “Jazzers.”) But instead, we have the Hornets in New Orleans. Which makes so much sense, because when I think of New Orleans, I think of Hornets.
2. Just leaving this spot open because no other name could possibly come close to the idiocy of the final name. The final name combines the hideous aspects of all the other names on here.
1. Lakers. First off, it tries to turn a noun into a verb again, where it just doesn’t work. (Laker? LAKER?! What in Tanzania is a “laker”?) Second, why, when playing basketball, would you want to be thinking of lakes? Or water, in general? Having played basketball, I can tell you, thinking of water makes you want to go get water. But lastly, and most importantly:
Anyone who has ever 1) been to Los Angeles, 2) Seen Chinatown or 3) looked at a map, knows this: Los Angeles is in the middle of a freaking desert. They made an entire movie about the fact that Los Angeles is in the middle of a freaking desert. Maps will attest to the fact that Los Angeles is in the middle of a freaking desert. There aren’t lakes anywhere nearby. The closest thing they have to a lake is the cavernous depths of Kobe Bryant’s ego, but that isn’t filled by water, it is filled with self-absorption, Nike shoes, and puppets of himself.
I’ll admit, the puppets are funny. But they don’t have a clue what a “laker” is, either.
~The Sports Maunderer~
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)