Do You Believe In Miracles? Not This Year

30 years ago, Lake Placid played host to the XIII Olympic Winter Games. During these Games, the United States hockey team stunned the world by defeating the Soviet Union in a quarterfinal game, 4-3, on their way to winning gold. The U.S. became the first Winter Olympic hockey team in over 20 years to claim gold that wasn't from Russia...in other words, the Soviets had dominated the sport. The was thought to be the most incredible victory in hockey Olympic history, and has remained so to this day. It became known as the Miracle on Ice, and Al Michaels's infamous quote "Do you believe in miracles? Yes!" has become legandary and a constant in any Winter Olympic coverage since that time.

Yesterday, February the 28th, 2010, 30 years after this incredible victory was another chance for United States to win an improbable gold medal. Yet their bid for more Olympic hockey glory was dashed this afternoon, when the United States lost to Canada 3-2 in overtime, as Sidney Crosby hit a quick shot past Ryan Miller that stunned all watching at home, all watching live, and the goalie himself.

Was it upsetting to see the United States lose in such a fashion? Well, it's never fun to see your home team lose whatsoever, so, yes. Was it expected that the United States would lose? It depends. Many people have bought into the run of victories that the American team had been putting together. I, however, thought differently, for a few reasons.

There is a reason I began this thought process by mentioning the United States defeating the Soviet Union. At the time, it was a true David and Goliath battle. The United States had been officially formed in the summer prior to the 1980 Winter Games. The Soviets had been destroying every single team throughout international play for years, seeing as there were very few players who actually had made the jump to the NHL; this all but ensured that their dominating players stayed together and played together for years, perfecting their teamwork and playing style.

Likewise, the Canadian Olympic hockey team was formed a mere months ago. Although the talent level was clearly superior to that of the United States team 30 years prior, they still had little time to prepare for these Olympic games together.

In 1980, the Soviets destroyed every team that they faced, through all international play and all qualification games in the Olympics. Their last exhibition game was a resounding 10-3 victory over the United States before the Olympics themselves. Russia looked to be the most complete and dominating team. This game proved to have a monumental impact weeks later.

In 2010, the United States defeated every team they faced with apparent ease during the Olympic preliminary round, including a 5-3 victory over Canada. Canada looked overmatched while the United States not only became the favorite for gold, but also the Number 1 seed for the playoffs. This game proved to have an outstanding impact mere days later.

In 1980, the United States won by a single goal on home ice. The Soviets looked crushed, the Americans overjoyed.

In 2010, Canada won by a single goal in home ice. Sidney Crosby couldn't look happier, as well as the entire see of red and white supporters that had come to see the game. The U.S. looked devastated, some even close to tears.

I've heard some people on NBC coverage try to claim that if the United States won, it would be another "winter miracle". The fact of the matter is that the United States winning would not have been a miracle: Canada winning would be a miracle. And they did. Canada, the country that has brought the most media to the sport, were victorious in what can only be considered one of the greatest finishes to a gold medal game.

Do you believe in miracles, eh?

"Testing, Testing, One, Two, Three"

Since it's inception, baseball free agency has been providing players, teams, and fans more heart attacks, more heart murmers, and more strokes neccessary in a single baseball offseason. As players debate how much they are "worth" (a.k.a. how much more money can they make then the last guy), team owners debate the exact same (a.k.a. how much money can I spend on a player that will give me just as much production at the same position for a better price).

This offseason is no different. One such story is with Johnny Damon, the former Savior and Benedict Arnold of the Red Sox, who now finds himself in a very odd situation.

Four seasons ago, Damon signed a flashy contract with the Yankees (hence, Jesus turned Judas...and yet the Red Sox fan within me has made me digress) because it was more money. The Red Sox signed Coco Crisp, a younger, faster version of Damon that was expected to provide just as much pop at the plate. Although Crisp is no longer with the Sox, it worked out for both teams, and all was well.

Now, four years older at the age of 36, Damon finds himself in a similar position, yet in a very different situation. Four years can do a lot to an athletes body, and Damon is no exception to this rule. Once known as a potent leadoff hitter who could steal 30 bases a season, Damon is now seen mostly as a leftfielder because he can no longer cover center, especially by the team that was hoping to sign him back for the 2010 season, the New York Yankees. Damon, hoping for a big payoff from his strong play during the World Series, wasn't going to get quite the amount of money he was looking for. When he signed with the Yankees after the 05 season, he got $52 million over four years, making $13 million in 2009. This offseason, he has asked for another $13 million for one year. The Yankees, however, are offering $18 million...for two years.

The issue is simple and could have been resolved months ago. Athletes such as Damon need to realize that they are not the Superman they once were when they entered the Majors. Their skills are slipping, and their kryptonite (age) grows stronger and stronger each day. If Damon were smart, we would take the pay cut, return to the defending World Series Champion Yankees, and continue to be viewed as a good player who didn't whine about how much money he makes. Instead, Damon is still jobless and $13 million poorer than what he could of been had he swallowed his pride.

Testing free agency is a very delicate matter that should not be fooled around with, like playing ball in the house. Well, Damon enjoyed playing ball in the house one too many times, and broke something; hope he enjoys the sweat he continues to produce as the season nears ever closer and all hopes of returning to the Yankees move farther and farther away.

Though I do hear Cincinnati is nice. They even plan on improving off of their fourth place finish last year in the Central Division too.

Some of Damon's latest work as he tries to convince himself he's worth $13 million: http://detroit.tigers.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=7112703

My Apologies, Mr. Peter King

As a Sports Journalist, as I would like to view myself, it is important to be modern, in-the-now, and of course, remain true to all aspects of unofficial journalistic law. One of the key laws of unofficial journalistic law is to never steal anyone else's work. Also, a very important modern part of sports journalism is to make yourself known through your work as well as your individuality.

With these two thoughts in mind, it has come to my attention while reading one of my more recently acquired Sports Illustrated's, I came across something that caught my eye; well, two things, to be exact. The first was a full page advertisement informing the readers that the highly dignified, highly educational, highly economicly savvy Swimsuit Edition would be hitting newstands next week (Feb. 9th to be exact, mark your calendars). The second was Peter King's "Things I Think I Think". Immediately, I thought, 'What a magnificent title! It's catchy, witty, and original!' Yet I had seen it somewhere before...exactly.

So, seeing as I am not good lying to a federal jury such as Rafael Palmeiro or Mark McGuire, I would like to come clean this very minute. Yes, I titled this blog Things I Think...I Think in the hopes that it would do everything that Peter King's blog did: attract readers with its wit and originality. Unfortunately, I pawned an idea off one of the greatest sports writing masterminds that this century has seen.

So, without further ado, I apologize Peter King. I had no cruel intentions of trying to steal your title, rather, I went too long without catching up on my Sports Illustrated, and could have paid severely for it in the future. I intend to change said-title to something just as witty and catchy and original...the second I think of something that fits that mold. Until then, I will leave said title, but please all you readers out there (that means you, Mom and Dad) do not get too attached for change is in the air...I think.

Blogs Vs. Real Websites

A blog is a wonderful thing. It is a place where one can put their personal feelings out there for the world to read on any topic at all...granted, not everyone is going to want to read what you have to say about any topic, but no one is stopping you.

A website is a wonderful thing. It is a place where you go to get actual legitimate information on any topic you want to, without one's biased opinion...unless, of course, you are reading an online column, but that's another story.

Two very different things, yet also oh so similar. So, which is worth your time?

Unless you wholeheartedly trust a blogger, your best bet is a website. People who write for websites are paid to put accurate information online to give the public the truth.

Unless, of course, you're reading my work, in which case it's always true...I think.