Monday, February 09, 2009

Why steroids prove MLB is better than the NFL

I'm not surprised by the reaction to A-Rod (no I'm not going to link to any A-Rod stories because you know what the hell I'm talking about). Dave Cameron has developed a new metric for the absurd reactions of the media, and he's absolutely right. The sports media is what it is. Much like anything with the media nowadays, it's not about reporting the news, it's about being obnoxious. So, it's pretty much par for the course that this A-Rod thing would be the end of the world.

But, every time this steroids stuff gets brought up, I think about how baseball is treated differently. People proclaim that they're done with baseball. (By the way, google is great.) Or that football is America's new pasttime. Really? What about Shawne Merriman? Or entire Super Bowl teams? Or the great football dynasties? Why does football get a free pass?

I'll tell you why. Because baseball is better. People get up in arms over this because baseball is more interesting than football. Scandals like this are part of baseball's fabric. Baseball is interesting. The stadiums are all different. Guys like Jim Bottomley and Mark Whiten have major records. The championship clinching game takes three days. There are all sorts of interesting stats.

The NFL? Sure, it's okay. I love the Seahawks and watch every Sunday. But it's robotic, corporate, and antiseptic (no I don't really know what made choose antiseptic but something seems right about that word). And it's just not as interesting as baseball. (For what it's worth, this is also why I think college football is better than the NFL).

So when people say they are done with baseball, I say good. Go away. I'll still love the game because this is what is. It's not perfect. It's a screwy sport and I like it that way.

In other words...yay steroids!!

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.