Undercover Lover

As in, there is "undercover" and then there is "Which way is up?"

Long before this little experiment was ever even considered, I had always had issues as a fan.  Mainly with other fans.  After being inspired as a young lad by experiences with Hockey East rivalries, squaring off in tiny arenas, too cold to sit in, and too noisy to remain quiet within, I had always hoped for the best out of a crowd.  After all, we're here to spectate and enjoy the presentation of entertainment, not to chit chat resting on our cellulite sofas.  I mean, we're supposed to be a part of the action, right?  We can impact the game, right?  At the very least, we can enhance the experience, no?  We're already somewhat invested, so why not go all the way, losing yourself in a symbiotic event?

They lose.  You lose.  They're still on the field.  You're still at the park.

Go on...

A Social Experiment

Ah, free hugs.  One of the new aged, hippie-revivalist practices of the Los Angeles strip, begging the questions, would you hug a stranger just for the fuck of it, or are you just a cheap bastard that takes anything they can get for free? 

Go on...

KG the Clown

Clowns are obvious caricatures.  They're supposed to look ridiculous because, well, that's the whole point.  They look ridiculous because it is intended to mirror their performance.  Pulling an endless thread of multi-colored fabric out of your mouth, piling into a car with your gay clown friends, and shooting water of the plastic flower attached to your lapel.  All of it is absurd, but the humor crime fits .  It's supposed to be ridiculous.

So what happens when absurd behavior doesn't fit?

Go on...

Hey, Have You Guys Heard?

There's a football game this coming Sunday!

Apparently, it's a pretty big deal.  But, what's that?  Oh, yeah I know, the commercials are always fun aren't they?!?

Wait, an abortion commercial?  That doesn't sound like much fun...

It certainly fucking isn't.

Hey, pass the cheetos and that bloody placenta juice, will you?  Cool.  Thanks, man. Mmmmmm... Delicious.

Go on...

Psychoanalytic Musings with Dr. b. Lee

On Confidence and the Cool; Pierce vs. Pacquiao

On Saturday night two victors walked off the stage and into their respective locker rooms. One with a scowl and the other with a smile. Performers have different ways of "getting up" for competition. They also have different dispositions during competition. Some people are all business; "doing their job" without even noticing the crowd and letting the ball, their fists, or their all-around play do the talking. Others use the crowd as a sort of weapon, wielding it against their opponent, while verbal jabs are hurled at opponents on and off the field of play.

Why is that athletes behave in either fashion? Some maintain a more reserved appearance while others visibly react to everything and seemingly need to add something extra to the game, whether it is in the form of talking trash or general theatrics. And is one approach better than the other? Is one more detrimental to the health of an individual competition or to the game at large? And is one approach more beneficial than the other, or in other words, is one approach "more fun"?

Prior to taking the ring in last Saturday's fight against Ricky Hatton, the cameras closed in on Manny Pacquio before he made his entrance. Typically a fighter will have a stern look of determination on their face prior to a bout, feeling the need to stay focused. However, when we see Pacquiao, he is grinning from ear to ear. It's as if he were about to take part in a parade rather than a boxing match. He was perfectly calm, serene even, yet ready, and apparently, absolutely confident.

Basketball players also seem to oscillate between these two extremes. Sometimes during the pre-game shoot around you see players stone-faced, getting mentally prepared for the game. Other times you can see players clowning around as if it were just another shoot around before practice, perhaps trying to work out the butterflies. But, rarely will you see the kind of "just happy to be here" look that we witnessed on the face on Pacquiao prior to the fight.

Normally, an argument would be, "Well, Sport A does not require the same kind of intensity and mental strength as a basketball game." But, in this case we're talking about boxing. If any sport required intensity, mental strength, and execution, boxing would most likely be at the extreme. However, Pacquiao seemed to rise above this. During the Pacquiao vs. Hatton 24/7 series, the majority of the barbs were slung from the Hatton camp. However, Pacquiao's side remained calm and relatively silent in the face of this assault. What is more, is that this onslaught did not seem to fire up Manny at all. There was no "bulletin board" material for Pacquiao, perhaps because he didn't want it. But probably because he didn't need it.

Maybe Pacquiao is just a transcendent figure, so wrapped up in his faith and his preparation that the outside world and his opponent do not even seem to exist prior to fight night. He doesn't need fodder or any extra motivation. He just needs to get himself ready.

Does such a figure exist in basketball? Or is basketball simply a different animal. Trash seems to be a part of basketball. You always need to get an edge on an opponent, one way or another, and mind games are a part of that. But, I do not think this plays as big of a role as some would like to believe. More often than not, the trash, or the histrionics appear to be more aimed at drawing positive attention to the actor, rather than negative attention to the actor's opponent. This hearkens back to a previous piece on the dispositions and tendencies of Kobe and TO.

Recall game 6 of the Bulls-Celtics series; Pierce starts to get warm in the 4th quarter; hitting back-to-back shots and putting the Celts up by 8 with under 4 minutes to go. As soon as he hits the latter of these shots, he turns to the Bulls bench and barks at them. Now, what competitive advantage is gained by such a tactic? Clearly not much, considering the fact that Chicago ended up winning the game. And more globally, how did this improve the game at all? Did it add more excitement to the game, or more "fun"?
Or was there a negative effect? Did Pierce lose concentration? By focusing on the yapdogs on Chicago's bench, did Pierce take his mind off the game, in turn helping Chicago recover and force the game into overtime? Of course, there is no way of knowing this, but it is difficult to see any benefit in jawing with people who are not even in the game to begin with. Sometimes of course a player needs fuel to get going. Someone from the crowd says something, maybe someone on the other team says something, and like a switch, the player starts performing. But again, this would also seem to argue against this whole concept of talking trash, for the opponent was aided by such a tactic.

Instead, maybe if Pierce kept his focus on the court, against his actual opponents, then maybe he bottles that fire, plays defense a little harder, and the Celts finish the series in 6, as opposed to 7 games. Or maybe, Pierce requires this release, either for his own personal need for attention, or perhaps because without this release he ends up committing a hard foul.

Or, perhaps basketball simply attracts this disposition; ostentatious athletes with a knack for theatrics in addition to making big shots. Basketball today is simply an outgrowth of its players, rather than an independent framework within which the players are forced to work. Talking trash isn't necessarily a part of the game (although Larry Bird and Michael Jordan were doing it in the 80's), but it has become one due to the nature of the games' actors. But this theory would seem too cookie-cutter, and would not take into account silent assassins such as the JZA.

Considering the history of boxing, the history of the pomp and circumstance, and the seeming necessity for boxers, their trainers, and promoters to talk and talk all the way up to fight night, Manny Pacquiao is surely an aberration. But, this cannot be considered a bad thing. If trash talk and promotions were all that mattered, then why would the fight even take place? People do not pay $50 to hear Don King speak, they do so to watch the fight.

The point is that in order to enjoy an event, trash talk and/or grandiose displays of selfishness are not necessary to the overall enjoyment level of the game. Sure, if Josh Smith threw down that between the legs dunk against the Heat, it would have been cool. Maybe the Heat even would have stepped up and not been so awful in game 7. There is no way of knowing. But one thing is for sure, no matter how much you talk, or dance, or scowl, it all comes down to execution, and execution stands on it's own. I'd rather watch Pacquiao smile his way in and out of the ring any day of the week, rather than watch a loser dance and jaw his way into the loss column.

Psychoanalytic Musings from Dr. b. Lee

On Respect; Comparing apples to apples, pt. 2

Some may charge that I'm kidding myself in comparing TO and KB. KB doesn't have the same problems with teammates as TO. But, did we forget about the whole Shaq debacle? Did you forget about what he said leading up to the 2007-8 season regarding his teammates and the team's owner? Does Kobe not "act out" on the court?

I would charge that the only difference between the two is their access to the limelight. KB gets the ball whenever he wants. Therefore, he doesn't need to whine about it… Because he would. TO on the other hand is subject to play-calling, route-running, the safety blitz, and the Cowboys shitty offensive line. These are constraints that KB does not know. If KB were only allowed to touch the ball on every 4th possession, how do you think he would respond? One can suspect that if this were the case, KB would be mailing it in a lot more often (than he already does).

But the substantive similarity is undeniable. These men are two of the best performers in their respective sports. However, they behave as if they were two up-and-comers that needed to separate themselves from the pack. Histrionics and masturbatory celebrations are not fun, they don’t add any additional entertainment value to the game, they certainly aren’t boosting any profiles, and don't you dare call them clever. They’re a cry for help from those who are emotionally underdeveloped and insatiably egocentric. These accessories to a player's “repertoire” only serve to detract from their legacy and from their standing in the eyes of the average fan.

So Kobe and Terrell I say unto you, keep it quiet, keep it cool, and just fucking relax. Then you'll realize and keep the respect. Even if you still don't think you're getting enough of it.

Psychoanalytic Musings with Dr. b. Lee

On respect; comparing apples to apples, pt. 1

There's a phenomenon that occurs to people who are highly visible to the public eye. Some cannot properly "handle" such a life, either due to our own perceptions (they're merely fuck ups, but we blame their being fuck ups on the fact that they're wealthy and famous) or just because the pressure is too great and they fold under it (like a star basketball player that can score 30 points a game, but misses the last two free throws which would clinch the game).

However, there are some highly recognizable figures, let's call them "athletes", that never seem to settle into their role properly. They never appear to be secure, there are frequent "issues" that emerge and seem to follow them wherever they go. The perfect example of this phenomenon is Terrell Owens. Terrell Owens is an extraordinary football player. Over the course of his 13 seasons in the NFL, he is averaging over 1,000 yards receiving per season, 10 touchdowns per season, and 14 new, irreconcilable relationships per season. Even at the ripe old age of 35 the man is still producing, and at the moment, due to his physical conditioning, he is showing no signs of slowing down. He essentially has the body of a 25 year old man, with the maturity of a 15 year old boy.

TO has arguably been the best wide receiver in football over the last decade. Everyone seems to know how great he is (as much as we hate to admit it). Even TO seems to know how great he is, which is why one would think he is always clamoring on the sidelines when he is not getting the ball thrown his way (I’m good! Fucking use it!). However, the only thing that TO doesn't seem to know, is that everyone already knows he is a great receiver. He appears to be so uncomfortable with his standing in the pantheon of wide receivers, that he feels the need to supplement his game, and the perception thereof, with his mouth. He catches a touchdown pass, which we may have even marveled at, and then performs some kind of "celebration" as if to say, "Look at me, I caught a touchdown pass!" Yes, honey, we all saw it, you did a great job. Now get off the field.

Everyone knows who TO is. Everyone knows how good he is.

So why does he always feel the need to act out? Does being an elite wide receiver in the NFL not get him the attention that he feels he deserves? If he didn't perform touchdown celebrations, or if he didn't call out his teammates and his coaches on the sideline or at press conferences, would he be considered a lesser player as a result? In reality, it seems the opposite is true. If he kept his mouth shut, if he left the clown nose in his locker, then I get the feeling the public would have even greater respect for him and appreciate his performance even more.

Another example of this phenomenon, although in what some might call a less "extreme" version, is Kobe Bryant. Kobe Bryant is arguably the best basketball player in the NBA at the moment, and could very easily be considered one of the 10 best players of all-time at the end of his career. KB (for the purpose of consistency) after winning 3 titles early in his career has seemingly struggled to step out of Shaq's enormous shadow simply because he has not won a title in LA's post-Shaq era.

Or has he? Was KB ever truly consumed by Shaq's shadow? Or was this just the machinations of the (“liberal fucking”) media? Or even worse, was this all made up in KB's head?

Today Shaq is merely a personality. More to be gawked at in public, than concerned about on the court (non-sense All-Star selection aside). KB is the show, even if he sometimes shares the stage with Lebron (LJ... shoot, LBJ?). He is a brilliant basketball player that can alter games all by himself. KB ultimately decides if the game is won or lost.

Everyone knows that KB has this ability. Everyone knows how good he is.

So after making a big shot why does he give us the "Elephant" dance? After a win, why does he pop his shirt at the opposing fans? Yes, sweetie, we know you can make big shots and that you play for the Lakers. Now get off the floor before you are assaulted by the recently bankrupt gentleman in Row G.

Wouldn't we be more impressed if after making a game-changing shot, if KB just jogged down the floor, straight-faced and cool? Or if after a win in hostile territory, he simply strolled off the floor with a deep calm in his eyes? I don’t know, maybe as if just to say, “I know. Now you do, too.“