Follow This (or don't): @akeenan14
So before I go off on my point here which will be days late and rambling with no general point I have to start out with a little story.
I won my fantasy hockey league this year (more accurately, I won one of the leagues, second in another). This league actually pays real money. Now I can tell the wife that my hours spent looking over lineups and checking the stats is actually an investment.
Anyway, everyone is supposed to send me their dues - but one manager (who shall remain nameless, but he lives somewhere in the Gateway to the west and his team came in like 9th place) literally couldn't handle the thought of losing to me sent the money to my kids with the instructions that under no circumstance were they to give me that money, and they can spend it on whatever they want. I mean, come on, who brings the kids into it? I took that shit. I mean those kids didn't win that money, I did - screw this. Winning, it's what I do.
Also winning. The Blackhawks. Took care of business against the Wild. I kept hearing over the last couple of weeks how the Blackhawks haven't won a playoff series since they won the Stanley Cup. It was really starting to piss me off. First that is only two years - it's not like it's 10 or something. I mean maybe you can make that point once, but I was hearing it at every game. Second, they lost to the Canucks in seven games, in overtime in game 7, when the Canucks were the 1 seed; and then last year they lost to the Coyotes where 5 of the 6 games went to overtime and Mike Smith was standing on his head the whole series. This was not a team in crisis. But they took care of business this year. They'll either play the Sharks or the Red Wings in round 2 - and I have to say I think I'd rather see them play the Red Wings. First the rivalry is still awesome, and second they frighten me just a little less than the Sharks. Either way I'm expecting a tough series.
Finally, it's the end of Fergie time:
Come on, a much better picture than that red-nose little Scot.
So I'm a City fan. I couldn't stand him. I'm not going to sit here and write about all the wonderful attributes of Sir Alex Ferguson because that would be massively hypocritical of me (I know, I'm usually so comfortable with my hypocrisy).
Here's my take. I think Ferguson was a bully. Taken from my source for all literary insight here's the definition from urban dictionary (after a whole bunch of entries where people obviously still working through some issues):
And I think he used to try to bully other managers. That was one of the reasons I loved when Mancini stood up to him on their 'fight' last year.
I mean I never saw other managers really stand up to Fergie - there was always too much respect or intimidation or whatever. But way - I think Fergie used to try to play mind games with other managers, and I don't think any manager who actually played for Ferguson actually ever beat him: Bruce, Hughes, Strachen, Keane, Ince (however briefly) - their record against United is probably something like 0-325.
And while any United fan will talk about how Chelsea or City have bought titles, I think they should look a little closer in their own back yard, because United has always been a massive, if not the biggest in any given year, but always been one of the top spenders.
So yes, Chelsea and City have driven wages out of control, but you can see that Fergie has done what he's needed to to keep up almost guaranteeing wage inflation.
But still, even as hostile as I am about him. 13 league titles. And from 1990/91 when they finished 6th the lowest position they've ever finished in the table is 3rd, and they've only done that three times! I mean that's insane.
Yes, they've spent money to get there, but that's kind of like buying wine (holy shit, look at this random analogy). Spending a bunch of money on an expensive bottle of wine increases the likelihood that you're going to get a good to perhaps a great bottle - but that's no guarantee. You still have to know what you're buying, and have a little bit of luck that shit doesn't just get pear shaped (I love that term, and I don't even really know what it means).
So what I don't particularly care for Ferguson, you can't deny the impact he's had on the game and what he's been able to accomplish.
That, of course, got me thinking (always dangerous). From a professional sport perspective who could be considered the closest thing to Ferguson? I think if we went to the college ranks, whether it is Wooden or Bear Bryant you can find someone who has had both the tenure and the success that Ferguson has - but what about in the pro ranks? I think it would have to qualify on three different aspects. It would have to be tenure with the same team and an insane amount of success
My first thought was Jerry Sloan, who as it turned out played for the Bulls. I had no idea. But he took a Utah Jazz team, coached the team for something like 23 years and only missed the playoffs in three of those years. To be honest, I have no idea how Sloan is regarded in coaching circles, but I never hear a comparison between he or Phil Jackson or Red Auerbach or anything - but Sloan's accomplishments with the Jazz have to put him up there in the top five at least, right? I mean Jackson, Auerbach, maybe Riley and then who? But, of course, the one thing that Sloan lacked was the championships. It's a little not fair, because Ferguson often bought the best players, while Sloan never did - but Sloan never won a championship.
So that got me thinking about Scotty Bowman. I mean he's had the success. Holy crap has he had success. 9 Stanley Cups. Over two thousand wins. But he only stayed with teams for less than ten years. I mean I thought he was with both the Canadiens and the Red Wings forever (it at least seemed like he was with the Red Wings forever) - but it was only nine and ten years respectively. So trying to find an NHL coach who had both success and tenure I ended up landing on Jack Adams who also coached the Red Wings, but I actually don't know anything about him - so we're going to have to take a pass on that one.
Anyway, that finally landed me on the NFL. Doing as little research as possible and thinking only on who I thought might fall into the Ferguson-esque, I landed on either Chuck Noll, Tom Landry, and Don Shula. Then I actually bothered to look at the stats. Jesus these guys were giants in the game. Noll coached from 69 to 91 and led the Steelers to four Super Bowls, and coached the most dominate team in the 70s. Shula coached the Dolphins from 70 to 95, but only won 2 Super Bowls (only, that's funny) - but his winning percentage was an impressive .659 (compared to Noll's .566), so I think it's pretty clear that Shula has to trump Noll, even with Noll's four Super Bowls.
But in the end, I think I landed on Landry as the closest thing American sports have ever had to Sir Alex. I mean he coached from 1960 to 1998, and while he only won two Super Bowls as well - between 1966 and 1985 (20 years for those keeping score at home) the Cowboys only missed the playoffs two times. His overall winning percentage with the Cowboys is already an impressive .607, but he also took the Cowboys as an expansion team who were brutally bad the first five years, as, you know, he built a franchise that previously didn't exist.
If you look at his numbers from 1966 to '88 his winning percentage was .673.
So that's where I landed. I mean, sure - maybe Belichick gets there some day (currently has a winning percentage of .726 with the Pats), but he's only been with the Pats for 13 years - so he's still got a long way to go.
Needless to say when I started this - never would have guessed that's where I'd land.
So before I go off on my point here which will be days late and rambling with no general point I have to start out with a little story.
I won my fantasy hockey league this year (more accurately, I won one of the leagues, second in another). This league actually pays real money. Now I can tell the wife that my hours spent looking over lineups and checking the stats is actually an investment.
Anyway, everyone is supposed to send me their dues - but one manager (who shall remain nameless, but he lives somewhere in the Gateway to the west and his team came in like 9th place) literally couldn't handle the thought of losing to me sent the money to my kids with the instructions that under no circumstance were they to give me that money, and they can spend it on whatever they want. I mean, come on, who brings the kids into it? I took that shit. I mean those kids didn't win that money, I did - screw this. Winning, it's what I do.
Also winning. The Blackhawks. Took care of business against the Wild. I kept hearing over the last couple of weeks how the Blackhawks haven't won a playoff series since they won the Stanley Cup. It was really starting to piss me off. First that is only two years - it's not like it's 10 or something. I mean maybe you can make that point once, but I was hearing it at every game. Second, they lost to the Canucks in seven games, in overtime in game 7, when the Canucks were the 1 seed; and then last year they lost to the Coyotes where 5 of the 6 games went to overtime and Mike Smith was standing on his head the whole series. This was not a team in crisis. But they took care of business this year. They'll either play the Sharks or the Red Wings in round 2 - and I have to say I think I'd rather see them play the Red Wings. First the rivalry is still awesome, and second they frighten me just a little less than the Sharks. Either way I'm expecting a tough series.
Finally, it's the end of Fergie time:
Come on, a much better picture than that red-nose little Scot.
So I'm a City fan. I couldn't stand him. I'm not going to sit here and write about all the wonderful attributes of Sir Alex Ferguson because that would be massively hypocritical of me (I know, I'm usually so comfortable with my hypocrisy).
Here's my take. I think Ferguson was a bully. Taken from my source for all literary insight here's the definition from urban dictionary (after a whole bunch of entries where people obviously still working through some issues):
One who typically interacts with others, particularly those percieved as weaker or less powerful, by using tactics of fear and intimidation for the purpose of exercising undue, inappropriate and often arbitrary control over them. The word is derived from the word "bull", and that animal's generally agressive behavior.In a way that kind of describes Fergie. I mean first, I think he used to ride the shit out of the officials. And I think it worked. I think with as much success as he's had, and he kept jawing at the ref, and working the referees that on the margin, calls would go United's way. I have nothing to base that on other than what I would see in the games, and until Da Silva got sent off against Chelsea the other week, United didn't have a red card all season. Fergie time, however, which even I have complained about - does actually seem to exist. Sure, you could read that article and conclude that the extra time is just given to stronger teams when they happen to be losing - but I'm still saying its Fergie time.
And I think he used to try to bully other managers. That was one of the reasons I loved when Mancini stood up to him on their 'fight' last year.
I mean I never saw other managers really stand up to Fergie - there was always too much respect or intimidation or whatever. But way - I think Fergie used to try to play mind games with other managers, and I don't think any manager who actually played for Ferguson actually ever beat him: Bruce, Hughes, Strachen, Keane, Ince (however briefly) - their record against United is probably something like 0-325.
And while any United fan will talk about how Chelsea or City have bought titles, I think they should look a little closer in their own back yard, because United has always been a massive, if not the biggest in any given year, but always been one of the top spenders.
So yes, Chelsea and City have driven wages out of control, but you can see that Fergie has done what he's needed to to keep up almost guaranteeing wage inflation.
But still, even as hostile as I am about him. 13 league titles. And from 1990/91 when they finished 6th the lowest position they've ever finished in the table is 3rd, and they've only done that three times! I mean that's insane.
Yes, they've spent money to get there, but that's kind of like buying wine (holy shit, look at this random analogy). Spending a bunch of money on an expensive bottle of wine increases the likelihood that you're going to get a good to perhaps a great bottle - but that's no guarantee. You still have to know what you're buying, and have a little bit of luck that shit doesn't just get pear shaped (I love that term, and I don't even really know what it means).
So what I don't particularly care for Ferguson, you can't deny the impact he's had on the game and what he's been able to accomplish.
That, of course, got me thinking (always dangerous). From a professional sport perspective who could be considered the closest thing to Ferguson? I think if we went to the college ranks, whether it is Wooden or Bear Bryant you can find someone who has had both the tenure and the success that Ferguson has - but what about in the pro ranks? I think it would have to qualify on three different aspects. It would have to be tenure with the same team and an insane amount of success
My first thought was Jerry Sloan, who as it turned out played for the Bulls. I had no idea. But he took a Utah Jazz team, coached the team for something like 23 years and only missed the playoffs in three of those years. To be honest, I have no idea how Sloan is regarded in coaching circles, but I never hear a comparison between he or Phil Jackson or Red Auerbach or anything - but Sloan's accomplishments with the Jazz have to put him up there in the top five at least, right? I mean Jackson, Auerbach, maybe Riley and then who? But, of course, the one thing that Sloan lacked was the championships. It's a little not fair, because Ferguson often bought the best players, while Sloan never did - but Sloan never won a championship.
So that got me thinking about Scotty Bowman. I mean he's had the success. Holy crap has he had success. 9 Stanley Cups. Over two thousand wins. But he only stayed with teams for less than ten years. I mean I thought he was with both the Canadiens and the Red Wings forever (it at least seemed like he was with the Red Wings forever) - but it was only nine and ten years respectively. So trying to find an NHL coach who had both success and tenure I ended up landing on Jack Adams who also coached the Red Wings, but I actually don't know anything about him - so we're going to have to take a pass on that one.
Anyway, that finally landed me on the NFL. Doing as little research as possible and thinking only on who I thought might fall into the Ferguson-esque, I landed on either Chuck Noll, Tom Landry, and Don Shula. Then I actually bothered to look at the stats. Jesus these guys were giants in the game. Noll coached from 69 to 91 and led the Steelers to four Super Bowls, and coached the most dominate team in the 70s. Shula coached the Dolphins from 70 to 95, but only won 2 Super Bowls (only, that's funny) - but his winning percentage was an impressive .659 (compared to Noll's .566), so I think it's pretty clear that Shula has to trump Noll, even with Noll's four Super Bowls.
But in the end, I think I landed on Landry as the closest thing American sports have ever had to Sir Alex. I mean he coached from 1960 to 1998, and while he only won two Super Bowls as well - between 1966 and 1985 (20 years for those keeping score at home) the Cowboys only missed the playoffs two times. His overall winning percentage with the Cowboys is already an impressive .607, but he also took the Cowboys as an expansion team who were brutally bad the first five years, as, you know, he built a franchise that previously didn't exist.
If you look at his numbers from 1966 to '88 his winning percentage was .673.
So that's where I landed. I mean, sure - maybe Belichick gets there some day (currently has a winning percentage of .726 with the Pats), but he's only been with the Pats for 13 years - so he's still got a long way to go.
Needless to say when I started this - never would have guessed that's where I'd land.
