A Forgotten Saint?

This past weekend I found myself in Alabama for a club soccer showcase tournament. It put me out of my usual flow of the school week: study during the week, and enjoy a break on the weekend, concluding with taking Sunday off to watch football. A New York Times article about the forgotten Tim Tebow made me think about hagiography, a term I just recently learned in my high school course, American Studies. It is the writing of saints, and I think that Tebow can be viewed as a saint over the past year or so.

Tebow is known as a very pious man, and the way he has held himself resembles a saint. This may be a stretch, but in the realm of professional sports, a devoted Christian can be viewed as a saint. In this article, it describes Tebow as "Northern Florida's favorite son". I connote son to mean a son of God, and many have seen Tebow in this holy light since his time in the NFL.

Just last season, the Denver Broncos season took a turn for the worse, and the playoffs seemed out of their reach. However, their executives and coaches made the call to listen to the fans and put in Tebow:

The Broncos listened to popular demand, and put in the awkward quarterback. Call it luck, or a sign from a God above, but Tebow was able to turn things around in Denver and led them to the playoffs down the stretch of the regular season. The believers: I told you so. The haters: awestruck. Tebow had done the unthinkable, and no one could understand how.

In class, we talked about how in the new movie "Lincoln", Abraham Lincoln is portrayed as a saint in the way that he would never threaten anybody and still seemed like the good guy even when he got fired up about something. Tebow has always carried himself in a similar manner, and in his press conferences, he always is selfless and talks about God and his team/teammates.

But what happened to this saint-like figure in the NFL? He is now rarely brought up on sports talk shows, and when he returned to his hometown of Jacksonville this past Sunday with the New York Jets, "Nobody stormed the gates or flew a plane over EverBank Field to demand that Tim Tebow run one measly play in the Jets’ Wildcat offense that for the most part this season has been locked in a cage." Yes, it does feel like Tebow is locked in a cage now, and this saint has been forgotten. Who knows if he will ever get another shot as a starter in the league, but he is certainly a lost saint for the time being.

Cyber Monday? C'mon Man!

I was recently watching TV when I heard something about this "Cyber Monday" phenomenon going on, and I was confused. I then was informed by my mom that it was an online sale day, the Monday following Thanksgiving and the infamous "Black Friday". Now, my family and I agree that the whole marketing ploy is just ridiculous (in our opinion). I realize that it can help stimulate the economy, but after this weekend is over, then what? You are left with smaller margins for retailers and costumers anxious for more great deals like they just encountered: "heavy discounting may pressure retailers' profit margins, online and offline." (To see the full story, click here. Now, I think that "pressure" is the last thing we want our retailers to be going through. With all the 'hoopla' about a fiscal cliff we are approaching and the president and Congress struggling to get along, I think this dinky little annual sales days are ridiculous and unnecessary (for further coverage and opinion on the fiscal cliff, see my last blog post).

When I first found out about Black Friday, I thought it was a joke how much coverage it got. While watching football on Thanksgiving this year, I painfully had to sit through commercial after commercial telling you to come in early to get the best deal. Also, I think it is even coming to a retailer "late", because I started seeing ads that told the viewer sale prices started as early as TEN AT NIGHT! So it really isn't Black Friday, it is Thanksgiving Thursday, Sales Saturday, Save Cash Sunday, and now also Cyber Monday?!? I think my opinion is loud and clear, but what do you think of the sales weekend in late November that is now becoming an annual occurence? Over the top or not?

You stay classy, San Diego.

Can we work together?

President Barack Obama was reelected yesterday night, November 6, 2012, in a convincing fashion. As Americans, we have to think: what does this mean for me and my country? Well, there were other key elections also going on which will keep things in Washington complicated. As the Christian Science monitor tells me, partisans in Washington will likely hold their ground. Jake Sherman and Manu Raju of Politico.com put it in the wee hours after Tuesday night’s election results were known, “Obama’s convincing reelection, the Republicans’ sustained majority in the House, and Democrats’ hold on the Senate only further complicate the prospects of cutting any kind of deal on expiring income tax rates, massive pending cuts to Pentagon spending, and entitlement reform.”

Many are seeing the democratic incumbent's reelection coupled with a conservative majority in the house and a liberal majority in the Senate as "only further complicating the prospects of cutting any kind of deal on expiring income tax rates, massive pending cuts to Pentagon spending, and entitlement reform". I think Washington needs to become bipartisan, because doing something is usually better than nothing. We need to work together as a country and figure out the best ways to tackle our biggest problems and issues.

With a "fiscal cliff" looming for our country, having a Congress and President at a stalemate is not acceptable at this time. Our national debt and wishes for the people and jobs of this country need to be top priority, and this requires cohesion from top to bottom. However, this idea is not obtainable, but understanding a common goal is necessary. If we do not work together, things will not get better. Plain and simple.

Obama is not the "Right" type of Christian?

I was recently reading an article on CNN about President Barack Obama's religion, and how some claim he is a different kind of Christian. Furthermore, I was blown away when a reverend said the following about Obama, that "he's never heard Obama say he's 'born-again'. There's no emotional conversion story to hold onto." Firstly, this pisses me off because I think the fact that a president pretty much has to be a Christian in order to be president is wrong and against what America stands for. I think anyone who lives in America and has the right ideas for the country as a collective should have a fair and equal chance of being president. Seeing something like this makes me think we are still stuck in the era the Puritans were in at the same time the book "The Crucible" was set in.

Relating to "The Crucible", I think Obama is similar to the accused witches and 'Devil's Helpers' such as John Proctor. Many are viewing Obama as a "wrong" breed of Christianity, in which his faith is a combination of over three different sects of the religion. In The Crucible, John Proctor was questioned about his faith just because he did not attend church recently and that he had worked on Sunday's. Obama is getting similar knocks, which I believe to be total stretches. People like Rev. Cass, who criticized Obama earlier in the post about never telling the public about being "born-again", believe Obama to not be truly engaged with Christianity regardless of the fact he goes to church every weekend.

This is total B.S.; just because someone goes to church or does not go to church doesn't mean you can label them as a certain kind of person or certain type of Christian. Everybody has their own rhyme or reason for doing what they do with their life, and I believe God does not discriminate against one who can't or doesn't choose to go to church or whatever place of worship on a regular basis. So, would one who argues with me say that someone who goes to church MORE than once a week gets a spot in heaven before someone who just goes every Sunday? The idea that your attendance at church influences your religious views can be true in some cases, but I do not want to see America or anyone in the world labeling people based on this assumption.

What are your takes on Obama and never being "born-again" in his conversion to Christianity? Do you think one's attendance to their house of worship influences their "place" with God or their worshiper?

Doping and Loyalty- Doing What is Right

"By not saying anything, you're part of the problem". This was said by former masseuse of Lance Armstrong and the entire United States Post Office cycling team, Emma O'Reilly, in 2000. Ms. O'Reilly has since admitted to being apart of the underground doping system Armstrong and his teammates ran. This primarily took place outside of the states, but purely to avoid domestic security and issues.

Ms. O'Reilly for some time remained loyal and trustworthy to Armstrong, but has since turned against him, and for the right reasons. She understood that she would be "part of the problem" if she did not speak out against the team, and she believes this purity in her life will give her better things to come.

I believe Ms. O'Reilly shows a couple of american values in her story. First, that Americans cannot get away with everything just because of the ego our country holds. Armstrong admitted that O'Reilly had enough information from her time on the team that she could "bring [him] down". So Armstrong knew that O'Reilly could be the mole in their doping scandal, but possibly could have had this strong individualistic ego and a nationalistic idea that he would remain clean. This clearly has backfired. Also, O'Reilly's story can show one how Americans ultimately have enough pride in their country to do what's ethically right and right under the Constitution. It took courage for Emma O'Reilly to come forth and say what she has seen in the Post Office cycling team camp, and she did what was right. She just wants to spring forward a new cycling generation, and it is taking the necessary steps to get there. What do you think Armstrong and O'Reilly tell you about America and cycling?

To see the full article, click the follow link: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/13/sports/cycling/lance-armstrong-aide-talks-of-doping-and-price-paid.html?pagewanted=2

Replacements Gone: NFL is restored

Most football and sports fans saw this iconic play last Monday night involving a hail mary pass from Seahawks quarterback Russell Wilson to wide receiver Golden Tate. Here's the clip:

We can dive into the logistics of the NFL rules about a joint catch between an offensive and defensive player, but long story short is that Packers defensive back M.D. Jennings clearly had control of the interception and then Golden Tate stuck one hand on the football on the ground and the replacement refs gave him the touchdown. The play even went to review where the refs still saw no need to reverse the call, giving the Seahawks one of the luckiest and bogus victories in NFL history.

But it is the refs that we are here to talk about. The replacement referees were officiating NFL games for the preseason and the first 3 weeks of the 2012 season. No one was thrilled to have them up to this Monday Night Football game, but once this one was over, there was no doubt that they had to go. The replacements were in commission because the "real" refs were on strike in their union against the NFL. They wanted the pay they thought they deserved, and the league wasn't caving in; well, not until this Monday night outrage.

I think this dilemma and resolution shows how the American public can create a revolution against something, in this case the NFL, and influence it with our numbers to change things to the way we think they should be. The days after the Packers-Seahawks game, social media was blowing up with hate towards the replacement refs and the NFL for not paying up for the officials we trust and now love.

 There is a reason why the original referees are qualified and experienced enough to take on the hardship of officiating in the NFL, and the support of the public and their strength as a union proved as a powerful example of how strength in numbers can be effective. What is your take on the recent agreement between the NFL and the referees?

How Athletes Can Help Homosexuals

A Toronto Blue Jays shortstop, Yunel Escobar, recently had a gay slur written in Spanish on his eye black tape. It got me thinking about the role and expectations in a growing topic such as homosexuality in America. Then I saw an article on nytimes.com about the owner of the Pittsburgh Pirates and his recent disclosure as a gay.

One section in particular made me think about the role professional athletes play regarding young kids and their opinions on topics such as gays: "One reason there has been so much attention lately to statements about homosexuality, supportive and derogatory, from prominent male athletes is that they inhabit a stubborn bastion of reductively defined masculinity, and many impressionable kids take their cues from it." It paints the picture that being gay makes that person not manly or have "defined masculinity". I can be open in saying that I am NOT gay, but have no reason to be in opposition of men or women taking part in same-sex marriage. If that is their choice so be it, it is not my business.

However, this article and topic did get me thinking that role models to younger kids, and professional athletes and owners certainly are important to boys in America, should be open in expressing their beliefs and interests, because otherwise it can give the wrong impressions regarding certain issues. Do you think that owners and athletes such as the Pirates' owner Kevin McClatchy is taking steps in the right direction?

Yunel Escobar sporting his controversial eye black

Guns in America

I remember my grandpa telling me how he keeps an unloaded pistol in his bedroom in case he ever were to need it. Do keep in mind that he is 75 years old, and I have to question whether he knows how to operate it to begin with. Anyway, I came across a gun lovers video on nytimes.com, and it made me think about our country and our gun policy that is etched into the bill of rights.

In the video, residents of Colorado who live near the past shootings at Columbine and the Batman movie theatre incident express their concern for the safety of themselves and their families. Many of these people have gone and got their concealed gun license to keep a pistol on them at all times. It is my personal belief that increased gun owners will only escalate the issue of gun control in America. I do not believe that weapons as powerful as guns should be obtained as easily as taking a few courses to get certified.

The video also states the fact that a possessed killer like the one at the theatre would find another way outside of a gun to mass murder people. This is definitely true, but if gun laws were a bit stricter it would be taking steps in the right direction.

I am all for freedom in our great country, but gun policies should be changed, and changed for the betterment of our people and safety.

What do you think of the second amendment and current gun policies? Do you think things should be changed and why.

The American Ideal (or not quite)

When I was scrolling through ABC News tonight, I came across an article about pole dancing classes for kids in Canada. It caught my eye because through my life (granted its not been very long) I had never heard of kids or anyone actively training to become a strip pole dancer. Now, there might be studies that say pole dancing for women is a good exercise that can be fun, but to me it goes against the American ideal. 

At least in my community and household, it is never promoted for a young woman to pursue a career in pole dancing. Quite frankly, it is frowned upon. While this article refers to a Canadian program that "will offer pole dancing classes for children as young as five", the picture associated with the story shows girls dancing on poles at the Las Vegas Stripper University. This leads me to believe that America is not far behind Canada.   

(Adrian Sanchez-Gonzalez/AFP/Getty Images)

I am not trying to argue that pole dancing is not a career, because for some people it is--such as the women attending LVSU. What I am trying to say is that the example Canada is setting with these classes for little girls is not a positive one. If this class leaked its way into America, I wonder what reaction most mothers of little girls would have. I believe the traditional American ideal would be to reject the idea for promoting the wrong ideas for their children. One might think I sound like an old stiff trying to stick to old American values, but I do think there is something to be said about classes for little girls on the pole (and even the university built around the profession).  I don't believe these classes are progressive for the country in any way, shape, or form. All I know is that if one day I have a little girl of my own, I would be sure to not sign her up for a program like this. What is your take on pole dancing classes for young girls or young adults at a university?

The Best League on the Planet

It can be easy as an American to be closed-minded, to think that we are the best at everything we do. However, when it comes to the sports world, we need to look to Europe and the Barclays Premier League.

After seeing this match at the end of last season, it confirmed my belief that this is the premier league on the planet. Manchester City, looking to win its first league title in decades, was losing at home to Queens Park Rangers, a club trying to keep its head above water and avoid relegation. The video should explain itself:

This soccer (or 'football') league is widely considered the pinnacle of the sport, and I believe it is the best league in the world. Soccer is the most popular sport on the planet, and it is easy to see why when all you need is a ball--the rest can be improvised by the players. It is a sport that allows the poorest nations on the globe feel connected with the richest: they are united by a ball and two goals.

This morning, I was watching some English Premier League action, a match between Manchester United, a league powerhouse, and newly promoted Southampton. For those of you who don't know, most european soccer leagues have multiple divisions of play. It can be compared to the baseball system we have here in the States, with the MLB, AAA, AA, and A leagues. However overseas the best teams from a lower league get promoted up one division at the end of the season, and the worst sides from a superior league get relegated. Getting back on track, these two league polar opposites faced off this morning, and shockingly the small market Southampton Saints took a 2-1 lead into the second half. ManU was left pushing for an equalizer, and in the 87th minute new signing Robin Van Persie found it when a shot deflected off the post and gave him an easy sitter to score. Then in stoppage time, the dutchman found the game winner by scoring with his head off a corner kick.

The late drama is a recurring theme in the league, and the excitement it presents is immense and entertaining for all. The big (and small) spenders, exciting goals, and international popularity of the league leave me entertained time after time, and why I see the EPL as the best league in the world.

What do you believe is the best sports league in the world and why?