A-Rod's Worse Than Bonds In My Book

I wasn't in search of finding a breaking news story when I took a cruise with my television remote control on Saturday morning. in fact, I just wanted to see with was on the MLB Network (I've become a big fan in the month it has been on). Imagine my surprise when I saw that MLBN was live with the news that Yankees third baseman Alex Rodriguez had tested positive for using anabolic steroids in 2003.

My immediate reaction was "Et, tu, A-Rod?" I sat on my couch in stunned disbelief. I watched hours upon hours of coverage (which annoyed my wife but that's another story). This wasn't just big news. This was HUGE news. Bigger than the Bonds revelations.

And this was news I choose to believe. I know Selena Roberts, having covered many games with her over the years (we cut our teeth covering the awful New Jersey Nets of the mid 1990's). If she's reporting it, it's true. And besides, Rodriguez never denied it when Roberts confronted him with her story last week. All A-Rod did was decide to duck behind the cover of the union.

A-Rod is the best player, certainly of his generation, maybe of all time. A player that was on track to smash Bonds' steroid aided record of 762 Home Runs. A-Rod is baseball's version of Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan, and Peyton Manning. He is bigger than the sport he plays. He's a crossover star (and that was true even before he started an affair with Madonna). In many ways, A-Rod is the game.

And now he is tainted forever. Even if he never fails another drug test, he's got the stain of steroids all over his uniform. When he breaks Bonds HR record (and he will) he'll do it with the steroid cloud hanging over him. His reputation will never recover.

Even if he decides to come clean, call a news conference and apologize, he will never get past this. Let's face it, Jason Giambi apologized for using steroids years ago. Fans forgave him. But don't tell me for a second that you (as a fan) have forgotten that Giambi's best years were helped by the use of performance enhancing drugs.

A-Rod - to some - will now and forever be considered a steroids cheat. Why? Well, for one, there's that report he failed the drug test. And secondly, because what he did hurts the game - and its fans - more than anything Barry Bonds did.

That's right. Rodriguez reportedly failing that steroids test six years ago is worse than what Bonds did.

You say you don't believe me. Well, MLB desperately wanted A-Rod to break Bonds' record. They looked at him as the clean cut boy next door type to rescue the record book from the steroids cheat MLB officials believe Bonds to be. They would have celebrated Rodriguez breaking Bonds' record in a much grander manner than they celebrated Bonds breaking Hank Aaron's record. Now they can't do it. Now Rodriguez is in the same category as Bonds is. He can't rescue the game the way MLB and Commissioner Bud Selig had hoped. And there isn't anyone else (at least that we can tell for now) that can. No one to rescue the record books from The Steroid Era.

A-Rod's positive test hurts fans more than Bonds does as well. Let's face it, Bonds has been a bad guy for most of his career. He was always a 'look at me' type of guy. He was a me guy as opposed to a team guy. Bonds proved that over and over as a member of the Pittsburgh Pirates (run ins with Jim Leyland, the constant moaning and groaning about his contract). He proved it over and over as a member of the Giants. He's proved it since he's been out of the game (you can't say blacklisted, but you can think it). No fan outside of San Francisco was shocked that he was accused of doing steroids. No fan was shocked when he (in a back handed way) admitted to using the 'Cream' and 'Clear'. No fan was shocked when reports surfaced last week that the Feds had proof of a positive steroids test. Most fans didn't think Bonds was above cheating. That couldn't be said about Rodriguez.

Should we have suspected something? Maybe, considering that he did get bigger as he got older and that the Texas Rangers were one of the teams that we know had a number of different performance enhancing drugs users (Juan Gonzalez, Jose Canseco). But the growth spurt (and A-Rod is bigger than he was as a rookie, by a long shot) was written off as Rodriguez just getting older. And considering the way Rodriguez worked to get better as a ball player, he flew under the radar in terms of steroids.

But he had us fooled. All of us. That's why this hurts - not just as a media member but as a fan - way more than Bonds, McGwire, or any of the others named in The Mitchell Report.

Rodriguez was supposed to be the savior. He was supposed to do for the game after Bonds what Cal Ripken did for the game after the strike of 1994.

It turns out he's just another steroids user. It turns out he really is A-Fraud.

Tune in to the Time Warner Sports 32 Roundtable tonight. I'll be on Dennis Krause's panel!!

Check out my podcast and find out why I'll never assume any player is clean again!

A-Rod Reportedly Used Juice

Breaking News:

According to Sports Illustrated, Yankees Third Baseman Alex Rodriguez tested positive for steroids in 2003. Click on the link for the entire report.

My initial reaction is one of shock. This actually hurts me as a baseball fan more than what Barry Bonds (allegedly) did. I always looked at A-Rod as the anti-Bonds.

I will have more thoughts for the blog that will be posted Monday morning, and don't forget to check out my podcast on Monday as well. There will be more there on A-Rod, too.

In the meantime, a big thumbs up to MLB Network, which is doing a great job in covering this as I write on Saturday morning. Instead of avoiding the issue, as some feared they would because it would make MLB look bad, they are attacking it head on.

Don't Turn Your Back On The Bucks

I have worked in Milwaukee since July of 2005. I have lived here since October of 2005. In that time, I have come to a number of conclusions about where the local teams rank in terms of public support.

1. Packers
2. Brewers
3. Marquette
4. Wisconsin
5. Bucks
6. Panthers

The Bucks used to be a lot higher on this list. Back in 2001, when the Bucks were making their run to the NBA's Eastern Conference Finals, the Bradley Center was the place to be. It was loud, and the Bucks actually had a home court advantage.

But the building has been a lot quieter over the last six years. The Bucks have been in a downward spiral since the Ray Allen trade nearly six years ago. This team has gone through four coaches since I started working here. There has been exactly one playoff appearance since Terry Porter was fired in June of 2005.

The low point was last year, when the Bucks were a horrible 26-56. It was a team that didn't care about pretty much anything, let alone defense. Blowout losses were routine. The low point might have been that night when Andrew Bogut made a free throw, and not ONE BUCK bothered to give him a high five or a fist bump.

After the 26-56 debacle was over, the owner - Senator Herb Kohl - cleaned house. There was a new GM, new coach, big trades, and seemingly a new direction. The result of those changes were there for everyone to see. The Bucks were a team that played defense. They were a team that competed for 48 minutes a night. The record was a hell of a lot better than it had been in the past few years. Fans started talking about the playoffs, and for a while it looked like the playoffs were more than just a dream.

But the NBA is an 82 game season, and injuries do happen. Michael Redd went down with a torn knee ligament. We won't see him again until next January. And Andrew Bogut will not miss the next eight weeks (at least) with a back injury. And now Luke Ridnour is going to miss the next four weeks after injuring his thumb in practice yesterday.

The result of those injuries - There's pretty much no air left in the balloon. The fans have stopped talking playoffs. The media has started to pay attention to 20-2 Marquette and the 2009 Milwaukee Brewers. Fans (the few die hards that are left) are on message boards talking about tanking the rest of the season.

And I say that this basketball team deserves better. MUCH better. They deserve, no NEED the fan support now maybe more than ever.

I know, most fans think it's the other way around. Most fans feel they are entitled to a good product. They feel that if the product isn't good, they have the right to dump on the team.

In some cases, I would agree with that. Last year's Bucks team was rightfully dumped on from top to bottom. This year's team doesn't.

Scott Skiles has this team competing hard every night they take the floor. Even though they lost to the Nets by fourteen earlier this week, they competed (for a little while). They have the kind of work ethic that a blue collar city such as Milwaukee should appreciate.

It would be easy for this team to fold, but Skiles won't let them. It's not in his nature.

It isn't like this team has a bunch of jerks on it. Last year's team had a point guard that decided it was a good idea to punch out an assistant coach (without any action being taken against him i might add). Last year's team had a bunch of guys who cared about nothing more than their stats and their bank account.

A lot of those players are gone. The ones that didn't want to be here (Yi) - gone. The guy that decided to punch out Tony Brown (Mo Williams) - gone. The overpaid and into his numbers Bobby Simmons - gone.

The one player that had a bad reputation that remained was Charlie Villanueva. It took a while, but Skiles got into his head and Villanueva has been playing the best basketball of his Bucks career this season.

This is also a team that, despite being under .500, has a chance to make the playoffs. Is it as good of a chance as it was a couple of weeks ago? No. But, remember that the Bucks play in the Eastern Conference, which means pretty much everyone is in contention for a playoff spot. The Nets aren't as good as they've been in years past. The Bulls are fighting with their new coach (Vinny Del Negro) and reportedly wishing their old coach (Skiles) was still there.

If GM John Hammond can somehow find a way to add a piece (besides the newly acquired Keith Bogans), - whether it's another point guard or a big man, before the NBA trading deadline on February 19th, then the outlook is going to dramatically improve.

It's not out of the realm of possibility. And besides, Hammond got someone to take Yi off his hands. He got someone to take Me Williams (not a typo) off his hands. Hell, he got someone to take on Bobby Simmons' contract! That alone should make him a contender for the Executive of the Year Award.

Are the Bucks playoff hopes on life support? Yes, but the priest hasn't been called in to give last rites just yet.

And as long as they are still alive, it would be nice if their fan base would show them some support instead of writing them off two months before the end of the regular season.

Check out my podcast and find out why I think it's a mistake for the Brewers to keep Rickie Weeks!

Just Why Is Barry Bonds Going On Trial?

I am not a fan of Barry Bonds. I think he was a fabulous player (pre-steroids) - a Hall of Fame player, actually. But, in my mind, he tarnished his legacy by injecting himself with anabolic steroids (the government claims to have proof), and using the 'Cream' and the 'Clear' given to him by Victor Conte and BALCO.

That being said, I have just one question to ask. Why are we putting Bonds on trial March second.

If you ask that to prosecutors, they will tell you they are putting Bonds on trial because he lied. Well, the last time I checked, there are a lot of people who lie. Most of them never go on trial.

For instance Rafael Palmeiro blatantly lied to Congress (perjured himself) when he said he never used steroids four years ago. Of course, it was just about four months later that he was suspended for using steroids. Palmeiro never went on trial for that (but he also will probably never get into the Hall of Fame either).
Politicians lie every day. No one is putting them on trial. Lawyers lie every day, and I don't see them being indicted.

So, again, why are we putting Barry Bonds on trial next month?

Is convicting him going to accomplish anything? No. Neither is sending him to jail. It bothers me that my tax dollars would wind up going towards giving Bonds his 'three hots and a cot.' My tax dollars would also go towards trying to convict him, and I just happen to think that my tax money would be better used by, oh, maybe trying to fix the mess that our economy has become.

The only reason Bonds is going to go on trial is because the Feds are ticked off that he lied to them. The old saying goes that you can't 'mess with the Feds.' Well, that might have been what Bonds did, and now they want their pound of flesh.

I just don't understand what good putting Bonds in jail is going to do here. Is it going to erase the fact that he put performance enhancing drugs into his body? No. Is it going to erase the fact that he holds baseball's most hallowed record with 762 home runs? No. Trying him, convicting him, and jailing him doesn't do anything to erase that.

You can't change history. For instance, the NCAA record books do not recognize that Michigan's Fab Five for to The Final Four in the early 1990's. But, it doesn't change the fact that we all watched Chris Webber call timeout against North Carolina, right?

Bonds cheated. If you read 'Game of Shadows' you believe that to be fact. If you read Jeff Pearlman's book on Bonds, you believe it to be fact. But, despite what we wanted, Bonds did break Hank Aaron's record. He might have done it with the aid of chemicals, but he did it. No trial, conviction, or jail time is going to change that.

Bonds has become a pathetic figure over the last couple of years. the eroding skills. The creaky bones that kept him off the field more often than not. The fact that he can't seem to accept that his baseball career is over.

And let's face it. His career is over. He is never going to put on a big league uniform again. Thanks to the intense media scrutiny of the last few years, there's a good chance he will never even make it into the Hall of Fame (if Mark McGwire isn't in then Bonds and Roger Clemens shouldn't get in either). And you know what? that's good enough for me.

That will be my pound of flesh as a fan. Keep him out of the Hall. That's the way to hurt him.

Let's face it. If Bonds gets convicted (which might be a tough thing to do in San Francisco - where he is beloved), then what kind of jail are you going to put him in? Maximum security? Please! If Bonds goes to jail, it will be a country club type of jail. What kind of punishment is that.

Keeping him out of the Hall hurts him. It will hurt him bad. Bonds has always wanted to be known as the best of all time. He will have a tough time saying it if he isn't in Cooperstown.

Being a Hall of Famer also has its financial rewards. His autograph will be worth more. His baseball cards will be worth more. Any Bonds memorabilia will be worth more if the term 'Hall of Famer' can be connected to it. Without it, Bonds gets hit in the pocket book. And, at this point of his life, with his baseball career over, I'm fine with hurting him like that.

I am not saying that I forgive Bonds for cheating the game. I am not saying I forgive him for robbing the fans of the chance to watch him chase Aaron without chemicals. I am saying that for every crime their is a punishment. And those punishments must be consistent with the crime.

Putting him in jail would not be consistent for the crime. Lying? Let's be real. We had a President of the United States lie about an affair. He didn't go to jail. Nobody put him on trial (in criminal court).

The government comes off as petty by going after Bonds. They would be better off letting Bonds twist in the wind as he has done for the last year. Hall of Fame voters could get their pound of flesh by voting 'No' every year in which Bonds' name appears on the Hall of Fame ballot.

Leave Bonds and the other steroid cheats like Clemens alone. Leave them to rot on the outside of Cooperstown looking in. I can't think of a better punishment than that.

Check out my podcast today: Who deserves more credit for Marquette's 20-2 start - Buzz Williams or the players?

Ramirez Was Right To Say 'No' To Dodgers

It is February 4th, and Manny Ramirez still doesn't have a team to play baseball for. Who would have thought that would happen. Then again, who would have thought we'd be less than two weeks away from pitchers and catchers, and there are still quality players (Adam Dunn, Orlando Hudson, Bobby Abreu, Joe Crede, Ben Sheets, and Randy Wolf) on the open market? That just shows you the effect the recession has had on the economy in big league baseball.

But then again, it's not like teams haven't tried to sign Man Ram. OK, make that team (the Giants were probably not serious about their pursuit). The Dodgers offered him a two-year deal early on in the free agent process, and he rejected it.

Then, after months went by without another serious offer coming in, the Dodgers tried again. A one-year deal worth $25M. A deal that would have made Man Ram the highest paid outfielder in baseball history. A deal that Ramirez and agent Scott Boras rejected.

Most of you probably think that Ramirez is a little nuts for turning down that kind of cash. Most of you probably think Ramirez is just pulling yet another of his stunts. Most of you would be wrong.

This isn't, and has never been, about money for Ramirez. The guy's got more money than he needs after signing a $160M deal with the Red Sox after the 2000 season. Man Ram is a guy that once left his paycheck in his car without caring if someone broke in to steal it (true story). He also isn't a guy that ever complained he was underpaid. All he ever wanted to do was play ball and 'be Manny.'

What this is about (if it's not money) is simply length of contract. The Dodgers offered Ramirez a one year deal. Ramirez is looking for a multi year deal (four years in case you are wondering). Privately, Man Ram knows he won't get that kind of deal (simply because of his age and fears that he may break down before he earns all the cash that would come with a long term deal). One would have to think Ramirez would settle for a deal in the three year range (or a two-year deal with an option for a third year).

The problem is, he hasn't gotten that kind of offer. And I can't figure out why.

Is Man Ram a flake? Absolutely. But he can flat out hit the ball. A career .314 hitter with 527 HR's. He is a first ballot Hall of Famer. Most teams would kill to have that kind of production, and would forgive any flakiness that comes along with it.

Sure, Manny has a fragile ego, and needs to be told he's loved more times than most people need it. But (and this goes for all walks of life, not just baseball), all the greats have their little idiosyncrasies.

Ultimately, the Dodgers should be ashamed of themselves here. Would the Dodgers have made the playoffs if they hadn't made the move for Man Ram? Probably not. All the guy did in 53 games was hit nearly .400 with 17 homers and 53 RBI. You would think the Dodgers would show more loyalty to a guy that carried them to the post-season. Isn't winning all that counts in this day and age?

Instead of rewarding Ramirez, the Dodgers are insulting him. If they really think that Dunn or even Bobby Abreu can give them what Ramirez did last season, then they must be on the same stuff Michael Phelps was caught toking up with. Abreu is a nice player, but he doesn't carry a team. He's a complimentary part. Dunn hits homers and drives in runs, but his defense is lacking, and his high number of strikeouts are a big reason while he is still looking for work.

Ramirez doesn't have those kind of weaknesses. His biggest weakness is that he's wacky. Big deal. Wacky got the Dodgers to the playoffs last year. Wacky ought to be shown a little bit of loyalty.

Because if the Dodgers won't, someone will before the games count for real.

Check out my podcast today and find out why Bucks fans are wrong to be down on Andrew Bogut!

Is Marquette Worth The Hype?

The Marquette Golden Eagles take their 19-2 record into suburban Chicago tonight, where they will face DePaul, a team who has yet to win a Big East game this season. Considering that MU handled the Blue Demons once this season, it would not be a stretch to say the Golden Eagles will likely get their twentieth win when things are all said and done tonight.

Thanks to their win over Georgetown last Saturday (coupled with a win over Notre Dame in South Bend earlier), there are some who believe Buzz Williams' club, still undefeated in Big East play at 9-0, stands a very good chance of being a Number One seed when Selection Sunday comes in a few weeks.

Those are pretty heady expectations. Maybe it's the realist in me, but I do wonder whether or not the Golden Eagles can live up to the hype that suddenly surrounds them. I wonder whether or not this team can indeed make a deep run into March.

So, in order to come to a conclusion about this MU team, rather than just make a rash judgment, I decided to list the reasons why MU can and why they can't make a deep run into March Madness.

Why MU Won't Make it Deep Into March:

1. They Haven't Faced the Big East's best Yet: The 9-0 record in the Big East is great, but beating the Hoyas (who have now lost five in a row) and Notre Dame (also on a five game losing streak) don't come anywhere close to the gauntlet the Golden Eagles will have to run through at the end of the regular season - UCONN, Louisville, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse. If the Golden Eagles can get through that stretch with even a couple of wins, then even the doubters will have to admit this team is for real.

2. Depth Could Be an Issue: MU is a four man team. Granted, the four - Jerel McNeal, Dominic James, Wes Matthews, and Lazar Hayward are formidable, but they are the only four MU players averaging double figures in points. They are also the only four players who average more than twenty minutes a game. If any one of these four players goes down, the Golden Eagles will be hard pressed to replace them.

3. Their New Coach: So far, it's been all good for Williams, but what will happen when the intensity gets turned up in March? How will Williams react? What happens when Buzz has to match wits with some of the game's best coaching minds in Jim Calhoun, Jamie Dixon, and Rick Pitino? That's the one thing we just don't know yet.

Why MU Can Make it Deep Into March:

1. Senior Leadership: There aren't many teams that can match the experience that the Golden Eagles have. McNeal, James, and Matthews are all seniors. They also just happen to be MU's top three scorers. How many schools can say they have that kind of experience on the floor? Not many when you consider that players who stay for four seasons are the exception, rather than the rule.

2. MU is Tournament Tested: The Golden Eagles, as currently constructed, know a thing or two about March basketball. They have made the tournament three years in a row, and even though they only won one game, the fact that they've been there so many times together gives them a leg up on a lot of other schools.

3. Improvement Across the Board: Take a look at the numbers from last year to this year. These Golden Eagles are shooting better (nearly 47% from the floor, 72% from the free throw line and over 36% from behind the arc) than they did a year ago. Not only that, but MU's assist to turnover ratio has improved from where it was a year ago (14.7-12.9) to 16-12 this year. They are taking care of the ball, and the results are showing up in their record.

4. Wesley Matthews Is Finally Living Up Tp the Hype: Matthews is enjoying his best season as a Golden Eagle. You don't want to say he came out of nowhere, but there weren't many who thought Matthews would be averaging over 19 points per game, not when you consider that his career best was 12.6 points per game during his sophomore season. With Matthews benefiting from Williams' high octane offense the most, MU now has four scorers it can depend on, when last year it only had three (McNeal, James, and Hayward).

5. Coach Williams' System: The first year MU head coach took what Tom Crean left him and spiced it up a little bit. This team will flat out run you out of the gym if you let it. And it has to, when you consider its relative lack of size. This team isn't big, so it has to do other things to win. They say that speed kills, and so far, to MU's benefit, that statement has been true.

So there you have it. The reasons why MU can make a long tournament run outweigh the reasons they can't. And, even though they haven't faced the big dogs of the Big East just yet, I think they will more than hold their own when it comes down to those last four regular season games.

Depth could become an issue, but MU has a lot more to work with in front end players than most teams do.

Are the Golden Eagles worth the hype? Right now, the answer is a resounding yes.

Check out my podcast and find out why I think it's ridiculous to compare Ben Roethlisberger to Brett Favre!

What You Might Have Missed During Super Bowl Weekend

The Super Bowl is in the books. Though it might have seemed like it was the only thing going on in sports, here's some stuff that happened this weekend that deserves to be talked about.



1. Derrick Thomas Gets Elected to the Pro Football Hall of Fame: Bruce Smith and Rod Woodson will get more attention, but the biggest name (for me) that got elected to Canton this week was former Chiefs Linebacker Derrick Thomas. He is most definitely deserving of the honor, but those that liked the way he played feared he'd never get in because of all the time that had passed since his death.



He only played eleven years, but he made a huge impact. In his first two years alone he rolled up thirty sacks. In his career, he had double digit sacks seven times (in an eleven year career). He might not have been the most complete player in the game (his weakness was definitely against the run, but he was one of the most feared pass rushers of his time.



Though he should have gotten in to the Hall a long time ago, maybe it's only fitting that he goes in with Bruce Smith and Rod Woodson. Smith might have been the best defensive end of his time. Woodson might have been the best defensive back of his time. And Thomas deserves to be in the discussion when you talk about the best linebackers of his time.



2. The Clock is Ticking For These MLB Free Agents: With the Super Bowl in the books, some fans will concentrate on collge hoops (more on that in just a bit). Some will start getting ready for the 2009 baseball season. If you're like me, you've been looking forward to picking up your baseball preview magazines. Why? Because pitchers and catchers report on Valentine's Day - less than two weeks away!



But, those preview magazines might need to be updates before it's all said and done. Take a look at some of the names that are still out there in terms of free agents: Manny Ramirez, Ken Griffey Jr., Adam Dunn, Orlando Hudson, Bobby Abreu, Ben Sheets, Randy Wolf, Pedro Martinez. I'm sure I'm leaving some names out. The point is there are still quality free agents to be had, but no one's biting. Why?



It's real simple - it's the economy. The creme de la creme got theirs, but the second tier of free agents are still out there for two reasons. One - teams don't want to pay top dollar for players who are a level below 'elite' for one reason or another. Two - most of the players still on the market think they can get the big money deals they thought they were going to get when they filed for free agency. They have yet to adjust their demands. Until they do, they are likely to remain unsigned.



The bet here is that the players will lower their demands (whether those demands are monetary or contract length). Once one does, expect a domino effect to take place.



3. Marquette Serves Notice: Why the Marquette-Georgetown game wasn't on national television (ESPN 360 doesn't count) is beyond me. Despite their recent struggles, there were a lot of people who thought the Hoyas would have enough to at least slow down the high flying Golden Eagles.



Instead, Marquette's three guards - Jerel McNeal, Dominic James, and Wes Matthews - stepped their games up. Lazar Hayward, one of the smallest 'power' players I've ever seen (he's only 6-4, not the 6-6 he is listed at) - came up with big rebounds when Marquette needed them. A game that was tight in the first half turned into a major rout in the second half.



The Golden Eagles are now 19-2 and have yet to lose a game in the Big East (the best conference in all the land with apologies to any ACC fans reading this). Sure, Marquette has yet to face UCONN, Louisville, Pitt, or Syracuse. But the Golden Eagles did hold off a good Hoya team Saturday, and went to South Bend a week ago and beat a Notre Dame team that (until recently) had been dominating at home.



Keep an eye on this Golden Eagles basketball team. They have what it takes to make a deep run in March. if they do, don't be caught off guard.



4. Rafa v. Roger: It's too bad that the match started at 3:30 in the morning. It's too bad most of us slept through it. Because the latest installment of Nadal v. Federer was a 4-hour, 23-minute classic - a match won by Nadal in five sets. In the process, Nadal stopped Federer from tyring Pete Sampras' record of 14 Grand Slam wins.



The rivalry used to be one that Federer owned. But the last three times they have faced each other at a major, Federer has come out on the short end of the stick. Federer's once dominant record against Nadal has gone from 13-3 to 13-6, and he's lost to the Spanish star on three different surfaces now (including grass which was once considered Federer's domain).



Federer needs one more Slam win to tie Sampras, two more to surpass him. If he's going to do it, he's going to have to go through Nadal. No one else in men's tennis is even close to these two.
What we have in Nadal-Federer is the greatest rivalry going in individual sports. You can't compare this rivalry to team rivalries like Red Sox-Yankees or Ohio State-Michigan. But you can compare it to rivalries that have taken place in individual sports.



Both players know they have to get through the other to get to where they want to go (immortality). It reminds me of the way the sport used to be in the late 70's and early 80's, when John McEnroe and Bjorn Borg used to beat each other up. it reminds me of McEnroe vs. Jimmy Connors.



And let's face it, with not one player standing up to Tiger Woods on the PGA Tour, the Federer-Nadal rivalry has become the best individual rivalry we have going today in sports.
It's just too bad no one's paying attention. But those that are are watching something special.

Check out my podcast for my take on Super Bowl XLIII!