Skip to main content

Perhaps I was right about the Braves after all...

A couple of months ago, I wrote a piece about the Atlanta Braves and how I wasn't buying into the hype surrounding the team just yet, which was largely due to the off-season acquisitions of B.J. and Justin Upton. While I praised the team's pitching, I made note that the team's make-up offensively concerned me. The team lost their three most consistent hitters from a year ago in Chipper Jones, Martin Prado, and Michael Bourne, and replaced them with three talented, but inconsistent and strikeout-prone players in B.J. Upton, Justin Upton, and Chris Johnson. While Johnson and Justin Upton have played well to this point in the season, B.J. Upton has struggled quite considerably. Dan Uggla, Andrelton Simmons, and Jason Heyward are all off to slow starts as well. Brian McCann and Freddie Freeman are out with injuries, and Heyward has just been added to that list. However, even with all these problems on offense, the team started off with a Major League best 12-1 record. I then wrote a piece stating that perhaps I was wrong about this team, that they deserved the hype after all, and maybe I had underestimated the pitching staff. Well, after going 1-4 in their last five games and only scoring a combined 9 runs in that span, the team has dropped to 13-5 and is beginning to resemble the team I wrote about a couple months back. Hopefully the bats can start to get going here to provide the pitchers some much needed (and deserved) relief at times. I don't care how good the pitching is if half of the starting lineup (minus the pitcher) are hitting .211, .167, .161, and .121.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

Mentioned on Crooks and Liars and Hinterland Gazette!

Due to some tweets of mine, I got mentioned on the following two sites (all my tweets can be viewed here -  https://twitter.com/CraigRozniecki ): https://crooksandliars.com/2019/04/trump-gives-stupid-advice-george https://hinterlandgazette.com/2019/03/istandwithschiff-is-trending-after-donald-trump-led-gop-attack-on-adam-schiff-backfires-spectacularly.html

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...