I am the absentee slumlord of this site

My apologies for my absence over the past two months but applying to grad school/work responsibilities have kept me occupied. There is simply not enough time in the day to devote to this crumbling, roach infested excuse for a blog.

Let's get to the most important news first, for the first time in a long time I liked the Bucs draft. As I mentioned at the Sticks, this was a more risk filled draft compared to last year. Last year's draft (and to a lesser degree previous drafts) featured more "safe" picks, i.e. guys who will be starters but not all-stars in the league. Which was mirrored in this year's Bucs team which was solid but lacked playmaking ability. I mentioned this multiple times last season but the Bucs offense was ranked the 10th most efficient by Football Outsiders but ranked only 18th when it came to scoring points (in the same company as the offensively inept Bears). The Bucs offensive weakness was exposed towards the end of the season when defense realized that to shut down the Bucs offense all you had to do was double team Galloway.

Now at this point the astute observer might argue, "Ski, the Bucs didn't draft any playmaking skill players on the offense this year," and those observations would be dead on accurate. I think the Bucs made a huge mistake passing on Limas Sweed in the second round and Mario Manningham in the third. That being written Dexter Jackson could develop into the guy who makes those 2 or 3 big plays a game the Bucs are looking for. I expect Jackson to be mostly used as a kick returner, a position which he could excel at as he was the fastest player timed at this year's combine. If Jackson can make the same impact on the team that Devin Harris has for the Bears or MJD has for the Jags then he was well worth a late second round pick. Jackson's value to this team is as a kick returner and it's just icing on the cake if he makes one or two deep catches a game this season as the 3rd receiver.

Moving on I liked the Aqib Talib over Mike Jenkins pick, even if it led all the Bulls fans to rise up in anger and promise they will never attend another Bucs game. Talib is rated the better prospect by most scouts, and has the ambiguous label of play-maker attached to him, which is best defined using the words of Justice Potter Stewart, "I know it when I see it." A number of scouts considered Talib as top ten prospect talent-wise but he dropped due to concerns about his character. From what I understand the Bucs talked to a number of Talib's coaches and teammates at Kansas and they all had glowing things to say about the cornerback.

Looking around the intertubes at other Bucs blogs, the reaction to the Bucs draft is more subdued. Buccaneer Harbour finds the draft average and compares it to last year (on that point we could not disagree more) and BucStats response to the draft is "meh." Which I believe is the same sound a dying giraffe makes. Even though I respect both of these guys opinion's they could not be more wrong if they had advised Miley Cyrus to do that photo shoot. Buc 'Em continues to offer zero analysis which I believe is a mistake since all that separates his site from Buccaneers.com is the word "official" and some pictures of cheerleaders. UPDATE: Since writing this Buc 'Em has added draft analysis which runs with a similar opinion to my own. Draw conclusions on your own.

On a somewhat interesting sidenote Mel Kiper Jr.s' draft grade for the Bucs was a "B" which might be noteworthy if the guys at Fire Joe Morgan had not revealed that Kiper's draft grades carry about as much insight as a Brittney Spears Guide to Parenting. (That's two pop culture references in one post, an all time high for me. I'm the PerezHilton of Bucs blogs.) Apparently the only grades Kiper had given over the last 3 years are either a "C" or "B" with the exception of an "A" for Kansas City this year. That's some weak sauce from Kiper there.

On a related note, if you are at all interested in sports blogging as a whole it's worth your time to catch the piece on Costos Now on HBO featuring one of the guys from FJM (who also writes for the Office as well, take that blogger-living-in-his-mothers-basement stereotypes!) and Will Leitch from Deadspin. The piece began with a recored look at sports blogs which was balanced but was then followed by a live panel discussion featuring Leith, Buzz Bissinger and Braylon Edwards(?). FJM captures the essence of the panel pretty well but for those who haven't seen it Leitch was unfairly attacked as a representative of blogs. What everyone on the panel with the obvious exception of Leitch failed to grasp was that, as FJM best put it,

The argument I had tried to make in the pre-taped segment was: you can't say anything about "blogs," any more than you can say anything about any medium. There are good blogs and bad blogs. There are blogs that cover the personal lives of athletes, ones that cover only the games, ones that offer opinions, and even a few that quixotically and foolishly attempt to metacriticize the media as a whole.

For better or worse I don't imagine this is a conflict which will get any better anytime soon as sports columnists for newspapers continue to misunderstand and feel threatened by a new medium.

Anyway, with the draft having passed expect me to post more often over at the Sticks with the free time I hope to find more of over the summer. Or then again maybe I'll leave all you to rot in this rat infested blog while I'm busy with other nefarious matters like tying that maiden to the train tracks.

BWA HA HA HA!!!

Times Fishes for Story, Catches Nothing But Cliches

Leave it to the St Pete Times to fabricate a story where none exists. From the ink rag which brought us proprioception, we now have Brooks-gate.

Background: After the Bucs win, the Times Bucs blog ran a story entitled "Is Brooks miffed?" In it the Times accused Brooks of harboring some deep seeded hatred against the franchise based on nothing more than a sports writer's hunch and a smile from Monte. Never mind the Bucs had just come off a win due in part to a great performance by Brooks.

Kudos to the Times though, much like the Philly papers they know how to play down to the lowest common denominator of fan. For what I guess are the same reasons certain people find Larry the Cable Guy funny there are fans who believe Gruden's only goal in life is to ostracize Brooks from the Bucs. These same people ignore that Brooks has lost a step, and can not play as many passing downs as he once did. And the Times, nevers ones to shy away from a little yellow journalism, play up the "Brooks miffed" angle in a desperate ploy to increase readership.

Is Brooks upset? Of course, no player ever wants to come off the field willingly. But Brooks is also a professional, and understands that he has to put the franchise before himself. There is no story here, only a desperate newspaper's shameless bid to save themselves from the rising tide that is reader indifference.

I Really Don't Dislike the Times but....

I'm really not trying to pile on the Times but kudos to Rays Index for pointing out the Times snafu the other week (and by snafu I mean a misstep off the side of the Sunshine Skyway level mistake).

Seems the Times withheld last Wednesday's edition from the Rays game. Typically the Times distributes copies of the paper during Rays games. What was so special about last Wednesday's paper? It featured a story on Elijah Dukes threatening his wife. Oh, and did I mention the Times and the Rays have a business relationship which could possibly lead to a conflict of interest for the Times?

Anyway, denials, coverups and further shenanigans ensue so go check out RI for all the info.

EDIT: Tommy at the Sticks was 1st with this story. Wow, I really have been away from the Sticks for awhile if I missed this.

And as long as I'm throwing out love to friends of the BBB I recommend checking out the Fanhome message boards, which is run by John from the knowledgable BoltsMag.

I paid 35 cents for this?

Perhaps it's just me, but I can't stand the local inksheets coverage of the Bucs. Despite the fact that there are ostensibly three major newspapers which cover the Bucs (Tribune, Times and Orlando Sentinel) all three have relatively little to write about the Bucs. Perhaps I have been spoiled by the Washington Post but the columns put forth by the local inksheets leave a lot to be desired. Exhibit A, this column yesterday by Stephen Holder from the Times.

I was looking forward to this column when the Times dropped the teaser on Friday they would be publishing an inside look at the new defensive line coach, Larry Coyer. Silly me, I assumed it would actually be an inside look at the Buccaneer organization. Instead we were left with ten short paragraphs (which were mostly one sentence long) which told us nothing we did not already know. Just about the only interesting tid bit in the entire column were three shorts sentences at the very end which mention Maurcie Stovall appears to be the anti-Michael Clayton, i.e. Stovall has a work ethic.

By comparison, just look at the first paragrpah from a Washington Post column on the disconnect between Hall of Fame coach Joe Gibbs and water sprinkler Sean Taylor...

Listen to Joe Gibbs talk about losing "contact" with Sean Taylor and Shawn Springs. "All of a sudden we lost contact," he said of Springs. As for Taylor, "I've had no contact whatsoever." It sounds as though Gibbs is mission control and Taylor and Springs are space modules. Contact is something you make via antenna while transiting Mercury, or looking for compelling evidence of water on Mars. It's not reassuring when the Redskins' coach uses it to describe his relationship with two starters.

Now THAT is an inside look at a franchise. And the thing is the Times should have an easier time getting access to One Buc Place than the Post does to the Skins. For those who unaware of local DC politics, Dan Snyder (owner of the 'Skins) despises the Post ever since the newspaper; 1) criticized the way the team is being run and, 2) ran a story about how Snyder attempted to bribe park officials to allow him to cut down protected trees on his property. Snyder even went so far as to start his own 'Skins radio network to control the information about his team.

Sure, one could always turn to the fanzine Pewter Report for Bucs information, but who wants to pay a $40 subscription fee?

So in the end I am left lacking when it comes to Bucs coverage. Which is a shame because this offseason has the makings of one the more interesting offseasons in recent history. A quarterback battle. A head coach on the hot seat. An influx on new talent on the defense. Even a story about redemption (Stevens) which two bit columnists devour like it was popcorn shrimp at a free buffet.


(SIDE NOTE: I honestly have no idea how much the Times costs now, i.e. if it's 25 or 35 cents.)