The Sportswriter: Seven Questions for Edward Rielly

(Editor's Note: Edward Rielly, a St. Joseph's College professor of English and a Westbrook resident, recently authored the book Football: An Encyclopedia of Popular Culture. Below are his answers to the seven questions I e-mailed to him.)

1. Besides this book, you've also written Baseball: An Encyclopedia of Popular Culture. What intrigues you about using sports as an allegory for American pop culture?

Both my earlier Baseball: An Encyclopedia of Popular Culture and the recent Football: An Encyclopedia of Popular Culture explore many ways in which that particular sport and American culture intersect, each affecting the other. With both sports (but not necessarily with all sports), there is such a historically strong interest in the game that we see a great many dimensions of our society represented in it.

I discuss in the football book such matters as race relations, the role of women, gun violence, disabilities, concussions, politicians, labor-management relations, the media, retirement issues, suicide, and many other topics. All of these are significant within football but also extremely important within our broader culture.

In some ways football, like baseball, is emblematic of American society. At times, football may be ahead of the curve, for example, integrating before large geographical segments of our country did; at other times, as in taking head injuries seriously, it has lagged behind. I am happy to see that football finally is catching up in this health area.

2. What are some of the most common roles baseball and football have played in reflecting or changing American pop culture?

Both sports have played huge roles in integrating our society and helping people to accept a multicultural nation. I think that they also emphasize the increasing globalization of the United States and the rest of the world. That is especially true in baseball with so many players coming from Latin American countries, but we also are seeing more players from Japan. The trend will continue. In football, as the NFL continues to play games abroad, as in the recent Patriots game in England, we probably will see more players coming here from other countries. Of course, the impact of these sports is widespread.

I mentioned a lot of connections earlier, but we also see these games yielding some outstanding films and literature. If we do not think that football has a big impact on us, we should remember the Super Bowl. Who would be so foolish as to schedule a meeting or other event when the Super Bowl is being played?

3. What are some of the biggest differences between the two sports in the roles they've played in pop culture?

Baseball achieved great popularity in the nineteenth century and to a great extent has retained that popularity. College football went through a golden age of popularity in the 1920s, but professional football did not reach something close to parity with other major sports until television became a major player in the late 1950s. The championship game between the New York Giants and Baltimore Colts, with Johnny Unitas leading the Colts to a dramatic overtime victory, is often credited with being the turning point for professional football. In my book, I call that contest football's greatest game--a subjective judgment, but one shared by many people.

It is hard today to believe that until then professional football was no better than the fifth favorite sport, behind baseball, boxing, horse racing, and college football. So football, especially professional football, has lagged behind baseball historically in popularity, thus limiting its impact on American society.

When General Douglas MacArthur chose a sport as a way to encourage the Japanese after World War II to accept American democratic principles, he picked baseball, not football. Of course, baseball had been popular in Japan before the war, and MacArthur was a former baseball player. Perhaps if General Eisenhower, a football star at Army, had been choosing, he might have selected football.

When the Japanese wanted to insult American soldiers, they hurled derogatory comments about Babe Ruth across the lines. Conversely, when U.S. troops came upon someone they thought might be a Nazi infiltrator, they would quiz him on baseball facts. The assumption was that any true American knew about baseball.

4. Baseball is, of course, frequently described as America's past time. Do you think that continues to be true, or do you think football as overtaken baseball's claim as America's past time?

Continuing what I just said, I would add that because of the longer and steadier relationship between baseball and the United States, and the perception that baseball is a quintessentially democratic pastime (something almost everyone at some level can play), baseball still deserves the title of America's National Pastime. The number of people following the sport today, in my opinion, is not the deciding factor regarding that title.

5. Which entry in the book is the most meaningful to you?

That is a really hard question to answer. I will take the liberty of answering it a little differently. As a graduate of the University of Notre Dame, I included a few more entries dealing with the Fighting Irish than perhaps someone else would have chosen. I will opt for the Notre Dame entries collectively as my personal favorites.

6. As a soccer fanatic I can't help but ask: How long before I can pick up a copy of a book in which you explore the relationship between soccer and American pop culture?

My grandchildren love soccer, and my son coaches it. However, when I was growing up in Wisconsin, no one around there played soccer. I am sure that a great many people now do, but soccer was not a part of my childhood. I never connected to it the same way that I did to baseball and football. Of course, soccer does not have the same long tradition within the United States as they enjoy. All of this is to say that although soccer may deserve a similar volume, it is unlikely to come from me.

7. Is there anything you'd like to add?

Any writer is likely to add the hope that people will actually read his or her book. My Football: An Encyclopedia of Popular Culture can be purchased at Border's, ordered through amazon.com or directly from the University of Nebraska Press, or, in fact, requested through any bookstore.

Of course, I'm biased in this matter, but I think that it's a good read. It is the type of book that a person can move through a bit at a time, reading an entry here, another there, whatever topics seem especially interesting. If anyone has a question or wants to contact me, I can be reached at erielly2@earthlink.net.

- John C.L. Morgan

Related: On Location: 19 Monroe Avenue (September 9, 2008)

The Sportswriter: Weekend Surfing

Eyes around the globe were focused on Cape Town, South Africa earlier this afternoon for the 2010 World Cup Final Draw, an event in which the thirty-two qualified teams--America included--found out who and when they will be playing when the world's largest sporting event kicks off in June 2010.

Because soccer is unique among American sports in the sense that it can truly spark seemingly random curiosity about other countries, below is a reading list for each of the Americans' first-round opponents, Algeria, England, and Slovenia:

Algeria (Wednesday, June 23, 2010)
Profile of host city
Profile of host stadium
Country profile
Team profile
National Public Radio archive
The Atlantic archive
The New Republic archive
The New York Times archive
TIME archive
Wall Street Journal

England (Saturday, June 12, 2010)
Profile of host city
Profile of host stadium
Country profile
Team profile
National Public Radio archive
The Atlantic archive
The New Republic archive
The New York Times archive
TIME archive
Wall Street Journal

Slovenia (Friday, June 18, 2010)
Profile of host city
Profile of host stadium
Country profile
Team profile
National Public Radio archive
The Atlantic archive
The New Republic archive
The New York Times archive
TIME archive
Wall Street Journal

- John C.L. Morgan

Related: Weekend Viewing: Inja (2001) (October 30, 2009)

The Sportswriter: On the Americans' Annoying Loss to Costa Rica

Besides the fact that I had to wait until my usual bedtime (10p) to begin watching the Confederation of North, Central American and Caribbean Association Football (CONCACAF) World Cup qualifying match between the United States and Costa Rica last night, the Americans' 3-1 loss was annoying for the following reasons:

1. One frustrating streak continues, while another frustrating streak was (barely) snapped.
Costa Rica's shredding of the Americans last night stretched the latter's winless streak in that Central American country during World Cup qualifying to eight games. Entering last night's match, the Americans were 0-6-1 in World Cup qualifying games played in Costa Rica, with a goal differential of 13-4. Of course, the Yankees' punchless attack and flaccid defense last night ensured the winless record was stretched to 0-7-1 and the goal differential widened to 16-5.

The only bright spot in the evening was Landon Donovan's penalty kick in extra time--in other words, well beyond the point in which it was obvious the Americans would lose--was the first goal the Americans had scored in a World Cup qualifying match in Costa Rica since July 2000.

2. The United States lost to a country smaller than West Virginia.
The United States is nearly 200 times larger than Costa Rica, has 75 times more people than the Central American country, and its GDP is nearly 300 times greater. So when the Americans win a CONCACAF qualifying match, I must always temper my enthusiasm, because, really, shouldn't we always win against such teams as Honduras (Saturday, 8p), El Salvador, and Trinidad and Tobago? To be sure, the passion for soccer in each of these countries is probably 100 times greater per capita than in the United States, where the sport barely registers a blip on the Richter scale of our sporting scene. But still, we lost to puny Costa Rica--again.

3. I hate artificial turf, I hate artificial turf, I hate artificial turf. Did I mention I hate artificial turf?
Turf and soccer mix about as well as, well, I'm too tired (see above) to think of a sharp analogy to stress just how much artificial turf and soccer do not complement one another. Besides all the romantic reasons associated with an anti-turf outlook (the fragrance of grass and earth vs. the stench of plastic and rubber, for instance), there's the simple fact that a quick surface such as the turf at Costa Rica's Estadio Saprissa simply robs the Beautiful Game of all its nuance. Too often, a nice touch or clever pass is simply negated by the ball skittering out of play, beyond the pace of an attacker who would've reached the ball had the game been played on natural turf.

I curse the day when FIFA gave such a playing surface the stamp of approval.

- John C.L. Morgan

Related: The Sportswriter: Thoughts on Tonight's U.S. vs. Mexico World Cup Qualifier (February 11, 2009)
Related: The Sportswriter: Three Ideas for a Better American Soccer Fan (November 1, 2008)

The Sportswriter: Why I Am Supporting Barca

Spain's FC Barcelona and England's Manchester United meet this afternoon in Rome to play the UEFA Champions League final, arguably the biggest game for soccer clubs in the world. And though my interest in soccer teams is generally directly related to the distance from my front stoop to the team's location (thus Westbrook High and the New England Revolution attract more of my attention than, say, the Kashima Antlers) I will have a rooting interest in Barca when I belly up to Skybox's bar this afternoon at 2:30p. Why? Well, let me count some of the ways:

1. Barcelona embodies a cosmopolitan provincialism that I find enticing.
In his essay "How Soccer Explains the Discreet Charm of Bourgeois Nationalism,"* Franklin Foer delves into FC Barcelona's pivotal involvement in Catalonia and its burgeoning nationalism, especially during the violent and oppressive days of dictator Francisco Franco. And he uses the Catalans' experiences with Barca as a way to flesh out his strong belief in liberal--or, as he prefers to call it--cosmopolitan nationalism:

[I]n theory, patriotism and cosmopolitanism should
be perfectly compatible. You could love your country--even consider it a
superior group--without desiring to dominate other groups or closing yourself
off to foreign impulses.

Foer goes on to describe Catalans' long and arduous battles to preserve its language and culture and its agitation for independence from Spain. But he's very careful to list the ways in which this active nationalism did not boil over into ethnic warfare or xenophobia, two traits that are unfortunately not uncommon among ultranationalists and some soccer supporters.

As an unapologetic provincialist, I'm always eager to cultivate a greater interest in the histories, cultures, and narratives of Westbrook and Maine. At the same time, though, there is too often an easy temptation to trade in the tired distinction of native and "from away," as watered down as a concept that demarcation may be.

2. It's the jersey, stupid.
After resisting the temptation to join the rest of the soccer planet in sullying the front of its jerseys with commercial advertising for more than a century, Barcelona finally caved in in 2006 with an advertisement...for the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) . Oh yeah, and Barca is paying UNICEF a couple million dollars each year to boost the agency's profile and help their HIV-fighting efforts in Africa.

Manchester United, on the other hand, inked a $100 million uniform sponsorship deal in 2006** with AIG. Yes, that AIG.

3. Partisanship just makes watching soccer more enjoyable.
Seems like an obvious statement, but Robert Coover uses Italian fans from the 1982 World Cup to explain why having an emotional stake in a team's outcome just makes spectatorship more appealing***:

Invested with his team or national colors, making
strange aggressive noises with airhorns, whistles, trumpets, drums and
firecrackers, crying out the holy name ("EE-TAHL-YA! EE-TAHL-YA!") or singing
repetitive lithurgical chants, falling out of historical time and geographical
space into a kind of ceremonial trance, timeless and centripetal, he does not
seem a spectator so much as a participant in a sacramental rite...indeed, in his
despair or ecstasy, he often fails to see the game at all, experiencing
it rather at a level that is blind, irrational, profound, innocent.

- John C.L. Morgan

* This essay is part of Foer's book How Soccer Explains the World: An (Unlikely) Theory of Globalization, a great read that touches on soccer's role in everything from genocide in the former Yugoslavia to America's culture wars.

** As a result of AIG's recent financial difficulties, the company announced in January it will not be renewing the pricey uniform sponsorship deal with Manchester United when the current agreement expires in May 2010.

*** Coover's essay is excerpted from the pretentiously-titled The Thinking Fan's Guide to the World Cup, a collection of thirty-two essays written either about one of the thirty-two countries that qualified for the 2006 World Cup or written by a citizen of one of those thirty-two countries.

The Sportswriter: Thoughts on Tonight's U.S. vs. Mexico World Cup Qualifier

"In the litter of empty soda cans and empty dreams, Gregg Thompson had a question burning across his face. The young defender from Minnesota strode across the rudimentary locker room and blurted at the American soccer coach, Alkis Panagoulias: 'When are we ever going to play a home game?' The answer from Panagoulias was equally blunt: 'Never.'"

- New York Times sports journalist George Vecsey describing the aftermath of a 1986 World Cup qualifying game the U.S. played against Costa Rica in which the Americans played before a "largely hostile crowd" in Torrance, California.

There are a few interesting storylines attached to tonight's FIFA World Cup qualifying match between Mexico and the United States.

Attracting the most media buzz recently is the foolish infatuation Mexican supporters have developed for voodoo dolls. Then there is, of course, the ever-present geopolitical aspect of the match in which political issues such as immigration, citizenship, and economics add a social and cultural layer to the on-the-field rivalry that does not surround, say, a U.S. vs. Barbados game. And don't neglect the hopeful fact that the Americans have turned the tide in the historic rivalry, compiling a nine-game home unbeaten streak (seven wins and two ties) in friendlies or World Cup qualifying matches since the tricolores beat the Yanks 2-1 in San Diego in a March 1999 friendly.

The most interesting phenomenon about this matchup, however, melds the latter two narratives together: Namely, it is fascinating how the United States Soccer Federation (USSF), the governing body of soccer in the United States, shrewdly embraces ethnicity when scheduling exhibition games to maximize revenues, but shies away from ethnic enclaves when scheduling important home games (like a World Cup qualifying game) as a way to ensure as much as support for the home team as possible--even if it means a financial sacrifice for the organization. Consider, for example, the discrepancy in the USSF's scheduling of exhibition games and World Cup qualifying games against tonight's opponents, Mexico.

Since their aforementioned 2-1 loss in March 1999, the U.S. has hosted (or will host) Mexico for seven exhibition games and three Confederation of North, Central America and Caribbean Association Football (CONCACAF) World Cup qualifying matches.

Of those seven exhibition games, six of them took place in pockets of the country populated relatively heavily by hispanics in general, and Mexican immigrants in particular.* In October 2000, for example, the U.S. hosted Mexico in Los Angeles, a city whose population is nearly one-half (47%) hispanic, about two-thirds of whom are Mexican (64%). And the subsequent games--Denver in April 2002 (31% hispanic, 69% of whom are Mexican); Houston in May 2003 (37% hispanic, 72% Mexican); Dallas in April 2004 (36% hispanic, 83% Mexican); Phoenix in February 2007 (34% hispanic, 83% Mexican); and Houston again in February 2008--all indicate the USSF is willing to sacrifice home-field advantage for a large gate receipt for exhibition games, as crowds for those games were 61,072; 48,476; 69,582; 45,048; 62,426; and 70,103, respectively.

All three qualifying games against Mexico since 2000, on the other hand, have not only been played (or will be played) in Latino-light Columbus, Ohio, a city whose relatively sparse population (at least compared to L.A. et al.) consists merely of 2% hispanics, 49.7% (or 8,686) of whom are of Mexican descent. But they have also been (or will be) played at Columbus Crew Stadium, a soccer-specific facility (read: not a cavernous football stadium plagued with many empty seats), whose capacity of only about 25,000 ensures the crowd figures--and dollar signs--from tonight's game will not match those of the friendlies against Mexico.

Now, considering the Americans' stellar record in Columbus (they are unbeaten in five WC qualifying games played there), and the advantage Ohio's February climate gives the Americans (one of those five qualifying wins took place in February 2001, when the U.S. beat Mexico in a game played in weather chilly enough to inspire the Mexican press to dub the game La Guerra Fria--The Cold War), it could be argued Columbus's demographics have little to do with the USSF's decision-making.

But by saying the USSF considers only past performance and an advantageous climate when making scheduling decisions--a limited scope the soccer press has persistently maintained--would ignore the American side's sore history of playing home games in front of the opposition's supporters, as well as neglect the USSF's habit for scheduling friendlies that cater to a region's ethnic proclivities.

Consider the discrepancy in the USSF's scheduling, even when friendlies and World Cup qualifying games not against Mexico are concerned.

Since 2000, the U.S. national team has hosted twenty-two World Cup qualifying games at only nine locations, with Columbus (6); Foxboro, Massachusetts (5); and Washington, D.C. (4) hosting the vast majority of the games. Of these three recycled sites, only Foxboro's urban neighbor Boston even remotely approaches the national average for hispanic population (14.4%, compared to the national average of 14.7%). Moreover, when you consider some of the other, one-time hosts--cities such as Kansas City, Missouri in April 2001 (6.9% hispanic); Birmingham, Alabama (1.6% hispanic) in March 2005; and Nashville, Tennessee scheduled for June 2009 (4.7%)--it is not coincidental that the USSF schedules World Cup qualifying games within a hispanic-heavy qualifying group (besides Mexico, CONCACAF includes such countries as Cuba, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Panama) in cities with a relatively low hispanic population. Especially when you consider the USSF's willingness to schedule friendlies with an eye toward embracing a region's immigrants, not avoiding them.

Besides the five Mexican friendlies I mentioned earlier, there's the June 2000 exhibition game against Ireland played in the backyard of Irish-heavy Boston, the March 2004 exhibition played against Haiti in Miami, and the July 2004 exhibition against Poland hosted by Polish-heavy Chicago. And don't forget the three friendlies played against Asian squads--China in January 2001 and June 2007, and Japan in February 2006--played in the Asian-heavy San Francisco Bay area (Oakland, San Francisco, and San Jose, respectively). So it appears that when the USSF is not throwing a bone to underrepresented soccer regions--Birmingham in March 2000 and March 2002; Seattle in March 2002 and March 2003; Richmond, Virginia in 2003; Albuquerque, New Mexico in March 2005; Cary, North Carolina in April 2006; Cleveland in May 2006; and Hartford, Connecticut in May 2006--it embraces ethnicity as a way of maximizing revenue for an exhibition game, even at the risk of ensuring the American national team does not enjoy overwhelming home-field advantage. Sadly, a lack of home-field advantage would not be foreign to an American national team.

Indeed, David Wangerin's history of soccer in America during the twentieth- and twenty-first centuries, Soccer in a Football World, is littered with references to instances in which the American national team has hosted World Cup qualifying games on their own soil, only to play before a mostly hostile crowd. In a 1957 qualifying game played against Mexico in Long Beach, California, Wangerin notes the decision to stage the game at that locale was "tantamount to playing away" and that "[a]lmost all of the 12,500 in attendance came to support the visitors, and took pleasure in the 7-2 hammering of yet another slapdash American collective." Ditto a qualifying game for the 1966 World Cup--once again, against Mexico--when Wangerin describes the game site as "hostile Los Angeles" and wryly blankets the phrase home crowd with a pair of ironic quotation marks. This phenomenon even occurred as late as 2001, when the Americans hosted Honduras for a key qualifying game in Washington, D.C. In his book How Soccer Explains the World: An Unlikely Theory of Globalization, Franklin Foer describes how, despite the USSF's letter to the Washington Post urging American supporters to wear red (a cause the USSF is also championing for tonight's game) to distinguish its cheering bloc from Hondura's supporters, "the Washington stadium might has well have been in Tegucigalpa."

Thanks to the USSF, though, it is unlikely Columbus, Ohio will not be mistaken for Morelia, Michoacán tonight--for more reasons than two.

- John C.L. Morgan

Related: The Sportswriter: Three Ideas for a Better American Soccer Fan.

* Population figures are based on the 2000 U.S. Census.

The Sportswriter: Why Linemen Don't Win More Fitzpatrick Trophies

"Those five guys, they pave the road for us to run. We do the easy part, they do the hard part. It takes real men to do what they do for us." - New York Giants running back Derrick Ward, talking about his offensive line in October 2007.

In his January 23 column, Press Herald sports columnist Steve Solloway laments the fact that only one offensive lineman has won the James J. Fitzpatrick Trophy (Lewiston's Gerry Raymond in 1977) since the award's inception in 1971. Now, Solloway briefly touches upon why this is the case (namely, a lack of appreciation among spectators for those who spend all game laboring in the glob of flesh known as the line of scrimmage), but he largely neglects how the collegiate and professional ranks of the sport may influence why so few linemen have been recognized as the best high school football players in Maine.

Fortunately, there's Gregg Easterbrook, a columnist at ESPN.net, who's always examining football's neglected arguments, overlooked statistics, and undervalued players (or smarter-than-expected cheerleaders, such as Standish native Alyssa Caddle). So, whether he's explaining the mathematical reasons behind his belief in why teams should almost never punt, highlighting the Pittsburgh Steelers and Baltimore Ravens' habit of blitzing at least one defensive back on two-thirds of the third-and-long situations in last week's conference championship game, or just giving Division II football teams shout-outs on a platform generally reserved for their richer and more talented brethren, Easterbrook always demonstrates an appreciation for the underappreciated. So it is no surprise that part of his December 17 hodgepodge of football-related thoughts turned to the lack of representation of lineman and linebackers in the pantheon of Heisman Trophy winners.

After noting the irony of the award's namesake probably not being able to win the award named after him (John Heisman was an offensive lineman), Easterbrook recommends the award be re-named the "Heisman Trophy for Big-College Quarterback or Running Back Who Receives Most Publicity." To be sure, the new moniker would be a mouthful, but at least its lack of brevity is redeemed by its accuracy. That's because, according to Easterbrook, ninety-three percent of the Heisman Trophy winners since the award was established in 1935 have either been a quarterback (25 times) or a running back (43 times), while wide receivers (4 times) and a cornerback account for the remaining 7 percent. Moreover, according to Easterbrook, the last lineman or linebacker to finish in the top 3 of the voting was University of Pittsburgh defensive end Hugh Green, when he finished in second 1980. This, despite the fact that offensive linemen have been represented in the top 5 picks of the NFL Draft every year since 2000, except two (2005 and 2003).

As unrepresentative as the the Heisman Trophy has been, though, the National Football League's (NFL) Most Valuable Player (MVP) track record is even worse.

Since 1957, ninety-six percent of the winners of the NFL MVP award have been either quarterbacks (33 times) or running backs (16 times). No offensive lineman or wide receiver has ever won the award, and a defensive player has been determined to be the league's MVP only twice (Minnesota Vikings Defensive Tackle Alan Page in 1971 and New York Giants Linebacker Lawrence Taylor in 1986). And, like the benign neglect the Heisman Trophy voters pay the college game's offensive lineman, the underrepresentation of professional linemen in MVP voting doesn't necessarily reflect the value the NFL labor market has placed on offensive linemen: Michael Lewis, author of the book The Blind Side: Evolution of Game notes that "the average N.F.L. left tackle’s salary was $5.5 million a year, and the left tackle had become the second-highest-paid position on the team, after the quarterback."

Which begs the question: Why are collegiate and professional linemen continually ignored for consideration as the game's finest players? Well, in a word, statistics. If baseball is the sabermetrician's game, then football is quickly becoming her second-favorite. A couple clicks on NFL.com's stats page, for example, can probably yield information on how well New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady has performed when he's played in a dome on an oddly-numbered Sunday, while wearing a red undershirt. But good luck simply finding how many pancake blocks Patriots offensive Matt Light has executed or how many sacks Nick Kaczur has allowed. In fact, "Offensive Line" isn't even an option on the Web site's "View By Position" scroll.

Which begs the ultimate rhetorical question: If the NFL doesn't care to measure and statistically appreciate its offensive lineman, how can we expect Fitzpatrick voters to do so?

- John C.L. Morgan

The Sportswriter: The ABCS of College Football

Geography and my alma mater's apathy toward even fielding a gridiron team are the two primary reasons I am not a college football fan, so I probably won't watch tonight's college football Bowl Championship Series (BCS) National Championship game between No. 20 Oklahoma and No. 21 Florida.

Yes, you read that correctly: Of the twenty-five schools that finished atop the final BCS standings, the University of Oklahoma and the University of Florida compiled the sixth- and fifth-worst rankings, respectively, in the 2008 Academic Bowl Championship Series (ABCS) rankings.

Compiled by Lindsey Luebchow, an education analyst at the New America Foundation, the second annual batch of Academic BCS rankings consider four criteria:

1. The team's most recent federal graduation rate (which to be fair, isn't as accurate as the Graduation Success Rate (GSR), which, unlike the federal graduation rate, gives schools credit for a student's graduation even if the student graduated after enrolling elsewhere).
2. The gap between the team's graduation rate and the school's graduation rate of non-athletes.
3. The gap between the team's black-white player graduation rate disparity and the school's black-white player graduation rate disparity among non-athletes.
4. The gap between the team's Academic Progress Rate (APR) and the median APR of fellow teams competing in Division 1 football.

Using these statistics, Luebchow determined Boston College (1), Northwestern University (2), Penn State University (3), the University of Cincinnati (4), and Ball State University (5) claimed the top five spots, while the University of Florida (21), Georgia Tech University (22), Michigan State University (23), the University of Texas (24), and the University of Oregon (25) brought up the rear.

- John C.L. Morgan

P.S. Using Luebchow's formula, I've determined the University of Maine football team's Academic BCS rating is 55, which would've placed the team in the eleventh spot--sandwiched between Virginia Tech and Pittsburgh--if the football team were worthy (or eligible, for that matter) of an actual BCS ranking.

The Sportswriter: Three Ideas for a Better American Soccer Fan

Being a soccer fan in America can breed paranoia. Perhaps because of its seasonal juxtaposition with football and all the instrinsic violence associated with that sport, a hint of an affinity for soccer attracts catcalls questioning one's manhood and hardiness. Moreover, critics of the sport even go so far as accusing any American who appreciates the "world's game" of being an un-American and undemocratic European socialist.

So it is that climate that I offer the beleaguered American soccer fan three ideas, an unfinished manifesto for the American soccer fan, if you will.

Talk American

My most eye-wincing experiences as an American soccer fan often occur when one of my fellow soccer aficienadoes throws out verbiage foreign to the ears of average Americans and--more important--to the culture of American soccer. (To add salt to the proverbial wound, such verbiage is usually uttered only after the mutterer has slipped into his best Madonna-esque British accent.) Therefore, American soccer fans should use language that is easily understood by the non-soccer fan in America. And speak a tongue that upholds the American soccer tradition.

Therefore, American soccer fans must cave to the inherent illogic of the matter and resist the temptation to call their sport soccer, not football. Moreover, they must not refer to the sport's footwear as boots; they are cleats. (Boots are what you wear in the Maine woods to combat ankle-deep mud.) Nor should they call the game's apparel a kit. It's a uniform, nothing more, nothing less. Just like a field is a field (not a pitch). And a game is, well, a game (not a match). And whatever they do, self-respecting American soccer fans must refuse to utter some of the more ridiculous monikers of some of the teams in Major League Soccer (MLS).

Indeed, despite the appropriate cultural, geographical, and/or historical relevancy of most of the nicknames in the league, there are a few annoying nicknames that should never be uttered by any self-respecting American soccer fan. The geographical soundness of the Colorado Rapids moniker, for example, is canceled out by the ridiculousness of FC Dallas (FC stands for futbol club). And the historical relevance of the New England Revolution is countered by the ahistorical sham that is Real Salt Lake (besides referring to a royal heritage that offends this country's republican roots, Real doubly offends the "Talk American" rule as it is pronounced ree-al in honor of the Spanish soccer power Real Madrid).

Defend Major League Soccer

Speaking of the MLS, it is every American soccer fan's duty to defend the home-grown league. Unfortunately, though, such a defense is considered uncool by too many in the American soccer community. The league just isn't as good as those found in Europe, the argument goes. Which is true, though I'd argue the MLS is underestimated both as a league featuring stellar international players, as well as a developmental league for homegrown talent.

In the 2002 World Cup, for example, of the 23 players on the United States team that was narrowly beaten by powerhouse in Germany in the quarterfinals (the captain of the German team conceded in March 2006 that the Germans were lucky to win the game), 15 of them were either playing in the MLS at the time or had played in the MLS. In the 2006 World Cup, 80% of the 2006 World Cup team had experience in the MLS, which is remarkable considering an undermanned American side outplayed the eventual champions, Italy, in a 1-1 draw in the first round. (Of course, they also failed to escape the first round, but that contradicts my argument, so I won't dwell on that inconvient fact as much as the heartening result against the Italians.) And this year's Olympic squad, a team whose solid performance was outweighed by a tough group, featured a roster in which players with MLS experience accounted for 15 of the 18 slots.

Moreover, the final in this year's SuperLiga, a league made up of the best teams throughout North America, featured an all-MLS final when the New England (finally) beat the Houston Dynamo. And teams comprised of the best players in the MLS have dispatched such world powers as Celtic and Chelsea en route to 5-0 record against premier international clubs over the last five years. To be sure, the MLS can truly begin to crow when its regular teams are beating the likes of Barcelona FC, but the results compiled by the MLS's best players are nonetheless remarkable.

And finally, the league is growing. Attendance is improving (games in 2007 attracted an average of 16,770 fans, with the median attendance pegged at 15,960), the league is expanding (two teams in Seattle and Philadelphia are set to join the thirteen-team league over the next two years), and more than half the teams have constructed soccer-specific stadiums (besides representing a hopeful sign for the league's long-term viability, soccer-specific stadiums enhance the viewing experience by eliminating the football lines that mar pitches fields shared with a football team and by reducing the cavernous sensation that plague teams that share stadiums with NFL teams.

Vigorously oppose diving and playacting

The scene, unfortunately, is a common one: One player challenges another for the ball and nicks the attacking player in the ankle. To be sure, there's contact. But where there's contact in soccer, too often Oscar-worthy theatrics will follow. The aggrieved player will contort his body, his face will erupt into a grimace, and his mouth will emit a hollow howl. Once on the ground, he will clutch his ankle or knee and writhe around on the ground like a juvenile throwing a tantrum. Then, after receiving the call, he'll gingerly climb to his feet, take a few steps with a slight limp, then proceed to chase the ball with full speed not ten seconds later.

Now, I can brush aside much of the criticism haters have for soccer. I am untroubled by the common complaints that the game is boring, that the players are wimpy, and that fans are un-American. The one accusation I cannot disagree with, however, is the charge that soccer players are floppers and fakers. Therefore, every American soccer fan should protest dives and play-acting with a full throat.

Fortunately, FIFA, the world governing body of soccer, has made diving a cautionable offense. But the culture still breeds such ugly behavior, and it will only leak down to the lower levels. Therefore, every American soccer fan should applaud Iranian referee Masoud Moradi, who flashed Nigeria's Chibuzor Okonkwo a yellow card for diving in the penalty box in an Olympic game this summer.

The fact that the warning was issued while Okonkwo was being hoisted off the field by a face-saving stretcher made it only that much sweeter.

(Correction: I initially defined the 'FC' in FC Dallas as "football club." It actually stands for futbol club.)

- John C.L. Morgan

The Sportswriter: Boston Red Sox

Amid a sporting age plagued by bland and unimaginative nicknames (A-Rod, KG, etc.), the writers at Full Circuit Clout (one of whom is Westbrook's Hurdy Chadwick, which I hope is not a pseudonym) must be credited for attaching colorful and original nicknames to members of the "Boston Red Stockings Base Ball Club:"

• "The Wonder" (Manny Ramirez: "[t]he Wonder of It All is not in the Mystic Region of Connecticut, but in the heroic beating chest of Slugger Ramirez.")
• "The Colossus" (David Ortiz, "the one with fists as big as hams.")
• "Lil' Hands" (Dustin Pedroia, "the pint-sized pugilist.")
• "Square Face" (Jed Lowrie)
• "Capt. Varitek" (Jason Varitek, "a hero whose leggings are stretched around thighs made so formidable by carrying the weight of the Bostons on his back for so many seasons.")
• "Knuckles" (Tim Wakefield, "a veteran's veteran and true gentleman of the sport.")
• "Nothin' Doin'" (Jon Lester, "a lad from the land of loggers, raised among the mists of Puget Sound and the timber-scented currents that blow down from the Cascades.")
• "Ol' Aches and Pains" (J.D.Drew, "[a] double-fisted hero with talent to spare!")
• "General" (Josh Beckett, possessor of "gallantry and grit.")
• "High-Pockets" (Julio Lugo, who "stands at the dish with the countenance of a street urchin caught in the path of trolley car.")
• "The Brawler" (Coco Crisp, another "pint-sized pugilist.")
• "Yukon" (Kevin Youkilis, who is "whisker-powered.")
• "Der Spiegel" (Curt Schilling, "the blond-and-paunchy one.")
• "Dancin' Jonny" (Jonathan Papelbon, who is "clad in gray flannel to collect the souls of the unfortunate bats-men at the plate.")
• "El Gordo" (Bartolo Colon, "the corpulent hurler.")
• "Navajo" (Jacoby Ellsbury, "the gazelle of the roster.")
• "Hoss" (Mike Timlin)
• "The Shadow" (Hideki Okajima, "who lays damp noodle after damp noodle across the batting area")
• "Two-Bags" (Mike Lowell)
• "Applebags" (David Aardsma)
• "Here I am!" (Craig Hansen)
• "Gap Tooth" (David Pauley)
• "Beanpole" (Clay Buchholz)
• "Flash" (Kevin Cash)

The site, which features an awesome array of vintage photos, early-twentieth century (late-nineteenth century?) verbiage, and repeated references to the extinct Duffy's Pure Malt Whiskey (any relation to Duffy's Cliff?) is a must-read, despite the ubiquity of Red Sox-related commentary.

I mean, where else have you heard Alex Rodriguez (excuse me, A-Rod) referred to as "Slaps"?

- John C.L. Morgan

The Sportswriter: Draft Grades

The 2008 NBA Draft is not yet twelve hours old, but analysts are already issuing grades for teams and even proclaiming some teams as winners and others as losers. Considering the players drafted last night have not even stepped on an NBA practice court, such analysis is a cute gimmick that has devolved into a serious exercise in futility.

Indeed, instead of etching their chicken scratch about this year's event on millions of computer screens (not to mention newspapers and magazines), sportswriters should be spending their time reflecting on a team's performance in, say, the 2003 draft. In other words, grade a team's draft performance based on players who, you know, have actually done something in the NBA--or not, as is the case of Mike Sweetney.

So without further ado, a reflection on the Class of 2003's top 10 draft picks (I do have a life, so I won't look at the entire draft):

1. LeBron James, CLE- A no-brainer, even at the time. But give Cleveland credit for drafting the player I think will be considered the best ever. Even if he is a traitorous Yankee fan from Ohio.
2. Darko Milicic, DET- A B-U-S-T for the Motor City: Milicic averaged no more than seven minutes per game in his career with Detroit and was subsequently traded to Orlando and then to Memphis.
3. Carmelo Anthony, DEN- Another can't-miss prospect in 2003 who's lived up to his draft slot. Though Anthony hasn't led the Nuggets to a championship yet, he has led them to the playoffs in each of his five years in the league. And he is one of the league's most prolific scorers.
4. Chris Bosh, TOR- A three-time All-Star who's the cornerstone of a solid team.
5. Dwyane Wade, MIA- Though the team currently stinks and Wade now seems to be injured more often than not, he did lead the Heat to its first championship in the 2005-2006 season.
6. Chris Kaman, LAC- A solid center who's contributed from the beginning (he appeared in every game as a rookie) and who has improved to become a double-doubler.
7. Kirk Hinrich, CHI- A key player in the Bulls' pre-2007/2008 resurgence.
8. T.J. Ford, MIL- Considering he was traded by the Bucks only two years after the team drafted him, Ford evidently was not a good pick for Milwaukee.
9. Mike Sweetney, NY- Who? Sweetney is no longer in the NBA.
10. Jarvis Hayes, WASH- After Hayes spent four years as a role-player, the Wizards declined to renew his contract. He is now a reserve with the Detroit Pistons.

(Editor's Note: This post has been edited to correct the spelling of the names of Dwyane Wade and Mike Sweetney, as well to correct an initial assertion that Sweetney did not have a Wikipedia page.)

- John C.L. Morgan

The Sportswriter

If you're a soccer fan (and even if you're not), I recommend Hal Phillips's two ESPN.com articles about the Americanization of Fulham FC, a soccer team in the English Premier League (here and here). Phillips, a writer from New Gloucester, describes Fulham's supporters and stadium so evocatively I yearn to be yet another Yankee (the good kind) wandering the streets of London looking for Craven Cottage. And his ironic observation that American soccer players are imported by foreign soccer clubs as cheap labor is spot-on. Alas, despite the articles' dated quality (they were published last spring), Fulham still finds itself battling for a spot in the Premier League, as they are currently in 19th place out of twenty teams, with four games remaing. The bottom three teams are relegated to a lesser league.

The good news, though, is that they've actually added a couple more Americans to the team since Phillips's travelogues, bringing the grand sum of Americans on Fulham to five (Keller, Bocanegra, Dempsey, Johnson, and McBride).

- John C.L. Morgan

The Sportswriter: New England Revolution

The New England Revolution opened its season last night with a win over the Houston Dynamo, 3-0. Unfortunately, you probably have no idea who these teams are, or what sport I'm actually writing about.

That's because despite all the talk of New England suddenly becoming a title-rich region, most people remain ignorant to the accomplishments of one of its most successful franchises.

Sure, most everyone knows the New England Patriots have played in four of the last seven Super Bowls (winning three), the Boston Red Sox have won two of the last four World Series, and the once-dormant Boston Celtics now possess the best record in the NBA. But did you know the Revolution, a team in Major League Soccer (MLS), have played in every Eastern Conference Final since 2002 (an accomplishment akin to the Red Sox playing for every American League pennant in that span)? Or that they've played in every MLS Cup since 2005? Probably not.

So next time someone reads the laundry list of New England pro teams' accomplishments in the 21st century, be sure to remind them of the New England Revolution's sparkling success.

Just leave out the part about them being the Buffalo Bills of the MLS. No one likes a very successful loser.

- John C.L. Morgan

The Sportswriter: Boston Celtics

James Posey is not the most underappreciated addition to the Boston Celtics this year. Nor is Eddie House or Glen "Big Baby" Davis. Instead, that distinction goes to assistant coach Tom Thibodeau.

Thibodeu, a native New Englander who was hired by the C's in late August, has fleshed out a resume as one of the NBA's most effective defensive coaches. When he was an assistant in Houston, the Rockets ranked among the top five in the NBA in fewest points allowed per game and the lowest field goal percentage allowed over the previous four years. And, according to his official team biography, the teams Thibodeau have helped coach have finished in the top ten in team defense fourteen times in his 17 NBA seasons. A critic may chalk those facts as a collection of coincidences, a case of Coach Thibodeau being in the right place at the right time, with the right players. But count this Celtics fan (albeit an admitted bandwagoner) as a believer in Thibodeau's defensive prowess.

Throughout the first half of this season, the Celtics led the NBA in all the important defensive statistics: They allowed the fewest points per game (89.44), the lowest field goal percentage (42.2%), the lowest three-point field goal percentage (31.6%), and the fewest assists per game (18.2). To be sure, the defense instantly became stronger when the Celts added Kevin Garnett, Ray Allen, and Co. to the roster. But Ray Allen and Paul Pierce, for example, didn't exactly have sterling reputations as defensive stalwarts before this year. The fact that they're two key players on the league's best defensive team leads me to believe it is the coaching, and not necessarily the personnel that should be credited with the Celts' drastic improvement in defense.

So next time you're taking in a game at the Stockhouse Restaurant, gather your friends for a toast to Tom Thibodeau, the man who deserves a Tommy Point each time the Celts take the floor. And when your barstool neighbor responds to the toast with a puzzled, "Who?" just respond with: "You know, the most underappreciated addition to the Boston Celtics this year."

Actually, you should probably sex that answer up a bit.

- John C.L. Morgan