Bye to the Hiatus: Sports Talk about Santo, Marlin$, Te-Pro Bowl

I've had writer's block, haven't really sat down by my computer after work, etc., so I apologize to the 10 of you who read my blog regularly.

And by apologize, I mean I'm not really sorry and you should write for me on my writing hiatuses.

Anywho, lots of sports stuff - might write a few blogs tonight. For now, a bulleted one.

As they always say, you're always more famous when you're dead...Ron Santo in the Hall of Fame, finally.

Welcome to the Hall, Ron. Too bad you weren't around to answer the call.

For years, Santo and his loyal fanbase lobbied for his induction into the Hall of Fame by the Veteran's Committee, which passed him over with each vote. It took the Golden Era Committee (which reviews players from 1947-1972 that have been left out of the Hall) to vote him in. A couple of points from this and the Hall of Fame in general:

1. Good for him, but why did he get voted in a year after he died? Did it take his death to get voted in?
2. The Hall of Fame shouldn't be easy to get into. It should be a selective process and reward only the game's best.
3. Santo didn't get voted into the Hall by the regular voters mainly because of the influx of guys voted into the hall during his 15 year eligibility span (over half of the time he was eligible, 4+ guys got voted in by regular committee).
4. The Hall voters are dumb. Only thing you need to know, no one, not even Babe Ruth or Ted Williams, has ever been voted in unanimously. Voters who leave certain guys off their ballots should have their vote taken away. Next example of this - Greg Maddux.
5. How can voters not vote for someone one year, then next year change their ballot to include said player(s)? Player's stats (aside from Hack Wilson's) haven't changed after they retired, so it makes no sense to leave a guy off of a ballot if you think he is a HOF. Either you think he is HOF-worthy or he is not. It shouldn't be a year-to-year thing where as a voter, you change your mind and say, you know what, he is worthy now.

The Miami Marlins have been bought by the ghost of George Steinbrenner.  First Reyes, now Buehrle. Next, Pujols? Marlins are spending like the Yankees right now. Last year, they were lucky to draw a thousand people to some games. They have a new stadium that they are looking to fill now. My guess is that it will be like the previous stadiums that opened - fun at first, but at the end of the day, people won't show up day in, day out for a losing product. The Reyes contract is going to look awful in  a few years, and if they sign Pujols, that'll make two contracts that look ugly come 2015. Reyes' game is based on speed, and with how often he gets hurt, I don't expect him to be getting within a whiff of his steal totals from the first half of his career. I consider him a bum for taking himself out of the last regular season game when he ensured himself of winning the batting title. This doesn't sound like a guy I'd want around my team.

Pujols has had 3-4 years in declining stats and is going to be an average to slightly above-average player in about 4-5 years, which means 5-6 years of dead money. Also, we assume he is 31 right now. With how often Dominicans who come to the major leagues have fudged their age, what if he is 33 right now? That would mean he would be 42-43 when this deal ends. Like I said a few weeks ago, the Cards should let the Marlins sign him. The Cardinals do not need him to contend in a weak NL Central now. And with the solid foundation of ownership that they've always had, they won't need him in the near future.

Tebow a Pro-Bowler? Not as crazy of a thought as you might think.

Never thought I'd be saying this, but I'd be surprised if Tebow WASN'T a Pro-Bowler this year. Before you think I've swallowed a couple of crazy pills and smoked a pipe, look at the AFC and look at the talent of the QBs this year by division. And by no means am I a believer in his long-term success, merely looking at this year's QB situations in the AFC. (Note: I've named the starter to be the guy who has started the most game for his team at this point):

AFC North: Big Ben, Flacco, McCoy, Dalton: Only one who will make Pro Bowl (at least initially) will be Big Ben.
AFC South: Schaub, Painter, Hasselbeck, Gabbert: No Pro-Bowlers here. Schaub, who would have made it, is out for year.
AFC East: Brady, Sanchez, Fitzpatrick, Moore: Brady will go. Sanchez is under-rated and gets too much criticism, don't see him getting in. Fitzpatrick is a sleeper for nomination. If Moore could have started the year, he may be more considered (and Miami may be a playoff team).
AFC West: Tebow, Palmer, Rivers, Cassel: Again, no one here deserves nomination. Rivers is having a down year, Palmer is still getting his feet wet.

Will get in: Brady, Big Ben
Could get in: Flacco, Dalton, Fitzpatrick, Tebow
Probably won't: Rivers, Hasselbeck, Sanchez
Won't get in: Everyone else

As you can see by a breakdown, it's not too crazy to think that the Tebow hype gets him in the Pro Bowl, even though his stats don't show it. The fans get a third of the vote, remember. Also remember that Big Ben and Brady will likely bail on the Pro Bowl (playoff status or not) and there will be replacement(s) for them.

Also remember that the Pro Bowl is a useless game that no one really cares about or watches anyways, and the arguments over who doesn't get in are as pointless as the arguments about the fringe teams who don't make the NCAA tourney.

The BCS got the final game right, but there should at least be a +1 scenario in place. Just about everyone who watches college football has something bad to say about the BCS, and most believe there should be some kind of playoff. I know some people who believe a team should win their conference (whether it have a title game or not) in order to be considered. Others don't like the idea of a rematch in the title game - I have no problem with one.

However, I do think that there should be some mini-playoff, like a +1 scenario, which I understand to be a four-team playoff, with winners of semi-final games to play in championship game. In years where there are less than two major conference teams that finish undefeated, the BCS process gets critiqued. Last year, Oregon and Auburn finished undefeated, so no problems there. This year? LSU and then a bunch of 1-loss teams.

I think Bama and OK St should play each other in a couple weeks to play for the right to play LSU in champ game. Either way, I think it'd end up being Bama/LSU for the title.