Ten Fingers, 6 Strings: Skip Bayless

September 29, 2005

Skip Bayless - Another Inane Article

If any of you people are sports fans, and know who the insufferable Skip Bayless is, you'll know where I am heading with this. In yet another article designed to "shock" the sports world by thinking outside the box, our fearless columnist puts his hands to the keys in yet another spectacularly stupid article. He argues for the removal of the place kicker, and in doing so has to, um, s-t-r-e-e-e-e-t-c-h, the truth:

After all, New England's Adam Vinatieri has won two Super Bowls with late field goals. Jim O'Brien won one for the Baltimore Colts. And of course, Scott Norwood's wide-right miss stained the careers of Buffalo greats Jim Kelly, Thurman Thomas and Bruce Smith, who could have been remembered for one Super Bowl win instead of four losses.
College football has been equally plagued. How many times have kickers cost Florida State games against arch-rival Miami? More than Bobby Bowden has clichés.

My point: Three-point field goals count way, way too much.

Skip, one problem with Scott Norwood and your memory: the Bills were already losing when Norwood squared away for his 43-yard field goal. What stained the careers of Jim Kelly, Thurmond Thomas and Bruce Smith was not that incident, it was the fact that the Giants (and eventually the Cowboys and Redskins) scored more points than they did in the final game of the year. If said Bills were so tainted, why weren't they capable of putting Lawrence Taylor on his ass to score a touchdown instead of relying on the vilified Norwood to win the game? It's because they weren't capable of such a feat. Lawrence Taylor ended his career with two-Superbowl rings and a crap-load of crack, because he and the Giants defense stopped them from moving the ball foward, and thus tainted the careers of these not-quite-good-enoughs.

Scott Norwood gave them a chance from 43 yards away, but hey don't let that inconvenient fact get in the way of another stupid article that you, without fail, endlessly supply the esteemed readers of ESPN.com.

Anyway, I could care less about the "point" of his article and whether or not he convinces me to abolish the kicker in football. Go read it and see if you are convinced to change the fundamental nature of football by an adult that still calls himself Skip.

Ad Hominem enough for you?

Posted by 10 fingers 6 strings at September 29, 2005 06:23 PM | TrackBack

Comments

The kicking game is an integral part of football. Som many games are affected by the decision -- do we kick or go for a first down? --that to remove it takes away a lot of strategy.

I myself think that they ought to give a point if, on the kickoff, the placekicker can put it through the uprights. Now that would be interesting. Or, over 50 yards, if a field goal was worth 4 points.

But take it away? Never.

Posted by: The Colossus at September 30, 2005 05:10 AM

Yeah, I agree. Football would denegrate into a bad version of rugby if it didn't include the kicking game.

I think behind all it's "brutality", American football is one of the most complicated and strategy intense games in existence, with so many variables working at one time.

Living in the Bay Area, we are well aware of Skip Bayless, as he has been writing "controversial" stuff for the San Jose Mercury for years now. I was going to post something he wrote about Steve Young when he was elected to the Hall of Fame and essentially used Steve's induction to blast him for not being Joe Montana. Montana was great, but if Steve Young doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame, then no quarterback does.

Posted by: TF6S at September 30, 2005 09:16 AM