Gretz defends Sippio

by bas on Aug 13, 2008 1:58 PM CDT Comment 19 comments

In a tactful post, Gretz decided to clown the KC Star's bashing of Sippio as unfounded, though does not make any roster predictions. He argues that B. Sippio works hard, does his job, and does not deserve to be bashed for being a good team player that has one obvious skill deficit. It is a good read, and quite funny. The Star's treatment of him seemed entirely unfair. Cruise on over and have a look and comment on it. I know there are some Sippio fans around here.

www.bobgretz.com

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Arrowhead Pride's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Arrowhead Pride writers or editors.

0 recs | Comment 19 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Good Column By Gretz

I agreed with his assessment that the KC Star’s article was way off base for claiming the Chiefs “would prefer he not make the team” because he’s not a Kuharich draft pick. Kuharich was there when they brought him in as a free agent after all, so he’s as much a Kuharich guy as any of the draftees. Utterly stupid comments by the Star and completely unfair to Sippio.

And yes, I admit to being a Sippio fan. I realize he’s got an uphill battle to make the roster, and I don’t have any illusions that he’s more than a fringe player, but I’m rooting for the guy anyway because all he’s done since coming here is bust his ass and make the most of his very scant opportunities and I think that deserves some credit.

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Aug 13, 2008 2:47 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Unlike Teicher ever busting his butt for anything meaningful or physical other than dinner.

Teicher is the classic reporter who never played the game, but became an “expert” watching others play. I lost all respect last season with Whitlock and have not read a column by him since. Now I will use the same discretion with Teicher.
My source of information for the Chiefs is this site first and foremost, WPI and Bib Gretz columns.

By the way for those of you who cannot see the game this week, NFL Network is replaying it on Tuesday morning at 2am, I think.

by Lanier63 on Aug 13, 2008 4:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Whoa Now

Just because an analyst “never played the game” does not make their opinion invalid or incorrect. Frankly, I’ve seen plenty of great NFL players who were absolutely clueless about football outside of their personal realm of expertise (Brett Favre being a prime recent example…he’s a great football player but frankly as dumb as a box of rocks). I’m willing to bet that pretty much none of the people frequenting this site have ever played football in the NFL and quite a few have never played organized football at all…does that mean that those people are all incapable of offering a valid opinion on the happenings of the NFL, because we’ve never signed an NFL contract or worn an NFL uniform? I think not.

If there’s any real gripe to be had about Teicher and Whitlock, it’s that they often submit very lazy analysis and talk out of their ass all too often…often blurring the line between subjective conjecture and objective analysis. To Whitlock’s credit he’s often willing to admit when he’s done it and retract statements (well, sometimes).

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Aug 13, 2008 5:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

word... and...

That caveat doesn’t go both ways…

Whitlock played the game (at least in college) and he’s twice as dumb as sh#t. I read his columns when I want a good laugh, or to be infuriated.. it’s usually a coin toss.
Terry Bradshaw is a moron… and won 4 superbowls… he’s murder to listen to.
Emmitt Smith, Deion Sanders and Michael Irvin were all superstars, but I’d rather put a fork in my eye than listen to them comment on football. Granted the latter mentioned are TV commentators, but you get my point.

to agree with Lanier, Tiecher seems to have lost his marbles with this Sippio thing. I was never a big fan of his, but now I think he’s a grade A douche.

By the way, NFL Network is airing the Chiefs/Cards game at 11p cst on Saturday night (16th). They may also be running it on Tuesday, and several other times through the week.

by Ochophosphate on Aug 13, 2008 9:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I wasnt insinuating "playing in the NFL"

“never played the game” meaning organized on any level. The people who post here don’t accept money for their opinions is what I was trying to convey.

by Lanier63 on Aug 13, 2008 9:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'd Accept Money For My Opinions If Someone Was Offering :)

I’ve also never played organized football on any level except for pickup games (I played rugby). Doesn’t render me (or anyone else who didn’t play) incapable of studying, watching or understanding the game or offering a relevant point.

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Aug 13, 2008 11:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I Do Agree That Teicher Is A Bit Of A Douche, Though

I can’t recall anything he’s ever said that I found particularly useful. He’s kind of like Jonathan Rand for me…someone who’s never offered an opinion interesting enough to remember. And I thought the Sippio article was a cheap shot at a guy who just shows up, busts his ass and doesn’t complain even when he doesn’t get a shot at playing time.

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Aug 13, 2008 11:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

indeed

I’d accept chicken feed for my opinion if it were worth so much.

I too never played organized. Honestly I never had a true love for the game until it was too late for me to do anything about it. If I had the passion I have now when I was younger, I might have made something of it.

My information is gleaned from the trifecta of insanity – Chiefs fanaticism, fantasy football, and an unhealthy NCAA/Madden addiction.

by Ochophosphate on Aug 14, 2008 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

There's Nothing Unhealthy About An NCAA/Madden Addiction

If the world can’t accept that we have a need about this time every year to hole up in front of the TV and get our football jones addressed instead of interacting with them, then that’s just their problem, man :)

Only downside I’ve found so far to this year’s Madden, by the way, is that it appears to be harder to do low tackles with the hit stick. I love low tackles. On the plus side, though, laying a standup killshot on a running back catching a screen pass has never been easier, and the smarter CPU AI where the defenders take better routes (as opposed to the superhuman speed CPU defenders used to develop) is way better. I’m holding off on giving a full rating until I’ve figured out just how bad the glitches are, but so far it’s a two thumbs-up game. :)

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Aug 14, 2008 1:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

yeah, I'm mad at EA

I’ll try to keep this short and minimize the details, but I’m currently pissed off at EA and haven’t bought Madden yet.

I don’t own a PS3 (yet) or 360 (never will) but I do own a wii. I completely skipped both NCAA and Madden in ’08, and just kept playing my ’07 dynasties/franchises on my PS2.

They so badly butchered NCAA on the wii this year (which was the first version on a Nintendo system since ‘05 on the GCN) that I traded it in after 15 minutes of play. It had nothing to do with graphics, it had everything to do with false advertising. You see, before launch there was a comparison chart on EAsports.com showing the features in all three major console releases of NCAA. Of course you don’t expect the wii version to have everything that the PS3/360 versions have, but the main critical features I was interested in were there – online play, and online dynasties. I realized within a few minutes of play that these features were nonexistent. There were several other features missing that seemed to piss off other owners (no realistic stadiums, etc) but for me it was the complete lack of online play that killed it. After several days of bitching to EA, I went on down to gamestop and traded it in for something else. Thankfully, the guy at my shop gave me full value on a trade in even though they only had it valued at $25. I was so mad at EA that I didn’t bother to pick up the PS2 version, I just decided to skip it entirely. I probably wouldn’t have been so pissed if EA hadn’t posted that comparison chart falsely advertising the features just days before launch. Of course, EA ripped that chart offline after launch and it is nowhere to be found (I’m not the only one who saw it, the forums were littered with people bitching about it). What I wouldn’t give for a screenshot of that chart.

For me, NCAA and Madden go hand in hand. I don’t bother to get one without the other. I import my roster files in to NCAA and then I graduate/draft my players in to Madden. Since NCAA was such a clusterf@&k I completely avoided Madden as well. There is a chance that I may go pick these up for the PS2 eventually, but not until they are dirt cheap new or used and hopefully make no money for EA.

Sadly, I’m the one missing out here. EA will still make bajillions off of NCAA/Madden this year on all consoles. I can only hope that they get their ass in gear next year and fix it, or at least not outright lie about the features that will be in the game prior to launch.

sorry for the novel

by Ochophosphate on Aug 15, 2008 6:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Madden/NCAA

I do the same…I like being able to follow players through their entire career (and draft players from Big 12 schools and football powerhouses for the Chiefs) so I buy both games.

You didn’t miss much with Madden 08 other than a few good tweaks to gameplay (low tackles are awesome). That game was so filled with glitches (and not just little ones, but game-killing ones like deleting all players from the free agent pool in franchise mode) and it took so long for EA to release a patch (about four months) that the experience was ruined for me. Madden 09 so far has been great (I play on XBox 360), although I’ve only had time to play a couple of games and I’m waiting for the inevitable bugs to surface. But so far so good.

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Aug 15, 2008 8:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

EA's Profits

They actually lost a lot of money last year during the quarter when they sold Madden. A lot of people were extremely unhappy with what they perceived (legitimately, in my opinion) as the overall declining quality of EA’s products. Can’t say as I blame them…I used to love NBA Live until they released ‘06 and ’07 for the 360 (both unplayable garbage that shouldn’t have made it out of beta testing) and an underwhelming followup with ‘08 (which is the last NBA Live I’ll ever buy). I was so angry about Madden’s problems last year that I wasn’t going to buy ‘09, but they finally canned the guy who’d been running the development team on it for the last few years (he was incompetent…the dude only cared about online play and he basically dedicated no effort to improving or even doing quality control on franchise) so I held my nose and ponied up for this year’s version. So far I haven’t regretted it (fingers crossed).

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Aug 15, 2008 8:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I hope they don't maintain this monopoly

I think it’s ridonkulous that EA is able to hold a monopoly on the licenses. They basically bought a license to be lazy. I understand their desire to pillage and plunder and take everybody’s $50 (and now $60+) per year for what is basically a patch of the prior year… but I still think it’s beyond a rip off.

If they don’t lose their exclusivity with the licenses I wish they would do the following.

-Drop the product refresh cycle to every two years. This should allow them time to make a real update and flesh out most of the major bugs.
-On the in-between years, they should release a reduced cost update (be it downloaded or by disc), say in the $20 price range that includes the new rosters and fixes additional bugs that were not fixed in the original relese.

I don’t think people would complain much, as this is more or less what they are doing now, they just don’t acknowledge it. Hell, ‘05-’07 were basically the exact same game with a few tweaks thrown in along with some (IMO) awful gimmicks (i.e. passing cone, lead blocking control) while passing it off as the “new” version. I didn’t play ‘08 much so I can’t comment.

I just wish there were a competitor out there that I could give my hard earned cash to so I wouldn’t have to keep feeding the pigs at EA. I’m tired of their substandard crap.

by Ochophosphate on Aug 15, 2008 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's Not A Monopoly

A monopoly exists when a party maintains more or less total control over an essential resource via coercive means that denies other competitors entry into that market. Labelling the EA/NFL partnership as a monopoly fails on several levels:

1) EA did not gain their exclusivity via coercive actions, they gained the license by offering more money than their competitors to have exclusive production rights to the NFL brand for their football video game. The NFL is a trademarked property and as such the owners of the NFL have every right to sell the privilege to use their brand (or to deny others to use it) to whomever they wish.

2) It’s a stretch to try and claim that football video games are an essential resource. Sure, we like them, but if we suddenly didn’t have them any more the hardship would rise to little more than an annoyance.

3) Madden is not the only video football game on the market, merely the only NFL licensed game. All-Pro Football came out last year. 2K Sports has the ability to make their own football game. The problem is that nobody wants to buy those football games (because they’re not NFL-affiliated…and because in the case of APF, the game sucked). That’s not coercive action on the part of EA or the NFL either, merely consumer choice. But if the quality of Madden drops too much and people decide they have to have a football video game, somebody will find a way to make that happen even without access to NFL properties.

4) Aside from being there to punish other entities from trademark infringement (a crime against the property rights of EA and the NFL) the government isn’t intervening to coercively influence the market. They’re merely extending the same protection that they would to any other business whose property rights were being violated. Absent coercive action by government that creates barriers to entry for new competitors or that grants special privileges to favored parties, monopolies cannot exist…the free market always works against them.

I certainly agree that the exclusive license for EA has weakened the Madden product, and I think that the NFL should take more of an interest in the quality of the product that represents them (because EA’s done a crappy job for awhile), but there’s nothing monopolistic in what’s going on with Madden.

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Aug 15, 2008 2:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

And The Key To Beating The Exclusive License

Is the same as the solution to dealing with any company that gives you substandard service…simply to not buy their product.

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Aug 15, 2008 2:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

As For The Lack Of Innovation

I haven’t bought a last-gen video game title since 2005 so I’m not familiar with the progression there. Until this season, though, all of the next-gen titles for the 360 have left me underwhelmed. Madden 06 was bare-bones (as were most of the franchise game titles the first year the 360 was released) and didn’t have an NCAA 06 companion game. Madden 07 was better but NCAA 07 was very underwhelming for its first year on the 360. NCAA 08 was very good, and Madden 08 could have been great if not for the horrible bugs throughout which wrecked it for me. NCAA 09 is slightly better than last year’s (except they still don’t have the Jayhawk mascot for the 3rd straight year, which really pisses me off) although a lot of the new add-ons I don’t care about at all (Mascot Challenge…who the hell cares?) but overall a very worthy addition. Madden 09 so far has been very good for me. So in it’s fourth year on next-gen maybe EA has finally figured it all out.

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Aug 15, 2008 5:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

wow, no Jayhawk?!?

After last year and a good preseason rank this year, you think they would put a little effort in to representing them accurately.

I totally agree with you that crap like the mascot challenge is a total waste of disc space. Sometimes I wonder who their focus group is for testing these games? Do they actually get feedback that these features are interesting/exciting and even essential?

by Ochophosphate on Aug 15, 2008 5:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

No Clue

I guess I should just be happy that they’ve got Memorial Stadium…they didn’t have that in NCAA 07 (just some crap generic stadium). As far as I can tell, the Jayhawks are the only Big 12 North team whose mascot isn’t represented. I think Baylor’s the only other Big 12 school missing theirs, but then, it’s Baylor. They haven’t had a winning season since the early ’90s.

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Aug 15, 2008 6:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs