My Hash Marks

So, you may have notice that espn.com and Matt Mosley have teamed up to create a new NFL blog.
Incidentally, it's called Hashmarks.
It's a good blog, with a great title (though it's very familiar sounding).

Anyway, now that I've started writing, I'll keep writing I suppose.
Let's see...

The NBA conference finals are over after two games, both of them.
I've never liked the NBA, and things aren't improving. I propose games be reduced to five minutes. Each team can have one timeout though so it'll last an hour or so.
People need to lay off LeBron James though. The Cavs are in the conference finals, that's impressive when you remember that they are, well the Cavs. Anyway, the kid's still young.
Give him time.

Go Barry Bonds. (I know, with that statement and my proposed NBA rule change I've alienated 91 percent of my readers, which is odd because I think this post will have about two readers.)
Seriously though, are we hating everybody who ever touched that "stuff" or just the surly ones? Hate him because of his personality if you must, but listen to his peers and take their word for it. What he's done and continues to do is amazing.
Appreciate it while you can. History will have plenty of time to judge it.

Speaking of that "stuff," give Jason Giambi a break too. Greenies used to be commonplace, and the revelation he tested positive for amphetamines is no big deal. Besides, he admitted to using stuff, then when some of that "stuff" is revealed we freak out?
I'm not sure what you expected.
Bottom line is he took some responsibility and he put some blame on the institution. The Yankees and MLB are angry because of the latter action. They hope to somehow solve this problem without taking any heat. Making a player regret opening up about using performance enhancers dramatically sets back the movement to repurify baseball.
I haven't heard or read that anywhere, but it's the case and as long as players can't open up about what went wrong, the shroud of secrecy, mystery and doubt will remain.

The Indy 500 is coming up despite the decline of the sport, this race is still chock full of storylines and potential history.
Three women are in the field and Danica Patrick has a legitimate shot to win it. A win would be huge. Three strong outings would be impressive.
There are two Andrettis trying to be the first from their family in Victory Lane since Mario did it 1967. Mario raced in 24 more without ever winning it again, and Michael's tried his hand at it 15 times. Last year, Marco, now 20 years old was caught on the last lap and edged by Sam Hornish in his rookie effort.
But I don't feel too sorry for the Andrettis. No one from my family has ever won the race in the history of ever. At least they've done it once.

Get excited for Canada.
They might win their first Stanley Cup since the Montreal Canadiens did it in 1993.
This time it's little Ottawa in the mix and all they have to do is knock off a team from sunny California.
Of course, the last two winners came from Tampa Bay, Florida and Raleigh, North Carolina, and the Anaheim Ducks are looking pretty strong. J.S. Giguere is a beast.
Still, let's root for the fellas up north. The NHL needs their champion to be appreciated, and Ottawa would appreciate the Senator's accomplishment far more than Los Angeles.

Let's get something straight.
It's a regrettable shame that the late Josh Hancock's father is suing Justin Tolar, the man whose car stalled on a freeway in St. Louis, allowing a sequence of events that led to the death of Hancock, a Cardinal's pitcher.
Now, is it wrong that he's suing the tow truck driver?
I would guess so, but until we find out if that driver, Jacob Hargrove, followed protocol then I won't say anything for sure.
Is it wrong that the restaurant owner and Cardinals broadcaster Mike Shannon and his daughter Patricia Shannon Van Matre — the manager who apparently tried to convince Hancock to take a taxi — are being sued?
Hell no.
I've worked in the restaurant business, and from what I learned one thing was always understood. If you get a customer drunk and he gets killed driving while still intoxicated, you're getting sued, and you deserve to lose. Drunk customers aren't cut off because management cares. They're cut off because if he drives and dies, they're in big trouble.
They got Hancock drunk. They apparently never cut him off. And they let him drive when they knew he was drunk.
All that should equal a decision in Hancock's favor.