Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Tuesday Tidbits: It Has Now Officially, Gotten Stankiest Out There

It's a gloomy day in Kansas City. That is, it's raining. Either snow or rain has been falling consistently for three straight days now, and sporting news hitting the CyberStands doesn't look much better. In case you've not heard, Kansas City Chiefs wide receiver Dwayne Bowe has been suspended by the NFL for four games for violating the league's performance-enhancing substance policy. Word is that he'll not appeal the suspension, that it'll start immediately. Speculations are that, as Bowe came into training camp 30 pounds overweight, he used a diuretic to help shed some pounds, which, if correcty, translates to off-season laziness. This means no Steelers at home this weekend, no Chargers on the road in two weeks, no Broncos and no Bills for the first part of a three-game home stand. Thank God for the Chris Chambers signing, as our playoff chances were looking threatened there for a minute.

In NCAA news, Kansas Jayhawks Head Football Coach Mark Mangino is going under the scope. I don't mean surgery, and I don't mean they're going to try and place the big fella on a slide for examination. I mean that the school is investigating allegations of questionable conduct in the form of "yelling at and making contact with a player earlier this season." But that's just a few clouds on a figuratively bright day for KC sports...

...because Kansas City Royal Zack Greinke has won the American League Cy Young Award, by count of 25 of 28 votes. When the chatterings began, I had little faith that Greinke would actually win it. The case for Zack tried to make itself inevitable, though, as the regular season drew to a close, and the playoffs began. But today, a certain someone's prediction rang true.

On the evening of April the 8th, of 2009, I texted Old No. 7 that KC's number two starter had looked real sharp in a 2-0 shutout of the Chicago White Sox at U.S. Cellular Field.

His response was something to the tune of, "Part of a little Cy Young campaign I like to call Gettin' Stanky with Zack Greinke," which made me chuckle. Of course I liked the notion of it, but never did I think it would come true, some seven months later. Well played, sir, and well deserved, Mr. Greinke. Three cheers for good news. Hell, three cheers for great news.


Stacy said...

He's always manufacturing little campaigns, out there in his mountain-hidey-hole.
But, yes and finally, some good news out from Stadium drive.
If the Chiefs could just cap it off with the predicted playoff run...

Dylan said...

How my sister-in law's google identity signed me in....I do not know.
It is me ,the D of KC ,in the last comment.
Plz do not harass her, she does not know.

old no. 7 said...

Oh, I see. "Speculations are that...Bowe...used a diuretic to help shed some pounds." The reason that these substances are on the banned list is that they are used to mask steroids. If you believe that tubby Bowe was just trying to fit into his prom dress, I'd like to make sure you're also on board with the story that Manny Ramirez was just trying to get pregnant.

I love the revisionist history that goes on around here--if a Chief cheats he's immediately exonerated and we just worry about the games. If anything shady happens with a Bronco it's a threat to morality itself and the children of America.

bankmeister said...

You know something? You're right. I just swung by the GNC and examined the label of every single diuretic available. They all say in bold, underlined print: Take this if you want, but know for certain that its use is for steroid-masking first, and only when consumed with regular exercise and strict dietary regiments will this substance help you lose weight.

There was also an FDA label that said, "Be advised that Chiefs fans distort the truth while Broncos simply identify it."

Silly me. I don't know what I was thinking, since, you know, wide receivers get busted for steroid use like every single day.

old no. 7 said...

Is your argument that WRs are incapable of juicing? He took a substance on the banned list--why did he do that?

I've watched a lot of sports, and if there's one thing I've learned it's this: if there's a chance someone might be cheating, they are.

bankmeister said...

I don't have an argument. You do. Take it up with Bob Gretz. He has the answers.

old no. 7 said...

Gretz is insane. Quote: "Bowe didn’t take the diuretic to mask steroids use." How, exactly, does Bob know this? Because that's what Bowe told him? Please tell me you're not this naive.

I'm not saying he did steroids, it is possible that the weight-loss story is true. It's just that in every single case an athlete tests positive for a banned substance there's a story like this. It was a tainted sample, etc. All I'm saying is that accepting that story and not even considering an alternative is putting your head in the sand.

But it appears that that's what the entire Chiefs universe has done. So I guess it's settled.

Dylan said...

How you managed to convolute this simple claim and story into a one man pity-party for the Denver Broncos is amazing!
Fact: DB tested + for a banned substance
Fact: The NoFunLeague will not reveal anymore to us. Discovery time- over.
Nowhere in this thread or post is history "revised" or are "heads put in sand."
I know you just bought your copy of "going rogue," but take it easy, Sarah!

Cecil said...

Pity party? Because 7 had the mental fortitude to question Bob Gretz, who might be the biggest homer in American sports media, whereas evidently the whole of Kansassouri just heard his take and nodded?

The point is this: if Brandon Marshall had the same thing going on, both of you would be waving the Bronze Flag of Steroids from the top of the tallest building in Raytown. But it's Dwayne Bowe, so naturally he's just trying to lose weight.

bankmeister said...

a) I heard the news on Bowe and formed my own opinion before I saw the Gretz piece.

b) I knew that you would trash Gretz.

c) "the entire Chiefs universe has done this." How do you know this? Did the entire Chiefs universe tell you so? Please tell me you're not this naive.

d) I'm disappointed that it took Cecil nearly two hours to jump into Camp Seven, but shock of all shocks, there he is, proud and mimicking.

e) I'm glad the front range doesn't have any massively giant homers. It's awesome there's no Adam Schefter or Bill Williamson or Shannon Sharpe that routinely address NFL issues but don't show a hint of homerism.

f) Comparing Bowe to Marshall. That's good stuff right there. We wouldn't ever do such a thing, 'cause, you know, we have every reason in Ray-Pec to give B-Marsh the benefit of each and every doubt. Bowe, however? He's a clown and a thug. Just look at his track record.

Cecil said...

Of course I'm gonna trash Gretz. He's a fan blogger like ourselves masquerading as a journalist.

Williamson is a terrible comparison--that fat fuck was leading the "they're gonna be terrible!" contingent before the season. Schefter, even though I think he's a dick, doesn't play favorites with the Broncos these days. He was tight with Shanahan, that's it. Sharpe, well, you know.

Also: you do realize this isn't about Brandon Marshall, yes? I'm not defending him; I'm saying that your response was, as ours likely would have been, totally predictable in its homerosity.

Dylan said...

If this thread were an amusement park ride.... it would be called: "The Jump.......to Conclusions."

old no. 7 said...

So I've added up the scores for this little dustup and...I win. Let's make sure that DKC's sister-in-law shows up for the party once Tradition time rolls around.

bankmeister said...

The only thing you "win" is the seldom-coveted Donkey of the Day award.

Dylan said...

How did you add up this little summation?
Do you have a calculator for "dustups?"
I'll calculate it:

Desperate, petty nerds resort to message board silliness....in order to distract from the largest "elephant" in the room:
The 2009 Denver Broncos....and you thought the Buccaneers were bad.

Note the clever borrowing of adjectives.

I win all dustups.

Child plz.

Cecil said...

I love the attempt to make the Broncos--who were, last I checked, leading the division--some sort of massive, Enron-esque fraud, especially by fans of a squad that is arguably the worst in football.

The Bucs, actually, have shown some life. The Chefs are Browns-level bad.

And hey, "desperate, petty nerds"? Who you callin' petty?

old no. 7 said...

Richard Petty is desperately seeking a new topic.

bankmeister said...

Yes. Leading the division. How frequently you remind us of that. Last time I checked, you were now only leading it by virtue of a tiebreaker. I'm feeling pretty certain that this is one of the last weeks in which you'll be able to boast such a claim.

Since you're so interested in making the Chiefs appear to be one of the worst in football, I'll go ahead and note that they a) have won twice as many games as the Bucs, Rams, Lions, and Browns; b) have shown that they're a better squad than Oakland -- hey, look! tiebreaker! c) held the club that just beat you to six points while your division leaders let them drop some 27 on you; d) suggested that, while not being worth $63 million, per se, their quarterback is likely better than Orton or Simms; and e) will in fact sweep y'all beeatches.

Be advised.

Cecil said...

A better squad than Oakland? You guys split the season series. I'd go with "equal" over "better," but that's just me.

Hey, we may not win another game this year--even though we will, at least, win three--but as of right now we are leading the division. I work in the present, Buck Rogers, not the distant future.

And wait, *who* suggested that Cassel was better than Orton? You? The Chefs? Bob Gretz? Either you've got some agreement issues going on in your last post or you're huffing ether.

bankmeister said...

Hmmm. I knew that would raise some eyebrows. I said better based on points for (142 vs. 88), points against (215 vs. 217), and net points (-73 vs. -129).

I suggested it. And it was based on absolutely nothing. See that? How 'bout those numbers?

Cecil said...


Let me get this straight: Cassel is better than Orton because of statistics that, literally, have no relevance to any possible point you could be making.

Points against. My God, man, why don't you just say he's better because he makes more money?

bankmeister said...

No, no, no. The numbers were why the Chiefs are better than the Raiders. I have nothing to support Cassel being better than Orton. Nothing at all.