Simers vs. Mora

You know, that's a Los Angeles Times thing that I think extends back to Bill Dwyre. Or maybe before him. Or maybe beyond sports. I hate it, but I deal with it for T.J. Simers.

It gets really annoying when Baxter Holmes or David Wharton has a good, long feature story and that paragraph structure is used.

 

Simers' line of reasoning isn't exactly outlandish either, BTW. This kind of thing is very common in the NFL. A couple of years ago the Jets laid down for the Bengals, Cincinnati got in and Texas went home, and then the Jets beat the crap out of the Bengals the next week.

The most famous one is probably 1991 when the Chiefs and Raiders played in the regular-season finale but they were already locked into a first-round playoff matchup too. I think maybe home field was being decided but Marty didn't really care about that. He just went vanilla the first time.

Marinovich on Dec. 22: 23-40, 243, 3 TDs, 0 INTs
Marinovich on Dec. 28: 12-23, 140, 0 TDs, 4 INTs

So the idea of tanking or other manipulation is unpleasant, but hardly unprecedented.

 

Actually, the Bengals laid down for the Jets, then the Jets proceeded to beat them again.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=300103020

 

Ah yes. So the Bengals thought they were helping themselves out.

In any case, the intent was definitely there, and I don't think it's unique.

 

I agree. But I also think it's interesting Simers thinks Oregon is better than Stanford. Stanford won in Eugene two weeks ago and hasn't lost with Kevin Hogan at quarterback.

 

Contra:

Simers doesn't succeed in making his case - in fact stipulates in the first sentence he can't make his case - and most of the quotes are Simers' own.

Like every Simers column, it's entirely about Simers.

 

Of course it is. But he's pretty good at it. I could never do it, standing up in public and wanting to be the asshole everybody's looking at, but he has settled that question for himself and has built a pretty good following that way.

 

From the UCLA perspective, this was the story of the game. Only T.J. Simers had the balls to really write about it.

 

Simers only amplified what many people thought.

Stanford is the best team I've seen this year, but a team UCLA has a better chance beating than Oregon. Oregon would do the same thing to UCLA in this title game as it did to UCLA in last year's title game.

So did UCLA tank it? Who's going to admit to that? Doesn't mean a shitload of people weren't thinking that.

 

I've never been in the same room with the man, but don't other reporters, who have actual work to do, get pissed at his puppet show? I think this would get old after a bit.

 

True, but that's his deal... Love it or hate it, that's what he does... I'm guessing he usually does not do it at a press conference.

 

TJ is not well-liked in general and from what I've heard that's well-deserved. I've never spoken to the guy, but I have friends who have worked with him who said, "If you ever met him, you'd probably never be able to read his stuff the same way."