Tuesdays with Hubner
If you plan to make a habit of glaring at the back page of this fine publication on Tuesdays-either discretely in lecture, or shamelessly during an intimate discussion section-you may become accustomed to my face, as well as the series of trivial sports-related thoughts invariably tucked beneath it.
In this, my debut as a sports columnist, I'd rather warn than welcome. It's a privilege to write and be read, so I would like to take this opportunity to be straightforward about what you can expect from me. That way, you will know whether reading this column is worth your time or whether you should begin to make some sense of the unintelligible buzzing noise coming from the professor's mouth that you've been trying to tune out.
Just as the credibility of a doctor's advice may hinge on whether he attended medical school (or at least watched \ER"" enough to know many cc's are needed, stat.) you might like to know how knowledgeable and/or passionate I am about sports.
I'll start by saying this: I'm almost positive that Heaven is where you want it to be. If this is the case, my ascension will take me to the big Final Four in the sky where Jim Nantz and Tyus Edney are sipping cocktails next to a grand piano with Grant Hill on the keys. I follow college and professional basketball and football religiously, baseball a moderate amount (moderate compared to Peter Gammons, but to the average human I'm sure it's unhealthy,) and hockey on occasion. Some of the less popular sports like soccer, golf and tennis can all be entertaining and they are still forms of competition, so as long as I can't find an Inferno rerun, I might end up watching.
As far as my knowledge of sports, it really just depends who's asking. If you're the kind of person that spends your free time reading blogs, scoring baseball games or insisting that you could, if given the chance, ""totally stump the Schwab,"" then you probably think I know as much about sports as Elizabeth Taylor knows about a lasting marriage.
On the other hand, my wealth of useless stats, information and jersey numbers might impress someone who considers themself learned simply because they can draft a good fantasy team. Either way, I could be a walking, talking Sports Almanac and there will still be some of you who will disagree with what I write for the simple fact that this space is reserved for my opinion, not a recitation of sports clich??s and consensuses. Plus, sports take up a good portion of my casual conversation on a daily basis-not because it's a life-jacket that keeps empty relationships afloat, but because I actually spend time thinking about it, arguing about it, caring about it, even getting into that sticky manslaughter situation over it.
Which reminds me, I should probably mention that I'm from the suburb 10 miles west of Boston, so my allegiance to Red Sox, Patriots and Celtics is tried and true. If you claim that we, the Boston faithful, have been spoiled over the last few years, keep in mind that until recently, caring about a Boston sports team was basically masochism; anyone 30 and older from the Boston area deserves this more than you know. Radio shows get callers who say things like, ""I don't want to be part of a world where the Yankees are champions."" A less obsessed legion of sports fans might understand that a simple ""Yankees suck"" chant could release a great deal of that frustration.
In any event, I want to be coherent in this space and provide intelligent arguments in support of my opinion on any number of topics that may require serious thought and perspective or just the opposite.
The one thing standing in the way of my goal is the fact that I have a strong attachment to certain teams and players that I cannot be truly objective when the topic at hand in any way involves those teams or players. For instance, I have just begun to accept that there is a debate as to whether Tom Brady really is a better quarterback than Peyton Manning, but the Patriots fan in me has a hard time understanding why that debate isn't over faster than you can say, ""three rings in four years.""
And of course, there are other beliefs I have as a result of my allegiances as sports fan. Because of this, I think the Pats will repeat this year and I think the Red Sox have as good a chance as anyone at doing the same thing. I also never liked the Yankees, and I can't stand A-Rod. And if there's one more thing I have come to believe about sports from growing up in New England, it's that you don't count on Drew Bledsoe to resurrect your franchise. There are strictly pocket passers and then there's Bledsoe, who has the mobility of a drunk on stilts.
But back on impartial-but perhaps divisive-ground, my favorite national broadcasters are Keith Jackson and Bill Raftery. My favorite current professional athlete is Shaq (what would you give to be friends with him? Your left one?). I think the best sports movie of all time is ""Hoop Dreams."" And I don't root for Lance Armstrong. Not just because he left his wife who helped him win his bout with cancer but because I think he's doping. Don't ask me to prove it, I wasn't there-only people who saw him do it were.
So that's that. I don't have to mention any of those things ever again because they're silly and likely won't pertain to whatever I might feel compelled to cover in the upcoming year. From here on, the most I can hope for is that I make you think-but I'll settle for you enjoying what you find here on the back page under my name (or front page, if you're like me and you read the important headlines first which are under ""Sports,"" then swear the paper is opening the wrong way).
Alas, Tuesday is a particularly exciting day already since if you call Domino's and order two large, one-topping pizzas you get your choice of CinnaStix or Cheesy Bread and a 2-liter Pepsi free!-all I'm shooting for is a close second.
Ben is a junior majoring in history, he can be reached at bphubner@wisc.edu
