World Series Buried Lead: FOX Sports Chicago

(The Big Dead Sidebar will try to provide readers with a buried lead before each and every World Series game.  This is the second installment in a series.)

In an effort to pull in a third large market for the World Series, FOX Sports will present the World Series through the eyes of some of Chicago's most popular players and managers.  At least, that's my theory ... and I'm sticking to it.

IOC Eliminates Chicago First (Update)

From the Chicago Tribune Web site's front page. It's like they took this picture at Wrigley Field in 2008, 2008, 2003, 1998, 1989, 1984, 1969, 1945...

In my eyes, the "presentation" must have looked like something straight out of a Second City improv.

Host: "OK, let's do some improv.  Shout out your suggestions, as usual.  Someone give me a baseball team."

Crowd Member 1: "2008 Chicago Cubs."

Host: "Did I hear 2008 Chicago Cubs? Alright, I need another team."

Crowd Member 2: "2008 Los Angeles Dodgers."

Host: "I like that.  Dodger blue.  Alright, give me an event.  A place."

Crowd Member 3: "The 2008 NLDS."

Crowd Member 4: "A pirate ship."

Host: "I like where this is going. Alright.  We've got the Cubs, Dodgers and the 2008 NLDS on a pirate ship.  Ready?  Set.  Go."

Portrayed on the stage is a group of "Cubs" being battered, bullied and pushed off the plank.

In the end, Chicago being eliminated first comes to a shock to some people pulling for the Windy City.  As a life-long Cubs fan, I say "meh."  I've been there before.

Chicago 2016? Nah, I'll Pass

Chicago brought out the heavy lumber in order to secure an Olympic bid that I totally do not want.

Unless we're talking about a Cubs-White Sox World Series, I don't want to hear anything about Chicago 2016.

Now, I'll be fair and say that I like the idea of money flowing into the city like a club when Pacman Jones walks in.  Or the increase of jobs and job opportunities the Olympics could provide the area.  That's fine and dandy.  I like that.  Who doesn't like that?

But if you look closely, the bad outweighs the good.  As a life-long Chicagoan, this city's commitment to the Summer Games really shows how out of line our priorities really are.

Many Chicagoans think hosting the Olympic games would cement its spot as a world-class city.  News flash: Chicago is already the best city in the world.  As always, I'm up for a debate if you think to the contrary.

Sure, Chicago would get a boatload of money that would help restore the the rough-and-tumble image of the South Side, while even more would go toward rehabbing a public transit system that has more problems than post-redhead Lindsay Lohan.

But I say screw it.  You want to make the South Side better?  Let's start with throwing money at the schools that rank among the worst public schools in the United States of America.  Let's get specific.  Chicago "boasts" four of the 25 worst public schools in America.  Stat Boy says that's 16 percent of the worst schools in America are in one city.  That's bad.  Is there anyone out there besides me that wants to invest some money in better books, better buildings and better teachers for these kids?

The city is rife with violence and undereducated people.  And I'm just talking about fans at White Sox games.  We don't need the Olympics.

How can the city expect kids to make rational decisions in their lives when the people they look up to can't.  Throwing money at the Olympics is like watching your brother throw money at an Escalade he can't afford while skipping out on his student loan payments.  His argument is that it will help his image.  Your counter argument is that his hard-earned degree should be all the image he needs at this stage of the game.

As for the public trans system, look, enough of my money has been sucked into that trap.  The CTA recently took some of the loot that was supposed to go to the alma mater's library refurnishing project.  Instead, it went to bailing out the CTA -- pushing back the project I thought would never get done before I graduated.  Besides, traffic in the city already sucks.  How much would you really look forward to rush hour traffic with a million other strangers?  If you thought finding a crowded train was easy before, wait 'til the Olympics come -- if they do.

I took an un-official tally and it turns out that more Chicago suburbanites are pro-Olympics than people that actually reside in the city.  Not much of a shocker to me.  They're not planning to build in your neck of the woods, are they now?

And to those of you who think you're getting seats to any of these events, good luck.  You'll be paying exuberant amounts of money you don't have and probably won't have even if you started saving today.  Personally, all I watch is the basketball -- and that's only if Team U.S.A. is playing.  The United Center would have that covered, while Soldier Field would host the outdoor events.  But where are we hosting the swim events -- in Lake Michigan or the Chicago River.

And since we're talking Summer 2016, the Olympics will also be fighting for local air time with the Cubs and White Sox runs for a pennant and preseason Bears football.  And we all know nothing comes between Chicagoans and their football team.

So in regard to the 2016 Chicago Olympics, you can count me out.

Unless, of course, someone needs a beat writer...

Boston Is The Sports City Of The 2000s, I Can Live With That. But Dallas? The 90s. Eh.

Sometimes I wish BFeldt found time out of his busy schedule to write a post here once in a while, because he makes some great points via his Twitter account.  In today's tweet, @BFeldt questions ESPN's search skills in finding the sports city of this decade.

"Boston wins best sports decade because of hair? Give me a break ESPN, how hard did you look for that advantage"

Answer: They looked down the hall, waved at Peter Gammons and penned up something real quickly.

So, who deserves it?  Well, I'll leave the door for Mr. Feldt to return to TBDS and let him throw down his two cents.  I'm more bothered why Chicago didn't get the sports city of the 1990s.

The argument for champion Dallas?

The Cowboys captured three Super Bowls, the Stars took the Cup in 1999 and the Rangers even won three division titles. But the Mavs were mostly a bad joke.

The argument for Chicago?

I thought you'd never ask.

The six championships by the Chicago Bulls trump the city of Dallas' accomplishments all by themselves.  In the two seasons in which they didn't have the G.O.A.T. full-time, they still made the playoffs.  Let's add some individual numbers with Michael Jordan's five MVPs and countless points scored, rebounds grabbed, steals snatched and assists dished.

In 1993 the White Sox won the AL West and the Cubs won the Wild Card in 1998.  However, individual accomplishments drove fans (and media attention) to the ballpark.  Sammy Sosa hit 332 homers in the 1990s, including 66 in '98 to win the MVP and help save baseball.  Frank Thomas hit at least .305 in every year except one in the decade and hit 301 jacks in the decade.  If not for The Big Hurt and his efforts, there would not be a team on the South Side.  The Blackhawks made 8 playoff appearances in the 90s, including a Stanley Cup appearance.

The biggest joke of the decade in Chicago was the mismanagement of the Bears, who still found a way to make three playoff appearances in spite of the McCaskey family and Dave Wannstedt.

Apparently, the Cowboys, Lakers, Dodgers, Red Sox, Celtics and Patriots don't get enough coverage on ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNNews, ESPNClassic or ESPN The Ocho.  I guess that's why they've launched a hyperlocal site for Boston and will do so for Dallas and Los Angeles before the year is up.