Working in academia does have its benefits. From 5 o' clock yesterday, I'm on Thanksgiving break already. I celebrated last night by watching the Blues beat Nashville in a less than stellar performance, and by drinking a 750ml bottle of Mauadite. (Yes, my night was full of things Canadian.)
So, I'm reading over the sports news online this morning, keeping tabs on the Blues and Cards in St. Louis (as well as the Billiken soccer team - who crashed out of the NCAA's again), DC United in our nations capital, and Notts county across the pond. While I was doing that it dawned on me just how much I miss having a local team to root for. Oh, don't get me wrong. I watch a lot of Twins baseball and Wild hockey. I love baseball and hockey and, hey, they are whats on TV. As a result, I know the players on those teams, and when they play anyone but one of MY teams in the sporting world I prefer them to win. But that is being a fan of the sport, and not a fan of the team.
I've toyed with the idea of adopting one of the NFL teams up here (Vikings or Packers), but it is hard for me to switch brand names to ones so well established as "enemy" in my mind. Were I living in an area with an expansion team it would have been easier. I've also thought about adopting a new college football team to support. Hell, I never attend the University of Missouri, so, in theory, it should be easy to switch. Trouble is I have an old bias against the Big 10, born of a childhood raised in Big 8 country, that will not allow me to cheer for a Wisconsin or a Minnesota. Besides, I've followed Mizzou for decades when they have been no good for anything, so I feel I deserve this era when they look to be a perennial Top 20 team.
I've also toyed with the idea of adopting the Minnesota Thunder, but the prospect of following a fourth soccer team (after DC United, Notts County, SLU Billikens) strikes even me as a little pathetic.
The Timberwolves are not an option as I loathe and despise the NBA. As for the college game, SLU is my team and has been since 1982.
I do follow college hockey, but I have a habit of rooting for teams that have prominent Blues prospects on them. Minnesota has been a good program in this respect since I've been up here. First they had Eric Johnson, and now they feature Jay Barriball and Cade Fairchild. Problem is, when they play another team that also has a Blues prospect, I don't care who wins. Last season, when TJ Oshie would come in with the Fighting Sioux I would be pleased by any result as long as the Blues prospects played well. I don't see that changing.
Now, there is one more option. There is hockey at the university I teach at...Div. III hockey. I've not been to a game yet, but the option is always there. There is a lunatic fringe aspect at play here that I'm not sure I wish to embrace...but I might just do so anyway. (I treat them the same way St. Augustine treated the Lord...I'll embrace them, just not yet.)
So, I'm left with these long distance relationships (LDR's). Granted, it is easier to maintain these affections in an age of cable television and the internet, but I still notice that I didn't see the Blues play a game until November was almost over.
Here is a quick rundown of what my various LDR's are like:
St. Louis Cardinals- By far the easiest relationship to maintain. The Cards are shown at least 20-30 times a season on national television. Listening to the games via XM radio is perfectly satisfying, baseball being far and away the best sport for radio play by play. If the St. Louis Post-Dispatch is still good for anything it is covering the Cardinals.
St. Louis Blues- This is fairly easy to maintain. The Blues have far less exposure on TV however. I'll see the games against the Wild, and Versus will show maybe 3 Blues games a season. That will improve as the Blues improve, I guess. I listen to 30-40 games a year over XM, although hockey is not as radio friendly. The late great Dan Kelly was the best there ever was at giving you a mental picture of a game you couldn't see. We won't hear his like again. However, I really miss going to games. I would only catch 2 or 3 a year when I lived in St. Louis (as I was mostly broke at the time), but I haven't seen a game in the Drinkscotch center in maybe 4 years. Damn.
DC United- OK. This has suffered. My current cable package does not include Fox Soccer Channel, so I am dependent upon ESPN's soccer coverage which will net me 5 games a year. I bought the MLS online video package this season, but found I hardly ever used it. (I watched maybe three games that way.) They do offer an online radio service, which I might opt for next year. Soccer is not horrible on the radio, although soccer announcers tend to be much less experienced broadcasters. The lack of booth time shows. The best option, of course, would be to get the MLS cable package, which is affordable, but would require moving up to digital cable or getting a satellite dish...both things I've been resisting.
As for the college teams, whatever coverage I get is largely dependent upon their national profile. That will wax and wane, so there isn't much one can do about it. It would help if XM beefed up the breadth of their college sports coverage, but that probably won't happen to my satifaction. (Who would invest in expansive Atlantic 10 coverage really?)
Ah well...this is a hell of a lot of writing to reach the conclusion that I'll probably just be listening to the Blues vs. Avalanche tonight over XM. Like always.
No comments:
Post a Comment