The single-game home run record is one of the strangest, coolest records in all of sports. When Josh Hamilton knocked his fourth longball against the Orioles, he tied the single-game record for homers, a notable, relevant record that deserves the as much distinction as the single-season and all-time home run records. And yet at the same time, Hamilton shares that record with 15 other players. 15! So while it's cool that he's the record-holder, he isn't exactly standing alone. It's like when I was named TIME magazine's Person of the Year in 2006; it would've been cooler had the award not also been given to everyone on the planet.

The list of people to hit four dingers in a game is a bizarre hodgepodge of Hall of Famers, solid sluggers and complete nobodies. Yes, Hamilton joins the company of Lou Gehrig, Willie Mays, Mike Schmidt and Ed Delahanty, as well as the recently-retired Shawn Green and Carlos Delgado. But also on that list are players like Mark Whiten, who hit just 94 home runs in his career, and Pat Seerey, who had a lifetime .224 average, 86 home runs and who led the American League in strikeouts four times. Bobby Lowe, who in 1894 became the first hitter to accomplish the Grand Sombrero (a term I just made up), hit only 71 home runs in his career.

Still, it's an unbelievably rare and awesome thing to see; consider that there have been 21 perfect games. It's also one of the most unbreakable single-game records out there, since the likeliness of a player even getting a chance for a fifth homer -- let alone being able to do it -- is infinitesimal. The hitter has to hope that the guys behind him are also getting on base and scoring a lot of runs, but even then, there's no earthly reason for a pitcher to throw a strike to a guy with four home runs. Hence, there's a 16-way tie for the record.

I don't think I'm overstating things when I say that this performance could go a long way to establish Hamilton as a Hall of Famer. His career has been offset by drugs and injuries to such an extent that he'll probably retire with an unimpressive home run total, comparatively speaking. And let's not forget: numbers mean everything when it comes to the Hall of Fame. But Hamilton has a chance to notch every other home run record in existence. He's already got the single-game homer mark and the record for slams in the Home Run Derby, and it's practically a foregone conclusion that he'll win the home run batting title this year (barring injury). Now the question is if he can surpass Barry Bonds' dirty 73 home runs or Roger Maris' clean 61 homers. He's on pace to do both, but the compelling aspect with Hamilton is that you can never expect him to do anything for very long before something gets in his way. He's the best slugger in the game, he's 31 years old and he's never hit more than 32 home runs in a season. There's a paradox there that can't be overlooked.

Continue reading this post »

There are some things in sports that you only get to see once: Kobe Bryant's 81-point game, the Stanford band running onto the field, Louis Oosthuizen converting a double eagle. Most things we get to see multiple times; as cool as a triple play or no-hitter is, seasoned sports fans have seen it enough times that it barely registers excitement. When Phil Humber pitched a perfect game a week ago, I'm sure a lot of people had the same reaction I did: "Again?"

Sunday's Grizzlies-Clippers game was something different. Yes, we've seen gigantic comebacks before in NBA games, and we've even seen them in playoff games. But we've never seen, and maybe never will again see, a comeback of that scope. The Grizzlies had a 24-point lead with a little over nine minutes left; the only way they could lose was if the Clippers played a flawless nine minutes of basketball, converting every shot and scoring every time down. And even then the Grizzlies would have to go on a cold streak of historic proportions; all they needed was two field goals over the final nine minutes to put the game firmly out of reach.

Somehow they only got one. Most teams don't even score 25 points in the fourth quarter, but Clippers managed to outscore the Grizzlies - a team that had been destroying them all game - to the tune of 28-3 over the final 9:12. The Grizzlies went seven minutes without a single bucket while the Clippers scored nearly every time down.

The Clippers were down 21 points to begin the fourth, which ties the record as the largest deficit overcome in NBA playoff history. And to put it in perspective, the other time a team started the fourth in a 21-point hole, that comeback wasn't nearly as improbable as this. The 2002 Boston Celtics made up 21 points against the Nets in the conference finals, but consider that the Celtics were at home in that game, that the lead never got higher than 21 in the fourth, and that with 9:12 remaining, the Celtics had already trimmed the lead to 10.

Is the loss an automatic death sentence to the Memphis Grizzlies? Maybe. There have been times that teams have lost in demoralizing fashion in Game 1, only to never play competitively again the rest of the series; the first example that comes to mind is the 1995 NBA Finals, where the Magic lost a game thanks to four straight missed free throws from Nick Anderson and then fit swept by the Houston Rockets. On the other hand, this isn't the first time a team has blown a game, though maybe not to this caliber. Teams have persevered. Hell, the Mavericks could have easily folded after giving away Game 1, but they still have Oklahoma City a fight in Game 2. If Memphis has serious championship aspirations, they should be able to overcome this.

Besides, history may actually be on their side. As weird as this is, the last three teams to blow an 18-point lead to start the fourth of a playoff game all wound up getting to the finals. So who knows - maybe the biggest chokejob in NBA history was a blessing in disguise.

Is a pro athlete ever allowed to fail, or are their salaries too extreme for them to deserve any sympathy? It's a question I asked myself this week after the Mavericks cut ties with Lamar Odom, the reigning Sixth Man of the year who turned in an Adam Dunn-esque season in Dallas. Odom simply didn't play well, and now people are asking what it means about Lamar Odom. Is he spacey, sensitive, overly-emotional, melodramatic? Was he so despondent about being dealt from the Lakers that it ultimately ruined his game? Did he not even try?

Who knows. But in retrospect, it shouldn't have come as a surprise that he did struggle. Few athletes have been through as much as Lamar Odom. This man was orphaned at the age of 12 when his mother lost her life to colon cancer. He lost his son to sudden infant death syndrome in 2006. And in this most recent offseason, one day after attending the funeral of his cousin, he was in the passenger seat of an automobile accident that killed a 15-year-old kid.

We have a tendency in this country to treat athletes as soulless automatons whose only purpose in life should be to play well. The only time an athlete can miss a game without controversy is if it's serious. Strep throat, arthritis, a cold, the flu? Stuff like that doesn't count. We want our athletes toughing it out, bleeding for their money. It's why the consensus among NBA analysts diagnosing Odom tended to be: "Get over it." Not "We understand he's been through a lot" or "This is a difficult period for him." Just play.

In an ironic, sad way, Odom's poor play is something of a breathe of fresh air, if only because it might make us realize that athletes aren't quite the one-dimensional robots we think they are. They don't live in a hyperbolic freezing chamber every time they leave an arena. They have personal lives that matter, just like us. And if Tiger Woods can be reduced to a screaming, tempter-tantrum-throwing shell of himself from the weight of his baggage, imagine what the same might have done to Odom.

Continue reading this post »

At this point, it's safe to say that 2012 is the year of surprises in sports. Even If nothing else happens in 2012 -- which is a distinct possibility, since the Mayans say we're all go to meet our grisly demise in a few months -- this would still go down as one of the most unusual, unpredictable years in modern history. There have been so many unusual events in the first three months of 2012 that even if we had died on March 21st instead of December 21st, my previous assessment would still ring true.

Let's look back at what we've already seen. First there was the Jeremy Lin phenomenon. Sure, it's easy to compare Linsanity to Tebowmania, which wasn't even a year ago and may have been just as large a national story. But Lin was a true underdog, an undrafted, Ivy League Asian kid, coming from the D-League, having been waived by the Golden State Warriors and Houston Rockets. Tebow, on the other hand, might have had the most prestigious college football career in history and was a first-round draft pick. It's not even close whose rise was more improbable. We've really never seen anything like Jeremy Lin's meteoric ascension; and that he continues to play decently amidst a tumultuous, ego-driven roster of ballhogs makes the story that much better.

Then there's Dwight Howard. Yes, we've seen LeBron James and Carmelo Anthony drag out their free-agency drama for entire seasons, but Howard just did something utterly unprecedented. For all the trade demands he's made since the beginning of the season, he has inexplicably decided to drag this story out for a whole extra season by waiving his opt-out clause, a development that's as staggering as it is annoying. Even Brett Favre's sagas resolved themselves after a few months. What Howard is doing, by not signing an extension and assuring that these same trade rumors will haunt our dreams for the next year, is irritating beyond words. It's also extremely unusual. When was the last time we saw an athlete in this situation decide to stick around in a small-town city where he has less chance of winning than on another team? Had Howard not complained so much, had he not waffled at every waking opportunity, his decision to remain in Orlando could be lauded. Instead, it's just a waste of time, since we'll be witnessing this song and dance again pretty soon.

Finally we have Peyton Manning, who now finds himself on the roster of the Denver Broncos. Of all the teams Manning could have played on, he probably chose the one with the worst offense available. In Tennessee he would have had Chris Johnson and Kenny Britt; in Arizona he would have had Larry Fitzgerald; in Houston he would have had Andre Johnson and Arian Foster; in San Francisco he would have had Vernon Davis, Randy Moss and Frank Gore. And yet for all the teams he could have selected, of all the tandems he could have chosen to finish his career with, he's decided to go to war with Willis McGahee and Eric Decker.

The surprising, crazy part with Manning has nothing to do with Denver, however. We've seen a plethora of athletes land with a new organization in the final years of their career. But what we haven't seen is what the Indianapolis Colts did in waiving their franchise superstar. It's one thing for a team to ditch a star in their waning years, when they're no longer any good. But to outright waive the greatest player in franchise history, who's been medically cleared to play and who wants to play for that very team, is something new altogether. Even if it was a practical decision because of the money it would have cost to keep both Manning and Andrew Luck, the Colts have essentially thrown away their star player for a total neophyte. Manning's dismissal marks a turning point in the NFL, where it was a long-standing tradition for a rookie QB to sit on the bench for most of their first season. The days of teams being afraid to insert rookie QB's appears to be over, thanks to excellent rookie seasons from Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, Andy Dalton, Sam Bradford and Cam Newton. And if Peyton Manning's release and the trading of RGIII's draft rights are any indication, benching a franchise quarterback to begin a season is probably now an aberration among NFL franchises.

And I didn't even mention the Sacramento Kings bypassing moving to a larger market, Tim Tebow deciding he'd rather be Mark Sanchez' backup in a media madhouse rather than the starting QB for his hometown team, and the NFL -- the league that looked the other way on Tom Cable assaulting a man -- not only suspending Sean Payton and Gregg Williams for instilling a bounty program, but punishing them harshly. If there will be an equinox on Dec. 21 that'll blow up the planet, we're already seeing signs of it. Things are happening that just don't happen in sports, and I can't wait to see what happens next -- even if I only have nine months to do it.

So here's something I found interesting. As the country is hammering away at Rush Limbaugh (and rightly so) for calling a woman a slut, I saw during last Sunday's NBA double-header on ABC an ad for one of their new shows: GCB, which stands for Good Christian Bitches. At first I was a little surprised that a major network was actually having a show where the titular characters were advertised as "bitches," but then my surprise multiplied when I found out ABC had yet another show coming out with bitch in the title: "Don't Trust the B---- in Apartment 23." What a weird world we live in where ABC, whose parent company Disney once employed Rush Limbaugh, can spend its time castigating a man for his misogynistic language, and then proudly promote its bitch-themed upcoming lineup, not to mention its town of cougars and housewives that are desperate. Yep, nothing inconsistent there.

Anyway, that has nothing to do with sports; it just happened to be on my mind. Let's talk about the Charlotte Bobcats, who many have been describing as one of the worst NBA teams ever. At 5-32, their record lends no doubt that they're the worst team in the league. But... historically bad?

How quickly we forget that just two years ago, we witnessed a New Jersey Nets team that was even worse. That team started off the season 0-18, had three separate double-digit losing streaks, were 3-34 through 37 games and had to win five of their final twelve games just to finish with a record of 12-70. The talent level on that team, with a rookie Brook Lopez and a then-respectable Devin Harris, while awful, was still probably better than this Bobcats monstrosity, whose best player is either D.J. Augustin or Kemba Walker. If they finished 10-56, that would give them a higher winning percentage than that Nets squad; five more wins sure sounds like a lot, but they already have two more of them than the Nets did through 37 games in 2010.

And last year's Cavaliers team was no slouching slouch either. Their record of 19-63 will certainly give them a higher winning percentage than what the Bobcats post this year, and let's not forget that Cleveland wasn't even the worst team in the league in 2011; that distinction belongs to the Timberwolves. All the same, in the wake of LeBron's absence, people will probably remember the Cavs' record-breaking 26-game losing streak more than they will the Bobcats' futility. It doesn't help too that in a lockout-shortened season, it'll be difficult to appreciate just how bad the 'Cats are without an 82-game slate to properly judge them. It's not unreasonable to ask if their record is skewed by the condensed schedule.

Of course, none of these teams even compare to the official worst team ever, the 1972-73 Philadelphia 76ers, who had four double-digit losing streaks (of 13, 14, 15 and 20 games) and an overall record of 9-73 -- the worst record in history. They magically won five of seven games at one point in February, only to lose their last 13. If not for an 85-82 win against Seattle on January 7, they would have lost 35 games in a row. In fact of their nine wins, seven were by seven points or less.

In terms of roster talent, this Bobcats team -- depleted of even its marginal talent in recent years (Emeka Okafor, Gerald Wallace, Raymond Felton, Stephen Jackson) -- is truly abysmal. If they win only five more games, it's hard to make a case that they're even the worst team of the past three years. Nonetheless, this is a truly, truly terrible team. It remains to be seen just how many games the Bobcats will win; a double-digit win output in a condensed season will automatically disqualify them from the discussion. But if they keep this up, if they really finish around that 9-57 mark, there's a legitimate debate to be made that this team is at least in conversation, even if it's as a finalist.

By Michelle Zehr

Michelle is a contributing writer with Gold Star Games, your tailgating games company.

The Pittsburgh Steelers have not always been known as the Steelers. Founded on July 8, 1933 by Arthur Joseph Rooney, the Steelers were originally founded as the Pittsburgh Pirates. In 1940, the Pirates became the Steelers as an attempt to generate more fan interest. Fans were asked to submit name suggestions. The winning name, the Steelers, reflected the city’s primary source of employment.

Helmet logos did not become popular in the NFL until 1948. Teams around the league developed designs, logos and mascots for their helmets. However, the Steelers hardly took part in this new craze. The Steelers added player numbers and a black stripe to their distinctive gold helmets.

The famous three star Pittsburgh Steeler helmet did not become popular until much later. In 1962, the Republic of Steel of Cleveland approached the Steelers with an idea. They suggested the Steelers use the steelmark, the insignia used by the American Iron and Steel Institute. The steelmark could honor Pittsburgh’s proud steel heritage.

What is the steelmark? The steelmaker is a c0rcle enclosing three hypocycloids (diamonds that have inward-curving edges) along with the word STEEL, which was created by the USX Corp. This logo could educate consumers about the importance of steel in life.

Three colors were chosen to promote the attributes of steel. These colors include:

• · Yellow, which lightens your work.
• · Orange, which brightens your leisure
• · Blue, which widens your world.

The logo’s colors where later amended to represent the materials used to make steel:

• · Yellow for coal.
• · Orange for iron ore
• · Blue for steel scrap.

The Steelers were a big fan of the logo presented by Republic Steel, despite the fact that Republic Steel was located in Cleveland. Pittsburgh has a huge rivalry with the Cleveland Browns.

The Steelers sported their new helmet logos in 1962. This same year, the Steelers qualified for their first-ever playoff game. During the playoffs, the Steelers’ helmets were changed from gold to black – the same color helmets you see today.

One final change was made to the logo in 1963. The Steelers received permission from AISI to change the world “Steel” to Steelers” on their helmets.

Being that this site deals with topics in the area of sports history, I thought it would be appropriate to pay homage to the greatest Pittsburgh Steeler in franchise history, and quite possibly the greatest slot receiver in NFL history, the great No. 86 Hines Ward. Not exactly blessed with the athletic abilities of the prototypical receiver, Hines managed to put up Hall-of-Fame like numbers playing the Steeler way; through hard work, dedication to his craft, will, and straight up balls. Hines Ward epitomized what it meant to be a team player in the ultimate team game for one of the most historic franchises in league history. Ward was a part of two of the Steelers NFL leading six Super Bowl Championships, being named the Super Bowl MVP in the 2005-2006 season, catching 5 passes for 123 yards and a deflating touchdown as the Steelers beat the Seahawks for the franchise's fifth title. It was at that point in his career that Hines Ward really emerged as the true leader of the Steelers organization. Jerome Bettis was retiring, Roethlisberger was young and immature, as was Santonio Holmes. Hines Ward was the veteran guiding presence for the Steelers offense during their two Super Bowl victories. In the past two seasons he has adopted this role even more so, mentoring the like of Mike Wallace, Antonio Brown, and Emmanuel Sanders, all emerging young talents. He showed leadership by the way he played every down, smiled on every play, and got up after every hit. It is a FACT that Hines Ward is the best blocking wide receiver in NFL history, something that won't show up in the stat books and appears even more impressive when you consider how run heavy the Steeler's offense was with the Bus. Here is one of many clips that show what I am talking about. Hines Ward is a Pittsburgh Steeler, and for a few years, the Pittsburgh Steelers were Hines Ward.

Aside from all the football intangibles, the little things that Ward brought to the table, Hines had amazing numbers for a small, average athlete at receiver who basically played in the slot most of his career. Playing in conjunction with outside options such as Plaxico Burress, Santonio Holmes, and Mike Wallace, Ward put up 1,000 catches in his 14 years with the Steelers. That is 664 more receptions than fellow Steeler wide receiver Lynn Swann who's sitting in the Hall of Fame. Continuing to compare Ward to Swann, Hines has one more pro-bowl (4) over his career than Swann; 34 more receiving touchdowns than Swann; 6,621 more receiving yards than Swann. Granted Hines has played 14 seasons compared to Swann's nine with the Steelers. But isn't that a testament to Hines Ward and his durability, especially considering the way he plays? I am a die hard Steeler fan, been to countless games and watch as many as I can on TV; I have never seen Hines Ward run out of bounds to avoid a hit, he always fights for that extra blade of grass. Many people argue that you can not compare the two receivers, that they played in different eras, in different systems that skew statistics. If one looks a little deeper, the comparison is fair. If you look at the quarterbacks and running backs that each receiver played with, one can see that that the Steelers offensive scheme and production related to the rest of the NFL hasn't changed, they are pretty much the same team. The Steelers of the 70's were run heavy as were the Steelers of the late 90's and early 2000's. One can argue that the Steelers were actually more run heavy with Jerome Bettis than they were Franso Harris. Bettis is sixth all-time in the NFL in rushing yards with 13,662 and 4th all time in rushing attempts with 3,479. Franco is behind Bettis in all these categories. The point is, Hines played in just a rush heavy offense as did Swann and put up ridiculous numbers. In his first nine seasons, Ward made all four of his pro-bowls and had four 1,000 yard receiving seasons, something Swann never did. Ward had 58 touchdowns in his first nine seasons compared to Swann's 51 career. Not to rain on Swann's parade, its just a point of comparison.

When comparing Ward to receivers from across the league, he fares pretty well too, being 8th all-time in the NFL for recptions, and second among active receivers. He is also second among active receivers in receiving yards and touchdowns, ranking 18th in yards and 13th in touchdowns for a career. Hall-of-famers such as Art Monk, Steve Largent, Michael Irvin, James Lofton, and Charlie Joiner all have less career receptions, and Irvin ranks below Ward in career receiving yards. There are many receivers who are ahead of Ward in these statistical categories as well, men such as Cris Carter, Tim Brown, Isaac Bruce, and Andre Reed who have yet to hear their names called to the Hall, but how many of those guys played as hard and as physical as Hines Ward. Also, it is an overlooked fact that Hines Ward may be the best slot receiver in NFL history. Looking at this list one can see that most if not all of these receiver (with the exception of the tight ends listed) are outside the hash wideouts. Hines Ward was never a wideout, he ran his routes down the middle, through traffic, among the linebackers. Imagine the first Wes Welker, obviously not as polished and refined, but the first of something never is.

Hines Ward will never be forgotten to Pittsburgh Steeler fans, and if the Hall-of-Fame rewards true football greatness, than Hines will surely have his place in the collective memory of football as one of the greatest players and hardest hitters this game has ever seen. I know that he says he wishes to continue his career in the NFL, but when you have such a career as Hines Ward has had with the Steelers, he will only be remembered for what was done in that Pittsburgh uniform, no matter what he accomplishes with another team. Number 86 will truly be missed and will go down in my book as the greatest Pittsburgh Steeler of all time.

Lynn Swann Stats

Hines Ward Stats

Rush List

The NBA dunk contest used to feature the best players in the sport, the likes of Michael Jordan and Dominique Wilkins and Clyde Drexler. Now, we're lucky just to get Paul George and Derrick Williams.

From 1984 to 1990, the first seven years of the event, the full-season scoring average of the dunk contest winner was 21.4 points per game. From 1991 to 1997, the last year before the event was canceled, that average had dropped to a pitiful 9.7 points per game. From 2000 (when it was resurrected) to 2011, that average has bounced up slightly to 13.4, but it's sure to go down again this season, since Paul George leads this year's group of four with 12.1 points per game and is the only contestant averaging in double-figures.

It's a hell of a drop-off for an event that pretty consistently featured the premier dunkers in the game. In the 80's, every single dunk contest featured players people wanted to see; even the years when Kenny Walker and Spud Web won, it meant something since they were doing it against the likes of Drexler and Dominique; those were legitimate upsets and were acceptable since Walker and Web were at least proficient at dunking.

But now... Derrick Williams? Jeremy Evans? Chase Budinger? They may be perfectly capable of playing the upset role that Web and Walker did, but a contest made entirely of upstarts is boring, which has been the biggest of problem with the contests the last twenty years. Even when Blake Griffin and Dwight Howard won it, who were they going against? Jamario Moon, Gerald Green, JaVale McGee and Serge Ibaka -- guys casual basketball fans don't even know exist, let alone that they're somewhat decent at throwing it down.

Since the glory days of the 80's, the only time the dunk contest was filled to the brim with big-name players was in 2000, when it featured Vince Carter, Tracy McGrady, Steve Francis, Jerry Stackhouse, Ricky Davis and Larry Hughes -- six players who would all average 20 points per game within the next three years. (With all due respect to Chase Budinger and Jeremy Evans, it's hard to see those guys making an All-Star team any time soon.) And that field was only able to come together because the event had been dead for three years.

The worst stat I can offer is this: since 1991, more than half of the dunk contest winners had a single-digit scoring average. For an event that's supposed to be the staple of All-Star weekend, that's simply unacceptable. Why LeBron James, Carmelo Anthony, Dwyane Wade, Kevin Durant, Derrick Rose, John Wall and Russell Westbrook aren't in it is anybody's guess. Perhaps the stature of Jordan and Wilkins and Web is so great that today's players are afraid to even mimic what they did. But if the dunk contest is going to be great again, it has to at least be relevant first. A four-man field of Griffin, James, Howard and Wade would be an awesome attraction that everyone would turn out to see. Alas, we'll just have to settle with Chase Budinger and Jeremy Evans. Yawn.