Is Osgood a Hall of Famer?

photo credit: Getty Images

I've heard this question tossed around this town many a time, and there seems to be a divide, at least locally, on the issue here. Is Christopher Osgood a hall of fame goaltender? Or is he just a guy that was lucky enough to play in Detroit during this dominant stretch of 19 playoff seasons? In my opinion, he is indeed, a hall of fame goalie.

Let's take a gander at Mr. Osgood's resume. Three-time Stanley Cup champion, 400 career wins, 50 career shutouts, .905 save percentage, and a very respectable 2.49 goals against average. Oh and he scored a goal against the Hartford Whalers. That is a pretty damn good resume for any goalie, if you ask me.

I mean check out the list of other goalies on this list here, Osgood joins the likes of Patrick Roy, Terry Sawchuk and Martin Brodeur in the exclusive 400 win club. Only 10 goalies have achieved this goal. Read that list twice if you have to, Ozzie is in some elite company. Also take note that Dominick Hasek is at 389. The two-time Stanley Cup champion, the six-time Vezna trophy winner for best goaltender, three-time Jennings Award winner for fewest goals allowed (in 08 he split it with Osgood,) the two-time Pearson award winner for most outstanding player and the two-time Hart trophy winner for league's Most Valuable Player, has 11 fewer wins than our own Chris Osgood. I will admit, Dom had to play for Buffalo, who wasn't good at all while Dom was there and he carried that team, but just think about it. The Dominator, who was arguably the best goalie in the League during his prime, has fewer wins than Chris Osgood. Dom will be a Hall of Famer, of that I have no doubt, so then shouldn't Osgood be one too?

But alas, there are two sides to every argument, so let me play a little devil's advocate here for a moment...

Put Osgood on another team. Does he get 400? Well he had four seasons away from the Winged Wheel, and he wasn't totally bad. He went 84-67-20 in his four seasons not in Detroit. Not too shabby, if you ask me. But not great either. Osgood has never been considered one of the elite in the league, his success is often credited to the fact that he plays in Detroit, where frankly you will face about 20 shots a game on a good day. A Wing goalie just have to stop what he faces, and never really has to be outstanding.

Ozzie was decent to good is when not in Detroit, but he wasn't anything special. If he didn't play the majority of his career here, there's no way he gets 400 wins. Put him on the Buffalo team Dom played for and I bet he struggles.

Osgood won the Jennings trophy in 08, but other than that doesn't have any hardware to solidify his career and resume as a hall of fame goalie. Three Stanley Cups is three more than many hockey players, but in 97 it was Vernon's team. 98 he is called the worst starting goalie to ever win the stanley cup. 08 was his most impressive cup, but Osgood never really stole a game in that postseason. He turned the Wings around when he came in for Dom, but he never stole games the way a Brodeur would.

But at the end of the day, only one thing matters: The numbers. If Osgood had been short of 400 at the end of his career, I legitimately think he would not be elected into the hockey hall of fame. Achieving this amazing feat I think is the difference between Osgood, Detroit legend, and Osgood, Hall of Famer.

If you scroll down in this link, you will see a comparison between Osgood and other Hall of Fame goalies, makes a compelling argument for him to be in.

Congrats go to Chris Osgood on joining such elite company and getting his 400th career victory. Ozzie is a great hockey player and an even better man, and he deserves this 400th win. Say what you will about Ozzie, but he's in the exclusive 400 win club, and it may be awhile before another goalie joins him.

Magical Number 400

Get Calvin the Damn Ball

Let's ask ourselves... Who is the best Detroit Lion? Is it Calvin Johnson? Is it Ndamukong Suh? Is it Drew Stanton? Well you could make an argument for any of these guys... only two of them though will people actually take you seriously. But for the sake of this article, let's go with Calvin Johnson, who's easily the best player on our offense.

So what do you do with your best player on offense? You get him the ball. If you have a star runningback, you're going to get him 25-30 touches a game. Arian Foster gets the ball on what seems like every other play in Houston. You ride your stars. Houston rides Foster, Titans ride Chris Johnson, Cleveland rides Peyton Hillis. The Colts live and die with Manning, as the Packers do with Rodgers. Bottom line, your offense revolves around your best player.

So why doesn't Detroit's revolve around Calvin? I know it is a tad more difficult to get the ball to a wideout as much as a runningback, but here's what I'm thinking... How many times do the Lions throw the ball? Well for a stretch they were number two in the NFL in pass attempts. So let's call it 30-40 pass attempts a game from a TYPICAL Lions game... typical meaning they're losing and needing to throw it. So why can't Calvin see 15-20 targets a game? On a side note, lately the Lions have had success running, and have thrown it less

He is 6'5, 4.3 speed, bigger and stronger than every corner in the NFL, just let him make a play. THat's what playmakers do, and teams let their playmakers make plays. But Detroit does not do it enough, if you ask me. He had three targets against the Jets, for example. Revis is good... But just throw it high and there's nothing he can do about it.

Valenti and Foster interview Calvin every week, and they asked them why the Lions seem to never run the stop fade in the red-zone... and all he could say is "I don't know, but I'd love it if we did." I agree with Calvin. HE'S 6 FOOT 5. No one will out jump him. It should be ran at least once every time their in range for it.

So, bottom line, the Lions need to find ways to get Calvin the ball 15-20 times a game. It sounds outlandish for a wide out, bu think about it. Your best player should get an abundance of touches. WIldcat, end arounds, fade routes, I don't care. Just find a way to get Calvin more touches, and we will have more success on offense. And if you get Calvin going, teams will try even harder to take him away, opening up the Burleson's and Pettigrew's of the world

Three in a Row... And it's Wins, not Losses?!?!?!

Photo Credit: Detroit News

Hello my beloved, and admittedly lately, neglected fans. It's been far too long since I've written a blog, and I feel that I should probably do this. I've been mega busy thus far over break, and I haven't even thought about the blog much at all, and for that I apologize to both you, the fans, and myself.

But anyways, let's talk sports, shall we?

First off, the Lions, where has this been all season. And before all my Sparty Brethren start telling me how good Drew Stanton is, let me tell you the defense beat Green Bay, and Tampa Bay was not a sign of Drew's future NFL greatness. Two coaching staffs have seen nothing promising from Drew Stanton and there's a reason for that. He was a waste of a second round pick, so please, just stop it... you're embarrassing yourselves every time you call in to 97.1 saying that "he coulda been great with playing time..." No... he's bad. First season he was on IR, just like every season in college it seemed like, and then Culpepper, fresh out of the unemployment line, won the job over him. A one armed-Hill started over him. He's not good.

Anyways, the Lions have looked like a real NFL team for the first time since they flirted with all of your hearts by starting 6-2. They put together three impressive wins in a row, beating a playoff team, Green Bay at home, a contender and good team in Tampa Bay on the road, and yesterday beating a solid, but inconsistent and underachieving Miami team also on the road. The win against the Buccaneers ended a 26 game road losing streak, which broke their old record set earlier this decade... Only the Lions, right?

The defense impressed me very much against Green Bay and Miami, and the offense stepped it up against the two Florida squads. The Lions have really put something together here at the end of the season, I just wish that Stafford were in, so we could perhaps be getting a glimpse of things to come.

I have two more planned blogs this week, IF I find the time and remember to stay on top of things. One is about what the Lions need to do on offense, and the other will be dedicated to my friend Conor, and about our favorite player... that's right... Tim Tebow

By the way, I hope everyone enjoyed their Christmas and is having a wonderful winter break

Let's go Bowling...

Photo Credit phawker.com

The bowls are set, and my favorite time of the year is upon us. It's time to go bowling. Sure most of these teams feature two teams that people can't even name one player on them. But I am a bowl junkie, I love the bowls, no matter who's playing in it, if there's a bowl on, I'll probably be watching it.

But like every bowl season, there are games that no one in the country cares about, and then there are those "must watch bowls." So let's take a look at the Bearded Fellow's "Can't Miss, Non-BCS Bowls" of 2010/2011.

Las Vegas Bowl: Boise State vs Utah
Say what you will, I have this one on my "Can't Miss Bowls" list because I want to see how Boise comes out. They missed out at a chance at the Rose Bowl or a national championship when Kyle Brotzman "missed" that field goal against Nevada. Boise is far superior to Utah, I know this, but it could be an interesting matchup. Next year (I believe it takes affect next season...) Boise will be a Mountain West rival of Utah. I'm curious to see how they're first matchup goes.

Chick-fil-A Bowl: Florida State vs South Carolina
This'll be a hell of a matchup. I absolutely love everything the Gamecocks got going on for them. Steven Garcia and Marcus Lattimore have been pretty damn good thus far for South Carolina. Christian Ponder had himself a 20 touchdown season for the Noles and is a very solid quarterback that I do like. This bowl, is under-hyped, I've yet to hear anyone talk about it... So I'm talkin about it. Watch this one folks.

Gator Bowl: Michigan vs Mississippi State
So we all know why you should watch this on Michigan's side. Denard is a super athlete, that offense is really dynamic, and it wil be Rich Rod's final game. But what about Mississippi State? I bet you don't know much about them... cuz neither do I... I did some research and found that they are a solid overal team. Not spectacular, just solid. They are 91st passing the ball but 19th rushing it. The Bulldogs lost to Auburn only by 3, so this should be a pretty good matchup.

Capitol One Bowl Michigan State vs Alabama
This is the game I am most looking forward to. You got the preseason number one team, who is still a pretty damn good team, in Alabama verse the cinderella story of the season Michigan State Spartans. Saban is going against his old school. Ingram is versing the school he almost played for. MSU has a chip on their shoulder after being snubbed from a BCS game and wants to show the nation that it was a mistake to leave out Sparty. This is going to be one hell of a football game.

For a full line up of all the bowl games, you should take your cursor and click riiiiiiiight here.

Also, check out these games:

Navy v San Diego State

Notre Dame v Miami

NC State v West Virginia

Northwestern v Texas Tech

Penn State v Florida

Why I Hate Fifa

Photo credit: onislam.net

I have never really been a big fan of Fifa. I felt they failed in the handling of the France Ireland fiasco, and I've done some homework and find that they've always been a little shady. To give them credit, recently they've done a good job at being ambassadors to the world, trying to use the game of soccer to unite people. The World Cup is a phenomenal event. In 06, Ivory Coast declared a cease fire and stopped their civil war so the country could watch and support it's football team. They brought Africa it's first World Cup and South Africa did an amazing job and made the continent proud.

But what I don't like about Fifa is their anti-American attitude. Most international committees have it, and Fifa is no different. No American refs were chosen for the the 2010 World Cup. We saw how bad the officiating was, especially when USA was screwed out of a win because of it against Slovenia. By the way, the ref that blew the Theiry Henry handball was selected for the World Cup. Kinda bogus if you ask me, especially since the American refs are becoming some of the most respected in the world, believe it or not.

And how about the fact that Fifa threatened to throw out there bid for the World Cup because of Arizona's immigration law, requiring immigrants to carry with them their paperwork showing their now American citizens... or something like that? Fifa is so quick to throw America under the bus, and yet they give the World Cup bid to Qatar.

Let's go over some laws that exist in this tiny, black gold-ran country...
Homosexually is illegal in Qatar.
Drinking alcohol in public is illegal in Qatar.
Public intimacy is illegal in Qatar.

Oh and they are first in carbon emissions per capita. Seems like a great place...

They are Muslim, I have no problem with people's religious beliefs and what have you, but let me just say this... The culture breeds hate. It's no secret what goes on in the Muslim culture. Honor killings, Christian killings, suicide bombings, constant war... we all know what goes on in that area.

Granted, Qatar is pretty stable all things considered, but If Fifa wants to throw a hissy fit over what Arizona is doing, then why haven't they said anything about Qatar's discriminatory laws?

Fifa is a bunch of corrupt, hypocritical, scumbags. Bottom line.

United States Better Choice, not Qatar

I'm left distraught and confused too, Alexi

Photo Credit: insidesocal.com

So let's face it, we got screwed out of hosting an international sporting event despite clearly being the better choice. Okay yes, that statement is riddled with opinion, but there are facts that back up my statements. So now it's time for me to ramble angrily but yet factually on why the good ol' US of A was the clear and better choice for the World Cup.

1994, Soccer's greatest and biggest display comes to the United States. A country that had little interest in the game. The team was mediocre at best. Fifa gives them the 94 world cup, but with a million strings attached. They had to qualify for the world cup in 1990, and they also needed to qualify for the Olympics, just to keep their bid. I bet Qatar, a country that's never qualified, won't have strings attached to this honor.

But I digress, the point I want to make about the 1994 World Cup is that it set records, records that still stand, for ticket sales and revenue brought in. The World Cup here was a huge success back when soccer was a dead sport that very few even pretended to care about. Now our tam is on the up n up, interest in the game has never been higher, just imagine how successful the World Cup would be here given 12 years for the game to grow even further. Our culture is diverse, more hispanics are coming into the country which reflects the growth in the interest of the game. It only makes sense to have the World Cup here.

This decision is one riddled with corruption. But is it all about money? Well it can't be, because the US would have generated the most revenue of all the bidding nations, check it y'all.
"The decision might reflect the United States’ diminished standing in the world because an internal study conducted by FIFA showed the U.S. would produce the wealthiest and most successful tournament of all the campaigners"

Granted, we don't have that oil money Qatar has, and probably didn't bride Fifa as much as Qatar did. I said it, live with it. Putin knows it's true, and so much of the world also knows that Fifa is corrupt and a shady organization ran by scumbags and sleezeballs.

"Basically, oil and natural gas won today. This was not about merit, this was about money," former U.S. national team star Eric Wynalda said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press. Qatar "is a country that is really going to struggle to host this event. A successful World Cup would mean the attendance would be twice the population." Here's that article too

Look, bottom line is the US was the right choice, not Qatar. We'd bring in the money, put the meat in the seats, and we'd put on one hell of a World Cup. And it's a shame they didn't give us the bid because they don't like our country, because 26 is pretty much set as China and 30 will likely be in Europe. This is devastating for the United States.

But what makes me mad is that the committee itself recognized that the tiny country, that has never qualified for a world cup, that gets up to 130 degrees in the summer, and that needs to build all the facilities in a small area to host the games, was a huge risk.
"Qatar’s bid was one of the most audacious proposals submitted and steadily moved from being a dark horse to pre-vote favorite despite being classified as 'high risk' by FIFA’s own inspectors."

It's upsetting to me that they knew the United States would make perfect sense, and yet they went with a risky choice, just because they don't like us as a country, and because we can't grease their palms with oil money.

And later tonight, part three of my anger blog, "Why I hate Fifa"

Rusia and Qatar?

Photo Credit: football.uk.reuters.com

Today Fifa announced what lucky countries would be hosting the 2018 and 2022 World Cup. The United States was a finalist for the 2022 bid, along with Qatar, Japan, and Australia.

I'll cut to the chase, Fifa made two intriguing decisions for the host nations... For 2018 Fifa chose Russia, over England, the "Motherland of Football," as the head of Fifa Sepp Blatter put it. A controversial decision, let's look at it.

Russia draws at most 20,000 for there local league games, nothing compared to England and other European nations. Russia is not known for it's soccer, although they usually have a solid squad. Russia did not qualify for this past World Cup and their best finish was 4th when they were still the Soviet Union.

It looked like England was the best choice, the other two candidates were Netherlands/Belgium and Espania/Portugal.

What made this decision controversial was the fact that Vladimir Putin declined to attend the event Thursday, citing that he feels the actions taken against some of the committee members voting (these members were accused of taking kickbacks) was a smear against Rusia. He didn't explain how it was a smear against Rusia getting the bid, but he did say he felt Fifa was corrupt and no longer felt good about his country's bid.

Vladimir Putin called Fifa corrupt... that's bad... Granted his statements are a little confusing, because they took action against guys taking money, but he felt that by doing that it was a smear campaign against Russia... but he was onto something...

Then it came time to announce the 2022 World Cup bid winner. To me, there were only two worthy choices: USA and Australia.

Fifa felt differently.

When Blatter announced Qatar won the bid, my reaction was "WHO?!?!?!"

Let's dig a little deeper into what makes Qatar a "qualified host nation"
1) Qatar is smaller than Connecticut
2) The population is less than the city of Houston
3) In the summer it gets up to 120 degrees, even 130 degrees. Great soccer weather
4) Qatar has never qualified for a World Cup.
5) They have a ton of money

If you guys couldn't tell, there is only one thing on that board that got them a bid. MONEY. Fifa is a corrupt organization that disguises itself as ambassadors.

It's all about who can bribe the most, and congrats to Russia and Qatar, you have the biggest checkbooks. I have to break this up into two more blogs, just so you guys don't read a giant post, but here's my initial post on the matter.

Up next, why Qatar over the United States is the WRONG choice.