The Latest U2, Shaq Hypocrisy, and The Chuck Rule

I bought the latest U2 album, "No Line On the Horizon," yesterday. I was disappointed. I think U2's existence can be divided into three basic parts. U2 1.0 was the 80s post-punk phase characterized by songs like "Sunday Bloody Sunday," "Bullet the Blue Sky," and "New Year's Day," as well as some softer, arena-type atmospheric songs ("Where the Streets Have No Name," "Bad," etc.). 2.0 was the unfortunate 90s experiment with dance pop and electronic music: "Discotheque," et al. 3.0 was the phase of the last two albums. Both "All You Can't Leave Behind" and "How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb" were somewhat experimental, but they much more closely resembled the albums of 1.0 and were both fairly good. I'd say we are now in a half-stage called U2 3.5 that retains the experimentation of the last two albums, but is experimenting, once again, in a dance pop way, with electronic songs and weird atmospheric effects. A couple of songs have good instrumentals, a couple have good vocals, but no one song really combines the two, and none of them is a real rock song. I was also disappointed to see just how much of a back seat Larry Mullen, Jr.'s drumming took, although I thought that the Edge had some of his better guitar work. Of course, I'm a drummer, music's equivalent of unskilled labor, so I really don't know. It just sounded a bit more technical than he's wont to do. Here's hoping that U2's fourth decade will be more like its first.


Shifting gears, Shaquille O'Neal is slowly becoming a parody of himself. Shaq has long had a pretty cool image: he's articulate, funny (sort of), and just a generally intimidating man. Besides his weird penchant for self-assigned nicknames ("The Big Aristotle") and, of course, Kazaam, he's been fun to watch off-court. But this latest incident with Dwight Howard, Van Gundy, and what might be termed Flopgate has been almost satirical. Shaq first warns against potential floppers- fine, Shaq has a point when it comes to men of lesser stature taking dives against him. But his hurtle to the floor was very plainly just that. Howard barely grazed him with a hip, but Shaq acted more like it was a 'bow to the chest. Van Gundy also made a tool of himself with that post-game rant, but Shaq has since compounded it. His semi-witty tongue has started to sound like a really bad amateur battle rapper. He referred to Van Gundy as "a master of panic"- meaning, exactly, what? The Diesel is generally just acting like an overblown self-caricature, an arrogant manchild with an assumed vocabulary. I don't know what to make of it, especially given that O'Neal has been semi-resurgent with the Suns.



Lastly, we turn to the Chuck Rule. I realize this was relevant about four or five years ago, but I think it merits discussion. The NFL has really been changed as a result of the crackdown on the rule after the Patriots-Colts AFC Championship game in 2004. It used to be that elite receivers could be controlled by physical players in the secondary, just as long as the rule retained some elasticity: a chuck seven to ten yards down field instead of just five gave the corners a little more cushion to watch the route develop before knocking the receiver off of it. It also gave them second opportunities to body up the receiver, meaning that even a big man- think Fitz- could be pushed off of his route. Consider the best receivers today: besides Steve Smith, who's just freakishly quick, most are very big, tall players with good jumping ability- Plax, Fitz, Boldin, Moss, Johnson etc. Even more of the pure down field receivers who are not elite are trending toward height and leap instead of burning speed- think Nate Washington. The smaller, fleeter players of just a few years ago are becoming outdated. Deion Branch, for instance, has accomplished nothing in Seattle, and other spark plug, mighty mite types are becoming rare as number one receivers. Look at Ben Roethlisberger's comments from last off season: despite being gifted with Hines Ward and Santonio Holmes, both above average receivers of moderate proportions, he vocally asked for the Steelers to get him a big receiver. And, lo and behold, Pittsburgh drafted Limas Sweed (who horribly botched that catch against the Ravens, incidentally). Why is this? Because smaller, quicker players were more valuable before, when they could make up lost time after the jam at the line (and about ten yards off of it) with speed. Now, with the jam restricted much more carefully to five yards, big players can get their release and travel relatively unimpeded, making it easier for a big armed passer to just bomb it over their heads. This is how Kurt Warner threw almost every touchdown to Fitzy. This has also resulted in the near-extinction of the true shutdown corner: Champ Bailey is maybe the only one left, and he is fading and overrated, anyway. This is why Asante Samuel has come to be considered so great. People look at his picks and think of them as the sign of a great defender, but many of those come on plays where he jumps a route in an all or nothing gambit. For every route he jumps on and succeeds, there might be three or four that result in his getting burned. And yet teams were falling all over themselves offering him record contracts, because, now, if you can get half of a shutdown defensive back, you pay like your getting the whole thing. Interceptions? $60M. Pass prevention? $45M. That's the new NFL economics.