The Kevin Sheehan Show - Wizards, Osaka, Easttown

Episode Date: June 1, 2021

Kevin and Thom opened the show with a recap of the Wizards' Game 4 win over Philly. They also spent time discussing the circumstances surrounding Naomi Osaka's withdrawal from the French Open. They finished with their thoughts on the Mare of Easttown finale.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

You don't want it. You don't need it. But you're going to get it anyway. The Kevin Cheyenne Show. Here's Kevin. Tommy's here today. I'm here. I hope everybody had a great weekend.

We both have watched the finale of the show we've been talking about over the last seven weeks, Maravistown. We will get to that. We will get to the Naomi Osaka story from the French Open. But I think we should start with. the Wizards who stayed alive last night, beating the 76ers, 122 to 114, in a game that, to me, it's pretty simple. I mean, if Joelle and Bede plays in the game more than 11 minutes, the wizard season is over.

I mean, it's really, it isn't much more than that. I mean, this is the easiest recap of a game of all time. Now, there were other things in the game that I want to talk about, but the bottom line is Joel Embed got hurt. He's having an MRI on his knee today. He played 11 minutes. When he was in the game, they were up by as many as 10. He got two fouls called on Gafford who started the game, two fouls on Len who came in for Gafford, and then he left the game, and the Wizards came back, and even though they trailed at halftime, they took a 14.3 quarter lead and held on for dear life against primarily 76ers backups because Ben Simmons was in foul trouble for much of the game.

If you watch the game on Saturday night, it was an embarrassment. I mean, it was one of the worst efforts I've seen. The one thing that I liked about last night, even with him beat in the game, Tommy, is that they actually came out and played with a level of urgency like they had interest in winning the game and extending their season. But if Embed plays and plays his normal minutes, the wizards are over, their season's over. That's the way I saw it. How did you see it? I agree with you totally. And, you know, let's face it, there are a number eight seed now who managed to squeeze their way into being the eight seed.

and they're playing a number one seat. So I don't know how we could expect, I mean, much more than what we've seen. This is the way the NBA works. I mean, the top teams, the difference between the top teams and the also rands is significant. Well, you're right. I mean, the wizards are taking golf dates and be played. And I know because he didn't play, Daniel Gaffer, even looked more impressive when he played.

But my, my, my, my takeaway was the wizards better not screw up Gafford and Hachamor. They better not to screw that either of the development of those guys up. Because in Gafford, they really got something. They, they, they got a bargain in Gafford. And he's got potential to be a real significant contributor to a good team. And same with Hachamor. and I just hope that, you know, as the organization does, they don't screw this up. Yeah, they, I think they, for next year, and maybe even the following year,

have like a team option on his rookie deal that Chicago signed him to when they drafted him. I thought hot. But I'm not even talking about that. I'm talking about his development. I know. Well, he's got to, you know, he's got to stay here for, you know, a meaningful amount of time. So, I mean, I think Gafford has been phenomenal. I thought Hachamura had his best game as a wizard because it was a playoff game.

And I really do like Hachamura now, so much more than I used to. I'm bought into Hachamura being, you know, a potential future star, not a guaranteed star, but a player who has a chance to be, you know, a number two legitimate All-Star on a team. team, something like that. And, you know, if you think about Beal Westbrook and Hachamura, if he were to emerge quickly as a star and a third star in the team, what would that mean? Well, it would mean not a championship. It would mean 45 to 48 wins a year, maybe a five-seat, and maybe one series one. That's the upside with this team, no matter what Hachamura becomes, and I'm more intrigued with what he can become now than I was, say, a month or two months ago.

They're just not anywhere near the upper echelons of the Eastern Conference, the stars on the teams in the Eastern Conference, from the three that play in Brooklyn in, you know, Kyrie Irving and Kevin Durant and James Hardin, to even, to be honest with you, the two that play in Philadelphia, certainly no one of the three matches Embed. Embedd is a true, you know, heavyweight star. The Wizards don't have, you know, like we've talked about it,

top 10 player. You know, Milwaukee has one. Hell, the Hawks may have one when all is said and done. The Celtics have one. Anyway, the game last night was interesting because, first of all, did you watch it? I mean, were you watching it on TNT? Because you're up in the Poconos right now. But I watched it.

The crowd was great. Now, I know there were a lot of Philly fans in the crowd. I was told that by people who were at the game. but the crowd was... But you could tell that through the TV. I mean, I went watching it. I was shocked at the noise that Philly fans made. And Saturday night was even louder because they played so well.

But anyway, I thought the urgency was there. I thought the fans were great, even if it was sort of a mixed crowd. There were more Wizards fans there than 76ers fans. I don't think there's any doubt about that. But whatever, whatever the percentage breakdown, there are a lot of Philly fans there. I thought Hachamura was awesome. I thought their intensity was awesome. But here's just an observation about this series.

You know, neither Westbrook or Beale have played a great game yet. Beal has not played well. You know, he had a couple of big shots down the stretch. He had seven turnovers in the game last night. And it could have been 10 turnovers last night. Westbrook was three for 19 from the floor. They were a combined 12 for 42. and for the series, I think Beal is something like 5 for 25 on threes.

He was 3 for 20 coming into the game last night. They got lucky, and maybe they'll continue to get lucky in this series. This is a big injury report coming up this afternoon. Because Tommy, it's not nuts to say it isn't that if Joel and Bede somehow got seriously injured last night and is out for the series, that the Wizards would have a legitimate chance of winning any game that he doesn't play in. Now, are they going to win three more, which is what they'd have to do to complete the all-time NBA comeback?

Nobody's ever come back from three-nothing down. I doubt it. I think Philly would be able to summon up enough. They're deeper in their bench to win one of these games. But we would go into tomorrow night's game as an example in Philadelphia if Joelle Embed is out. And the Sixers would be like a very strong. short favorite. These would be toss-up games going into it. And the one encouraging thing, again,

is that I don't even think Beal has played a great game yet in this series. Now, I'm not expecting Embed to be out. I'm not expecting Embed to be completely compromised, like health-wise, for the rest of the series, but I don't know. And if he were to be out or not be anywhere near 100%, believe it or not, the Wizards could win any game against them. Whereas before last night, I bet Philly last night laying eight and a half, I bought it down to eight, I thought they were going to destroy the Wizards last night. I thought Saturday night we saw a team that was basically had quit. They got embarrassed on Saturday night.

The defense was horrible. It looked like they were still more concerned about the popcorn incident than they were winning anything. And last night at the beginning of the game, I think it was like 8.5. 18 to 8 early, something like that. And I thought, yeah, this is not going to go well. And this is going to be another blowout. I think they led by 10 at one point in the first quarter, maybe 12, and then Embed got hurt, and the whole game changed around.

I mean, that's not a coincidence. He's that good, that good. By the way, Tommy, I had Tony Massenberg on the radio show this morning, and I've had Scott Brooks on a bunch, and I've talked to both of them about Embed. And do you know both of them? How about this? Scott Brooks played with Hakeem Elijah won in Houston, you know, in the mid-90s on one of those championship games. Tony Massenberg, in one of his like 17 NBA stops, he played with Hakeem Elijah won.

And when I brought it up, he said this when he goes, I definitely see, if that's where you're going, I definitely see the comparison in Embed's game to Elijah one. There are a lot of comparisons minus the three-point shooting. But anyway, I wanted to mention two other. things about the game last night, specifically the strategy to foul Ben Simmons, the hack of Simmons strategy. So I actually said last week on the show, don't use these 18 fouls on Embed, use them on Simmons. Yes, you did. Because he can't shoot free throws and they should go to a hack of Simmons strategy and force him out of the game. Anyway, it worked. He made three of six during a

key stretch four of eight overall down the stretch of that game. And the game went from being tied to the Wizards taking the lead and not relinquishing the lead. But one thing that I thought of, and I think people out there that are basketball players sort of understand what I'm going to say, and I think Tommy you will too. I think him making a couple of them because he had not made one free throw heading into last night's game. Heading into last night's game, he was 0 for 9 in the series from the free throw line. And even though he missed more, he made one out of every two

when he went to the free throw line down the stretch. It ended up five for 11 for the game. And only about one or two of his misses were really bad misses. All the others were basically online, in and out, a little bit short, a little bit long. You know, shooters, Tommy, good shooters don't miss left or right. They miss long or short. He'll never be a good shooter.

but his misses were long and short on a couple of them, not right or left. And I think maybe he got some confidence down the stretch on those free throws, but I like the strategy. I thought it was smart. And then one other observation, my God, it just drives me freaking crazy. Russell Westbrook has to stop screaming, and one. I mean, you can hear Westbrook on every single drive when he shoots, goes, he screams, and one, looking for the call.

First of all, it can't be an and one if you miss the shot. Okay, you'll get two free throws if you got fouled, but it can't be an and one if you miss the shot, which he typically does. Like last night, I heard him scream and won on about five misses. By the way, Beale does it a lot too. But you can hear it with Westbrook. He feels like every time he's aggressive going to the rim that he gets fouled. Well, make the shot, Russ, and then let's worry about the foul.

By the way, it can't be an and-one when you don't get fouled. And I'm telling you, Russ and Beal, and by the way, they're not the only ones. I watch Donchich, you know, this weekend who's hurt. I mean, some of the biggest complainers and whiners in the game, and there are a lot of them. I think most of these people are wrong like 80% of the time. Like when you see Beal, so many of the time you see Beal arguing, he wasn't even touched. Like it's not even close. Like they are expecting the two of them.

They want LeBron and Michael calls. And they just haven't earned that yet. Anyway, a couple of others. I mean, they won the game. The pace of these games has actually been good for them. And if Embedes out, tomorrow night becomes interesting. If he's out and they win tomorrow night, then Friday night, if he's out, becomes interesting. They're not that far off from Philly without Joelle Embed in the game.

With them in the game, there's a significant difference between the two teams, as we saw in the first three games. Yeah, what Philly needs to do if there is no Embedib is. hope one of their shooters, Danny Green or Curry gets hot. I mean, they didn't, none of them, I mean, I think the highest score for Philly was Harris, who had 21 points. Yeah. So, I mean, what they need is one of those guys to get hot. That's, that's the difference in the game if the Sixers win that game.

And they were within a point of winning it with, what, two minutes left in the game, right? Yeah, they were right there with, by the way, Guys like Mike Scott and Maxie and Thibble on the floor. I mean, reserves on the floor primarily. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, it's just that, you know, Curry and Green and Harris and Simmons, they all benefit from Embed being on the floor. They get a lot more open looks.

And the Wizards are not a good defensive team. But I did think that last night there was an urgency. And I'll end it with this, Tommy, because I watched a lot of NBA this weekend. I did, and I know a lot of you are rolling your eyes and saying, I hear from you all the time. Sheehan, I just don't get you. I don't understand why you're into this NBA crap. It's not crap. It's great.

And the playoffs are so intense. And by the way, it rained Tommy down here pretty much most of the weekend until yesterday when it was beautiful. But one of the things that I was planning on doing on the radio show and on the podcast today is just eviscerating the Wizards for showing no heart in these playoffs because every single game that I watched over the weekend, it was super intense. Now, the Miami Heat, you know, as the defending Eastern Conference champion, they went out pretty meekly. They just could not guard Milwaukee. And they were such a good defensive team in the bubble last year. And the Bucks played well. They played really well. But everybody else, every other game all weekend long was intense.

Fans were back. And of course, you know, that's the other big subject in sports is how the fans are completely out of control. Guy ran out under the court at the Wizards game last night. Scott Brooks apparently went nuts over it afterwards. I just remind me we should add that to the conversation today. But the games starting on Friday night, my God, did Kauai Leonard play well this weekend? He was so awesome to watch. I love him as a playoff performer. He just rises to the occasion. He's been a two-time finals MVP. And that team was at the point of completely being revamped in the offseason going out in the first round of the Mavericks. They go to Dallas. The crowd was crazy in Dallas. I mean, it was loud, and Donchich is such a good player, but he got hurt, but Kauai Leonard took that team on his back for two consecutive games. Paul George was excellent,

too. Rondo was great. Watching the Nets the other night, Tommy, against the Celtics, look, I am not a big Brooklyn Nets fan. I can't stand, you know, Hardin and the way he plays. I'm not a Kyrie Irving fan. Durant drives me nuts. times, although to me he's a much tougher player in-game, even though he's super sensitive off of it. The performance that the Nets put on on Sunday against Boston, Durant had 42, Irving had 39, Hardin had 23 and 18 assists. I came away from that game thinking, I don't think anybody can beat Brooklyn. You know, they play, I hate the way they play, but their three players are so good as one-on-one players, they're almost, they're impossible. You know, most teams don't have

one really good defender, let alone three. And I just, I just don't know that anybody can win four out of seven against them, unless it's a healthy Lakers team. Anyway, I could go on and on. The performances all weekend long were really compelling. Trey Young's been phenomenal. Chris Paul was so good on Sunday against the Lakers, and I know Anthony Davis was out. I've enjoyed, this happens to me every year. It's hard for me to watch a lot of NBA during the regular season, but the playoffs, like hockey, are a completely different product, completely different.

Well, I'll have to take your word for it. I know. It's the only NBA I watch was the Wizards this weekend. I mean, tonight you've got the Lakers and the Sons, and if Anthony Davis doesn't play, Tommy, the Lakers are in deep trouble. Phoenix is a five-point favorite tonight to take a three-two series lead. I don't know.

I enjoy watching Yokic a lot for Denver. He's great. I love watching Lillard. There are just some great players. Kauai Leonard's my favorite, as you know. I just love watching him. and what I'd love to see more than anything else over the next month, I'd really like to see a Lakers-Clippers Western Conference finals.

Everybody expected it last year in the bubble. We didn't get it. I think that would be a fascinating series to watch. I don't know if either team's good enough to beat the Nets. I really don't. And maybe Utah's good enough, although, you know, they're really good. They're really good also. And they play the right way.

I like watching them play. Anyway, do you have any comments about just the outcry and the outrage over fan behavior? The guy in Boston threw the water bottle at Kyrie Irving. He was charged with a felony. We had the guy on the floor last night for the Wizards game. He appeared to be severely impacted. Did you see him try to jump and touch the backboard? Unbelievable, though.

I mean, look, I think both those cases are a step up from dumping a box of popcorn on a plate. Oh, the water, of course, is, yeah. Yeah. I mean, what's the water pedal? That would hurt him had it hit him. Yeah, we're talking about different category of crime. Yeah. In terms of behavior.

And so, look, I mean, the arena-wide has 11,000 people in there, and one decided to jump out of his chair and try to. and try to get on the court. I'm relatively speaking, it's not an epidemic of fan violence. But it's a little bit disturbing to see that goofball get out of his chair and try to get on the court. I mean, these players, rightfully so, they all worry about that Monica Sellis moment.

You know, I mentioned this this morning. You will remember this. you'll agree, maybe you'll disagree. But I feel like fans running out onto the field was a big deal when I was a kid watching games. 70s, 80s, that it was really commonplace. And that, you know, seeing a fan run out onto a football field in the middle of the game, remember Mike Curtis knocked that guy out. Oh, yeah. You know, and it, by the way, fans rushing and storming the floor, you know, after big wins was much more commonplace. You see it in college.

Now you never see it in the pros anymore. Think back to the 80s when Boston was winning championships and the floor would get swarmed at the Boston Garden. I know that's different, obviously. But I feel like there was always a lot more of this back then. I don't know why there would be an increase in it. I don't know if it's pent up whatever from the pandemic or the excitement over being there and maybe people are imbibing more than they typically do going to these games,

having a chance to go back to these games for the first time. Look, I think the worst thing that happens in the NBA is what's happened many times, and we've got documented cases of major verbal, ugly, racist, level comments from Utah Jazz fans in Salt Lake City. That's the thing that we've heard more about than anything else over the years. And that's utterly unacceptable. And throwing a water bottle, a full water bottle, it would have appeared, at a player walking off the court, no matter what that player did, you saw what he did, right?

You saw him rub his foot all over the logo. He stomped on the logo. You know, these people, they need to be banned. and they need to be punished and hopefully that will serve as a deterrent. But I guess my point to you is I think that this used to happen a lot. Well, it's just like everything. Anything that used to happen before did not travel across the country within seconds. You know, I mean, social media amplifies every incident.

So, I mean, if a fan dives on the court and wants, Washington, the guy in LA knows about it within seconds. You know, I mean, that would have been buried on B6 of their sports section the next day. Yeah. In the old days. So it's just, it's just, we're more aware of everything. So, you know, this is, this is, this is what I mean, I always would preach of people who watch a lot of cable news. You know, it seems like it's the end of the world.

all the time. And you can't live like that. And I don't think there's an epidemic of fan violence. Like you pointed out, I think it was much worse years ago. You know, one of the seminal moments in this that a lot of people talk about was when the Phillies won the World Series in 1980. Over the Royals. And this is Philadelphia now. This is a very tough town. The The police in the ninth inning surrounded the field on horseback. I remember that. And that was considered a big seminal moment in this idea of what used to happen in baseball a lot. I mean, you've seen the image of Chris Chambers.

Of course. After hitting the home run against the Royals in 76, having to run through a crowd of fans to get the home play, knocking fans down. I think that stopped a lot after the horses running the field at Veterans Stadium. Yeah, I mean, it's good. No, I was going to say, I think the two, I think the two things are different. I think the rushing the field after a championship or a big win or whatever used to happen a lot more. And I think you're right that there were, you know, there came a point, you know, where it was like, we can't let this happen.

People are going to get hurt. but the tearing down of goalposts and football games, the rushing baseball fields, the Chris Shambles things, the all-timer. I don't know if he ever did make it to home plate. And, you know, college sports, we've continued to see that over the years, you know, with rushing and storming the floor after, you know, a big college basketball win or the same thing in a college football win, even though, you know, there are warnings about doing it.

It happens anyway. But that's different from the one-off fan that, comes out in the middle of a game to try to disrupt it, or the fan that does attempt to be violent towards, you know, a player, you know, like the idiot in Boston that threw the water bottle at Kyrie Irving that was full. You know, you and I both agreed on the popcorn incident that it was, you know, a bit of a mountain out of a molehill. I mean, come on.

It was popcorn. And as far as I'm, you know, there's been this, you know, part of the conversation that has pushed like a racist narrative that these are white people throwing things at black players. I don't know at this point. I haven't read enough about each incident to find out if there's any truth to any of that. I would just suggest to you that, you know, in a place like Boston as an example, in those games, almost every player on the floor minus Joe Harris is black.

And almost every fan, it seems, in the crowd, is white. The odds are if there's a drunk idiot in the crowd that it's going to decide to do something, it's probably going to be a white person and a black person on the receiving end. I don't know if it has anything to do with the race. I haven't seen any of that. There's a history. I know. There's a terrible history in Boston.

Yeah, understood. Look, and I have no problem with black players come into their conclusion that these attacks the racially motivating. I mean, I don't know if they are, but I know if I was black, if I was black and I was getting stuffed thrown out. I would walk into many arenas assuming there's a lot of people

in there, not the whole crowd, but there's people in there that hate me because of the color my skin. A lot. I think there's a lot of arenas you walk into where you should assume that a lot of people hate you just because of the columns you write in the things that you say. I don't know.

I mean, you know, it'd be pretty hard to get into a conversation about what percentage of the crowd has racial motivation on a given night. Obviously, every city, you know, tends to be different. But I don't know that there's any proof that the gentleman in Boston or the gentleman in Philadelphia or the person that apparently spat at Tray Young did it with racial motivation. Look, here's the bottom line. Whatever happens to these guys, they deserve what they get. Agreed. Totally agree.

They should be banned. They shouldn't be allowed back. But I think you're right about this blowing up because of the age that we're in, the intersocial media and the immediacy of something going viral. But it's just my feeling that in the 70s and 80s, a fan running out. onto the court or running out onto the field was a much more common occurrence. And my guess is, is that there probably was a lot less security back then at games. Oh, sure there was.

Absolutely. And the opportunity, and by the way, I would probably suggest that, you know, it was an 80% chance that person was over served. I've told you the story about my friend's brother. You know the story I'm going to tell at Memorial. stadium climbing the foul pole. You're sure? What's he camden yards? Joe climbed the foul pole. Yes, it was probably Camden Yards. It may have been Camden Yards.

But, you know, he climbed the foul pole in like the seventh inning, hammered. By the way, rest in peace, Joe. Joe was a character. Joe was a risk taker. He was fearless. We all loved him. And Joe would always be up for doing something like this. And he climbed the foul pole and left field during I was there that night. During an Orioles game. And his friend Tommy convinced the cops that he could get Joe to come down. And the cops let him try to talk Joe down.

And he screamed up to him, stay up there. If you come down, they're going to arrest you. And so Joe stayed up there for like another 35, 40 minutes until he got tired and finally came down. They ended up continuing the game with them up there. Oh, I know. But they move. a bunch of people at the bottom right the pole so so you know yeah he didn't fall down on anybody

or or anything like i was there i was at can't the yards that's that's so funny that is so funny look at the nationals i've said this numerous times i never see i never saw a person run out on the field at a nationals game oh come i'm sure it's happened but in all the years i've covered the team I never saw one. It's a pretty, it's a pretty well-behaved crowd. Of course it is. Apparently, during the rain delay recently at a game, a spreeker ran on the field.

Saw that. But, I mean, I rarely see, like, I rarely see fights in the stands. I've never seen a fight in stands. I'm sure they've happened. I've just never seen them at Nationals games. Oh, it is a tame crowd. That Nats crowd, you know, I've said this before because especially when I've gotten upset, you know, being in a playoff game and you got people screaming at you to sit down when the counts three and two. At the end of an inning, you're like, no, no, no, this is the playoffs.

You get up. I got into that confrontation that first year against St. Louis. And literally, people were saying, sit down. You know, when you've got Jordan Zimmerman with a three-two count on a hitter with two outs at the end of an inning. And, you know, I remember just saying to you, my God, some of these people are at risk sitting in these good seats during these games because their head never lifts out of their phone. They're constantly in their phone as foul balls are whizzing by their heads. They have no idea what's going on in the game. but they look great in their curly W hat.

Yeah, that's not the crowd for that, even though I'm sure it's happened. I will tell you this, Caps games, and not so much the Caps games in recent years, but back in the day, and I'm talking about like in the 80s and 90s at the Capp Center for a playoff game against the Rangers or the Devils or the Flyers, oh, there were some fights in the crowd and those games. I know. Huge fights, especially the upper levels. There still are some at Caps games.

Yeah. You know, it's the nature of the beast. Here's one last thing about what fuels a story like this too. You don't have to be a sports fan to be interested in this story. Yeah. In other words, you can show, I can show this video to my wife and she'll say, oh, my God, that's outrageous. Yeah. You know, as opposed to showing her, like, a great play.

play in a game. So this is a story that translates beyond sports. So that also gives it a lot of legs. I would imagine that most of these have been overserved imbeciles, essentially. And maybe, maybe, you know, getting back to a live sporting event after a year and the excitement over that and the pent-up, you know, sort of feeling of getting out and getting out and getting hammered and going to a game has led, I'll tell you what, like we talked about last week, the crowd at Madison Square Garden for those first two games against the Hawks, it was out of control. I mean, in a good way, I love that.

I love, the crowd last night was great at Capital One Arena. You could feel it coming through the screen, you know, as that game was tight, you know, in the fourth quarter. It was outstanding. The hockey games, you know, in New York in particular, the Islanders games were great. They won an overtime last night to even up that series. By the way, Toronto.

How about those Islanders? How about those Islanders? And Toronto, oh my God, they blew it against Montreal. They had a 3-1 series lead and they lost game seven at home last night. And how many years has it been, Tommy, since Toronto won a series? I don't know. I don't know. But, you know, that's got to be tough.

a place where they take hockey so seriously. Oh, yeah, no doubt. And especially their continental rival. Exactly. Although it's interesting, Toronto fans, I mean, remember when the Maple Leafs and the caps were playing in a series, wasn't at the same time that Toronto was playing Washington in the NBA? I think they were both playing simultaneously.

Anyway, there was a big game. Actually, it wasn't Washington in the NBA. Toronto had a game seven in basketball and had a game seven in hockey. And I ended up having somebody on from Toronto on the radio show. And I said, what's the number one story? And they said, well, it's hockey. Like, it's not even close. Yeah.

But what I always used to say about the expos in Montreal is baseball, Montreal will be a big hit when they start playing the game with hockey sticks. All right. We got a couple of other things to get to, including the Naomi Osaka story. We will get, you'll get our thoughts on Marevistown. And I'm waiting here a little bit to see if Chase Young and Montes, what if there are reports about whether or not they showed up for OTAs today. Much more coming up after this word from one of our sponsors. Toronto hasn't won a playoff series Tommy and hockey since 2004. So it's been 17 years since they even won a playoff series. That's got to be tough for people who really care about their team, which they do up there. All right. So Naomi Osaka, for those that are not big tennis fans, because I don't think there are a lot of them anymore, not this country. It's become very much a niche sport in the United States.

It's still very popular, very popular around the world, especially in Europe and South America and Australia. Naomi Osaka has been a multi-time championship winner. She's 23 years old. She's Japanese. I mentioned, and I forget if I did this with you or not, that Sportico, which is now sort of the Forbes business version magazine. John Orander, good friend, does a great job with Sports Business Journal, but Sportico did this article last week. Naomi Osaka in 2020 made $50 million in endorsements. She made $55.2 million when you factor in prize money. It's the most ever in endorsements

for a female athlete of all time. And she was, I think, fourth for the year behind LeBron, Tiger, and I think a soccer player. I forget where she was, but she had an incredible year off the court with endorsements. Anyway, I think we briefly talked about last week. She had a statement before the French Open started that she was not going to do the required post-match media, press conferences, that she was mentally stressed by it.

She was tired of having people doubt her in press conferences. She cited mental stress and mental health issues, but she was also in that original statement, fairly critical of the media, you know, and sort of the repetitive questions that put negativity into her head. The French Open was very disappointed with that decision. They told her that she would be fined the maximum amount for not doing media. She won her first round match, and then apparently all four majors decided that they would start discussing whether or not they would boot her from the tournament if she didn't continue, if she didn't live up to her responsibilities, which include doing media.

and before they took further action, she withdrew from the French Open yesterday. She withdrew and she had a long statement. I guess I could read it. You know what? I probably should read it for those that aren't following the story. She withdrew from the tournament yesterday saying, quote, Hey, everyone, this isn't a situation I ever imagined or intended when I posted a few days ago. I think now the best thing for the tournament, the other players, and my well-being is that I withdraw

so that everyone can get back to focusing on the tennis going on in Paris. I never wanted to be a distraction, and I accepted that my timing was not ideal, and my message could have been clearer. More importantly, I would never trivialize mental health or use the term lightly. The truth is that I've suffered long bouts of depression since the U.S. Open in 2018, and I've really had a hard time coping with that. Anyone that knows me knows I'm introverted, and anyone that has seen me at tournaments will notice that I'm often wearing headphones,

as that helps dull my social anxiety. Though the tennis press has always been kind to me, and I want to apologize, especially to all the cool journalists whom I may have hurt, I'm not a natural public speaker, and I get huge waves of anxiety before I speak to the world's media. I get really nervous, and I find it stressful to always try to engage

and give you the best answers I can. So here in Paris, I was already feeling vulnerable and anxious, so I thought it was better to exercise self-care and skip the press conferences. I announced it preemptively because I do feel like the rules are quite outdated in parts, and I wanted to highlight that. I wrote privately to the tournament apologizing and saying that I would be more than happy to speak with them after the tournament as the slams are intense.

I'm going to take some time away from the court now, but when the time is right, I really want to work with the tour to discuss ways we can make things better for the players, press, and fans. Anyways, hope you are all doing well and staying safe. Love you guys. I'll see you when I see you. Well, look, if she has, if she suffers from depression and is treated for it, then this is very serious stuff. And I wish her all the best.

But the rest of it is just pure horseshit. Absolute horseshit. You know, I mean, the way she handled it was, and her people. She didn't just handle this. A woman who makes $55 million in endorsements has people making decisions for her. And to just have dropped this bomb on the French Open without any discussions before, without any contact, you know, according to New York Times, the French Open officials repeatedly try to get in touch with her to talk to her about this, and she refused. Right. Refuse any kind of contact or discussion about it. Right.

So, I mean, they were pretty much left with no choice to do what they did. And, I mean, it's unfair to the other players. She didn't get any sympathy from any of the other players in terms of her refusal to do press conferences because they all have to do it. Well, that's not true. She got a lot of sympathy before and after. Raphael Nadal said, no, you know, he can't do this. Yeah, but Serena, the one that matters in her. sport with support. Serena, who would just as soon, who would have the same complaint. Serena, who was,

who doesn't like to be held accountable for her public displays of foolishness at best. Of course, she's going to think it's a good idea to not have to answer questions about the way she plays and what she does only on her terms. So I don't take that one seriously. But again, you can't have a player just decide they're not going to do press conferences and the rest of the people are going to have to do them. That's an advantage. Are you done? No, I'm not done.

Go ahead. There was a great New York Times story about this that, and I'm going to quote from it, Billy Jean King likes to say pressure is a privilege. And repetitive questions are an inconvenience, but also a reflection of legitimate public interest. Media coverage, much of it's. favorable, has helped Osaka become the world's best paid female athlete. Now I'm done. Okay. Three things, Tommy, real quickly, before I get to a conversation more about whether or not it's advantageous or not advantageous for players and coaches and teams to have media, to have

traditional media. The first thing is this. If she's suffering from depression, my God, get help. I'm sure she has access to it. Empathy. You know, the sport should reach out and do what it can to make sure that she's okay. You know, if she's truly suffering from depression and then, you know, associated anxieties and phobias over, you know, these press conferences and public speaking, get her help because obviously she's distressed and the most important thing more than anything else is that she needs help and hopefully she will get it. Number two is that you are right based on everything that I have read in the reporting on this over the last 24 to 36 hours.

The French Open reached out to her and her people starting late last week after her original statement and they wanted to help. They wanted to accommodate her. They wanted to work out a solution whereby she did fulfill her responsibility, but maybe she was able to do it in a more comfortable setting. And she didn't respond. Her people didn't respond. So, you know, the French Open is taking a bit of a pounding by some

in terms of like being non-compassionate. they apparently, according to the reporting, reached out multiple times in an effort to figure out a solution where they could accommodate some of the issues that she was having. Lastly, and this is what I wanted to get to first, because I didn't want to forget this, because I think you will have an interesting perspective on this. I wonder whether or not this is really for her and other athletes, who, by the way, did come out on Twitter in support of her, did come out on Twitter. in support of her, did come out on Twitter over the weekend and say, you know, she's pushing the envelope on what could be a whole new paradigm of athletes communicating with fans. I wonder whether or not you think there's an effort here to sort of change by, you know, sports biggest names.

And I'm not saying everybody's going to be involved in this, but it's just going to take a few to sort of push it in this direction, that with social media and the millions of followers that all of these big stars have, if this is an attempt, if we're heading down the road where athletes are going to try to cut out the traditional media paradigm.

Yes, I do. Look, I think there's a lot of concern among media that the norms that are in place now because of COVID, the Zoom, contacts, the Zoom interviews, are not going to be taken away anytime soon, not because of COVID, because this way the teams, the players, they get to control who they talk to, when they talk to them, and pretty much what they say. So, yeah, I think, I think there is some legitimate concern about that. I might want to point out, this sounds awfully familiar to the time where 900 numbers

became familiar. And there was a groundswell of stories. And there were a handful of players and athletes that had their own 900 numbers. And there were stories and people speculating, well, now they're just bypassed the media. You know, they wouldn't have to do that anymore because if people want to hear what an athlete has to say, all they got to do is call this 900 number. And that never materialized. So I'm also skeptical of any ability.

to change as well. And here's the thing that drives me nuts. Most of the public that I deal with would say, fine. Let them do it that way. Right. In other words, most of the people that I deal with say, sure, less access, more controlled messages, fine. That's what I want. Yeah.

Which is insane. You're being duped. Yeah. I mean, I know you don't care that you're being duped. Yeah. But you're not, you're, you're, you're, you're, you're, you're, you're, you're, you're, you're, you're driving farther away from the kernels of truth that occasionally come out in these stories and in these back and forths. If there's less access and the access that there is, that there is more

controlled by the people, you know, by these athletes. I mean, I know a lot of it is jock-sniffing and stuff like that. But, you know, you are getting farther away from ever getting a chance at maybe what's really going on. Yeah, Tommy, I'm with you on this. Look, I'm sure there are people out there that just watch games or go to games and that's it. You know, they don't care about why something happened or, you know, they're not into the kinds of personalities that these athletes are, the kind of people that they are. They're not into the conversation about games.

They literally watch it. They turn it off. They go on with their lives. I think there are some people that are that way. I think most people, though, are interested in more. You know, I think that a lot of people enjoy the games, but then they take interest in the players and the athletes and the coaches and what they say after these games. You know, coach, why did you go for that fourth and one?

It seemed like you had all the momentum and you were deep in your own territory. Why did you decide to take the gamble there? You know, why a tennis player, did you decide at 4 or 5 in the last set at Deuce to serve and volley for the first time in the match? You know, whatever it is. I mean, I think that people are interested in a lot of that. And you won't get that without a media, without reporting. reporters asking those questions. And by the way, most of these press conferences are utterly benign.

I mean, there's very, in sports, I mean, it's not politics. You know, it's not even what goes on with like entertainers. You know, it's a lot of 90% of it is, you know, why, how? And, you know, they're acting very much as sort of a conduit between the athletes and coaches and the fans that consume the game or consume the match. and by the way, paid for it in many cases. You know, a lot of these players and coaches, I think fans like seeing in that environment. It's like a peak or a window into their personalities. And, you know, people are interested in that as well. You know, good luck getting that from a three-line tweet

after a game or a match from a player. You know, thank you for the support. I was glad to win. My opponent was outstanding. You know, I look forward to my opponent. my match tomorrow. You know, Svetlana Loricova, she's tough, she's really good. I don't even know if that's a player. But if that's what you want, you know, you'll enjoy sports no more or no less than you do now. You're probably in favor of like a new paradigm of athletes, you know, post-match,

post-game, pre-match. You're probably in favor of it. It doesn't really impact you, but I think it impacts a lot more. And if you tell me, by the way, you know, oh, well, the players will be very interactive on Instagram, I'll be able to ask the questions directly. I won't need the reporters that are there. Good luck. Good luck on getting your questions answered on Twitter. I just, I also just had, I think I had a bit of an issue with some of what was said on, you know,

by people that I respect. like Andrew Brandt, who I've had on the radio show many times, former president of the Green Bay Packers way back in the day. He tweeted something yesterday that I saw. He said, Naomi Osaka seems so much more than someone tweeting slogans or hashtags. High character willing to challenge the norms of the game. By the way, Tommy, she is very bright, very thoughtful. I've really enjoyed, and I'm not a big tennis fan anymore, but the majors I'll tend to tune in. She's been in a lot of finals. And you can tell she's really bright, really thoughtful. And I can only imagine what she'd be like if she weren't suffering from terrible anxiety

while doing these press conferences or these one-on-one interviews. But anyway, Andrew then wrote, maybe more will think, why do athletes have to answer the same mindless questions over and over again? Well, there are reasons why they do. First of all, mindless is very much a knock on sports media. I know that there are some repetitive questions and probably some mindless questions, but for the most part, I think most reporters are asking questions that they think are important for their viewership or their readers to know. And it's usually people who had just watched the game and they're interested and they sort of act as this conduit, if you will.

You know, this link between players, coaches, and fans. I think mindless, first of all, it's a subjective. You know, they're not all mindless. I would suggest that in a lot of situations, man, you get a lot out of these things. I think one of the most interesting things for me, and it would be as a fan as much as it is a media member or somebody that does a talk show on like a Monday after a Washington football game, I love watching the coaches press conference.

I think you learn so much more about what you just watched. Now, some people aren't interested in that. That's fine. But do you think you'd get that without a media core, without people asking the questions? Do you think that they would just offer it up via Instagram or some sort of internal, you know, more comfortable setting where people that they employ are asking the questions? No. I don't think so.

And I think in sports, there's a lot less of the trying to put players or coaches on the spot. Like, gotcha journalism. You know, that's more in politics. It's more, you know, with maybe entertainers, I don't know, much less in sports. There's some of that, don't get me wrong. But I also think that it misses the mark and the understanding of sort of the sports revenue cycle. I was texting back and forth last night with a friend of mine who is a former professional athlete, but he has also been on every side of the business of sports.

He's been an agent. He's been on the sponsorship side. He's been with teams. He just understands it every which way you can understand it. And he texted me because he saw my reaction or my response on Twitter to Andrew Brant's tweet. And my response was, mindless is subjective when Andrew Brandt described the same mindless questions that the media asks athletes over and over again. I said, mindless is subjective. The customer gets more than less if players answer questions that they, the paying customers, may have wanted to ask themselves.

Now, there were a lot of people that responded that said, yeah, you're sort of overstating the media's responsibility here or the media's contribution. here. I don't know if I am or I'm not, but this person texted me last night and he said, you know, I think it's naive to think that media coverage doesn't drive revenue. It doesn't drive sponsorship revenue. It doesn't drive purse revenue, et cetera, et cetera. As a sponsor, if my athlete didn't talk to the media, it would be a challenge. I get it relating to her anxiety. It sucks. I feel for her, but to say it isn't part of the job to talk to media is just someone who doesn't understand how the sports revenue cycle works. I think I agree with that. And I don't know that I'm smart enough to really figure out, or certainly if I want to spend the time to try to figure out what the

current model of, you know, sports media and athlete and teams means to revenue, you know, like if you didn't have it, how much less revenue would be generated. But I think intuitively, we can all sort of understand that, you know, the interest in sports goes beyond just the games. It's the people who play them. It's their personalities. It's what they say and what they do and the interests that so many people have in that. And, you know, with respect to a lot of the things that we talk about on this show, because we talk a lot about personalities, but the conversation about, you know, the games and what the coach said and why he said he did what he did. Like, it just feeds on itself. And, you know, maybe there's a different way to do that. But if you

rely on the players or some sort of controlled setting, um, to, you know, maybe there's a different way to do that, but if you rely on the players, um, to have that information disseminated or to have their personalities framed, I think you'd be missing out on a lot. And again, I don't know what it would do to revenue, but there's a reason that they make insane amounts of money. And it's not just because they're really good at what they do and people like watching them do what they do. There's more to it.

You know, there is the personalities that they're, they have become. They are, the controversies, the, you know, the positives and the negatives about these athletes all drive interest. And I don't know if you would get the same level of that all together. With that said, again, not to beat a dead horse, if she's suffering from depression, that is the only thing that matters for her. And any compassionate human being would want to see her get better. But I do think that there is a bit of naivete as to how sort of the sports revenue model works and the importance of the media in that. But I hope she gets better and I hope she gets better by figuring out a way to, you know, go through it rather than around it. You know, I'm not

there are so many different ways to deal with this kind of stuff. But I think I liked Billy Jean King's line. Pressure is a privilege for athletes. But it's not easy to deal with for many people. But I hope that she gets better. And I hope she gets better by being able to overcome this fear and this anxiety. Anyway, what was the Billy Jean King line? Do you have that again from the Times?

King line is pressure is a privilege. That's the Billie Jean King line. There was something else in that New York Times story. No, that was the line. Pressure is a privilege and then it was more reporting about it. Repetitive questions aren't inconvenience, but also a reflection

of legitimate public interest. Yeah. One other quick thing on this, I just wanted to mention this because this is not a good look for the French Tennis Federation. The tennis head of the FFT, which is the French Federation of Tennis, I guess. His name is Gilles Moraton, and he had the following statement. We are sorry and sad for Naomi Osaka.

The outcome of Naomi withdrawing from Roland Garros is unfortunate, closed quote. He read from a prepared statement and then didn't take any questions. I know. I mean, how dumb is that? Yeah. Seriously, that is as dumb as it gets. I mean, you talk about hypocrisy. You know, he said something about we wish her the best and the quickest possible recovery, yada, yada, yada, and then, you know, and then he walks off. He abruptly walks off and doesn't take any questions. What a dope. Talk about bad advice or bad instincts. Yeah, absolutely. There are a lot of bad advice going around in this issue right here.

Yeah. But, you know, we'll see how this unfolds. I tell you what, at the U.S. it's open, this ain't going to fly. It ain't going to fly in Flossing Meadows. Probably not. You know what? I don't think it'll fly at Wimbledon. No, it won't.

You're right. With the British press, no. I hope it works out for her. I really do. She's actually really interesting, but I think I agree primarily with you. This should have been a drive. dressed by her people well in advance. This should have been, she should have, she or her people should have been open to listening

to what the French Open was offering is sort of a middle ground or an accommodation. But according to the reporting, they didn't even get back to her. And I think, you know, this thing snowballed. And the statement last week blew it up, you know? Yes, she made it work. And it became so much worse that it became unbearable and she withdrew. Uh, anyway. Okay.

Uh, let's get to the, um, the finale of the show that we've been watching. We'll do that right after these words from a few of our sponsors. The show that we've been talking about for the last seven weeks on the podcast, many of you have been following along. I've been seeing some of your tweets and some of your guesses on who killed Aaron on mayor of Easttown starring Kate Winslet. Uh, the finale was Sunday night. Um, you watch.

that I think yesterday. So what did you think? You know, we watched this woman, Kate Winslet, Marr, spit nails for six episodes. I mean, she was just like just angry, you know, not compassionate. I mean, just like the most of the series. and then in the series finale she turns into Mr. Rogers. She didn't turn into Mr. Rogers. She pretty much did. No, she did. I mean, she offered a shoulder to cry on to anyone who would listen to her,

anyone who needed it in the last episode. I thought that was ridiculous. The character jumped, I thought, was ridiculous. Well, it's because she was coming to grips with the fact that she had not grieved over her son's suicide. I get that. I just seem, I think it would be a more casual to go from zero to 60. It wasn't zero to 60.

Well, I think it was. I don't. You know? I mean, even as she tried to comfort, it wasn't even comfort with, you know, her son's, the mother of her grandson, I mean, that wasn't like the warmest or cuddliest of, of scenes, even though she understood that, you know, she was trying. She admitted that she was happy that she was going to be able to keep her grandson. I actually thought there was room for her to be even warmer in that final episode.

But anyway, what did you, so you didn't like the finale, I'm guessing? No, no, I wasn't that. Look, I'm not as excited about the series as everybody else seems to do. I know. You know? the, you know, can we discuss, you know, the who done it? Do you want to review it? Yeah, yeah, we'll just spoiler alert right now.

We're going to talk about the finale of the show. If you haven't watched it yet, then you'll want to tune out right now. And if you haven't watched the show, but you're planning on it because you heard so much about it. And it really did get incredible attention this show did, then you may want to tune out. out right now as well. And with that, we will talk about the twist in the final episode. Neither one of us had it. You know who had it? Stephen King had it. Stephen King, a couple of hours before the final episode, had that Ryan, the 12, 11 or 12-year-old son of Lorne and John was going to be the murderer. Do you know, he wasn't even on the board as up in terms of being able to bet on him.

But it was, for whatever reason, Stephen King got it. We never even talked about him. I, too, that's because that's because he was such an obscure character. But he really wasn't. He was, he was hiding, he was hiding his father's secret. And we knew that it was a very, you know, that it's, it seemed to be more than just infidelity. I mean, to me, the fact that it degenerated into a whodunit, I think it automatically loses interest in me. It reminded me of who shot J.R. During the big Dallas controversy of the 80s.

You know, I need more than a who done it. I can watch any Hallmark Act at the Christie show to get who done it. Oh, there's, it was more than a who done it. And to pick the most obscure, to pick one of the most obscure characters, that's easy to do. That's cheap. Okay. So the one you don't think did it. You wouldn't even think about doing it is the one who did it.

That's cheap. Yeah. Not impressed. I love the final finale. I loved it. I thought that it was a twist that wasn't a reach, which I was, worried about. You know, I, that was part of, look, you know, Brand Stark in the final episode of Game of Thrones, a lot of people didn't see that coming and a lot of people hated it and it was a bit

of a reach and the way they got to it was rushed and all of that. And even though I liked Game of Thrones the final season, I didn't love the finale. I loved this finale. First of all, it was much more than a whodunit show. I mean, it was a very good hoodon it. It was a very good hoodonet. It was a very good thriller. It was really the story of mayor and her journey to, you know, sort of come to grips with the fact that she had not grieved for her son that committed suicide and the relationships that had been impacted along the way. And I thought that, I thought it was a beautiful ending in many ways. I think the relate, first of all, I think the acting was outstanding. I thought Kate Winslet, I thought the three women, Kate Winslet,

Julianne Nicholson and Gene Smart were really good in this show. And I thought the scene with Lorne and Mare at the end was really, it was an incredible scene. And I thought it was very touching and very moving. As far as the twist with Ryan, it was completely plausible, not that we thought of it, but the way they got to it was plausible. It was obviously fit 10 minutes into the episode, Tommy. You knew something else was coming because it wasn't all wrapped up with John trying to kill Billy and then Mayer finding out that it was John, et cetera. Something else was coming and we did not know what it would be.

Now, there may have been a major mistake or a major hole in how they got to Ryan. Although people are telling me, because I talked about this on radio this morning, that I've got to go back and watch that scene. I thought that Mr. Carroll, who called up mayor at the end, and you get to the fact that he had been missing his gun. And I thought the implication that he'd been missing his gun and then it was returned was for a significant period of time. When it wasn't, it was in the same night. So somehow he went out, saw that his gun was missing, and then went out the following morning and it was back. Okay.

and wouldn't he, in the midst of a murder in that small town, wouldn't he have reported that somebody took his gun in the middle of the night? Well, some people said he was old and he wasn't sure, and he didn't really imply with direct lines in the show that the gun had been missing for more than just a night. Anyway, I thought that it was, I thought that if it wasn't one of the people we talked about, especially when we were talking about Richard, her boyfriend,

who, you know, what was his purpose anyway during the show? There were a couple of things. You know, listen to something. He tells her, oh, I'm leaving. I signed a contract with another college. Yeah, he's going to Bates. Yeah, I'm going somewhere. The murder we knew would have shot him for leaving.

That was, as it turned out, that was really an unnecessary part of the show. Look, some people said it was unnecessary. that we had a serial killer in the show. Actually, it wasn't. It provided a couple of thrilling episodes. And, you know, for a while, you were convinced that maybe everything was tied together, and that just separated the two events. You know, I still think the whole Shabon, you know, her daughter and the relationships that

she was in, especially last week when she was essentially stalking her new girlfriend via text, I thought that that was a little bit unnecessary. You know, there was a moment there during the show where I thought it might be Frank's new wife or it might be, or that my guess from a couple of weeks ago that it was going to be lore was going to turn out to be right, that she was protecting, you know, the family and John's being the father of this child. I thought it was wrapped up in a way that was completely plausible. I thought it was really well done. And I thought some of the emotional scenes with her mother and with Kate Winslet and Jean Smart, that that was a phenomenal scene with the daughter there. And I thought that Julianne Nicholson was phenomenal in the finale.

I thought she was really good. Here's what they're all trying to do. And they can't do it because it may not be possible. they're all trying to recreate True Detective season one. True. And it can't be done. Well, yeah, that was too dark. But that was so good.

It was so good. To me, that's some of the greatest television I've ever seen. Well, you know what, Tommy? I think that there's the possibility that we get. Now, look, the difference with True Detective is you got new people that came in to the following seasons. You couldn't do that with this. No. But you could have a new detective.

seven, you know, a seven episode season with this, with a new case, with, I just don't know that you're going to get the, well, you can, I mean, I don't know. I don't think so, but that's what they're all trying to do. And, you know, the night of, you like the night of. I, I loved the night of, but I couldn't stand the finale of the night of. I thought they missed the mark. Did you like the night of? I forget. I thought it was okay. It was okay. Yeah, I thought, well, I thought Tortura was phenomenal as he is in everything. But I hated the finale of that show. I thought that they completely missed it on the finale of that show.

And the other night, I was actually prepared for it not to be good and for it to be a reach and rushed as it often is in these things. I don't know, man. When it was over, I was like, wow, that was great television. And look, I'm not an expert when it comes to acting, but I can identify. great when I see it. And I thought Kate Winslet and Julianne Nicholson and Gene Smart were unbelievable in this series. Okay. You know, part of the allure of Kate Winslet was her taking over this Philadelphia persona. Right. You know, personality and the accent and all that.

You want to see greatness out of, you know, and because she's British, okay, you want to see greatness out of a British actor, watched the British actor named Dominic West who played Baltimore's Jimmy McNulty in the wire. I know. Well, everybody says they nailed it in the wire. It is unbelievable. That, to me, is far more stunning

than Kate Winslet's turn as this Philly-based, you know, Philly suburban detective. I'm not going to... I watched it. I enjoyed it. I just didn't think it was great television. It's not going to be on my short list of the greatest, you know, one-season shows ever. I just really enjoyed it.

And I enjoyed, I thought that the three women in particular were outstanding. Now, with that said, and I told you this after the first episode, because it's Kate Winslet, and we know that she's a Brit, I don't think she ever did nail, you know, the, the, the Delaware, South Jersey, Philadelphia thing. I don't think any of them really did for the most part. I mean, you know, you have relatives, I have relatives, we have friends, and I know what it sounds like, and it wasn't a great rendition of it. I think if it had been somebody that we didn't know, it would have, it wouldn't have been as jarring to me.

But I, but her character was great. I thought she, I just thought she was great. I think she's great in a lot of things. Anyway, what else do you have? That's all I got for you. Sounds like you'd give it a D and I'd give it an A. No, I'd give it a C. I'd give the show a solid B plus A minus.

I'll give the show a solid B plus. I'll give the finale in A. I like the finale. Okay. Look, I mean, I'm consumed. Talk about a series I'm consumed with. No, no, no, no. But that's great.

You should watch that. We're waiting for the next season of Bosch. The Handmaid Tale. The Handmaid Tale. On Hulu. That is, I can't wait for the next episode of that one. Now, that's a great series. How many episodes end?

We're in season four, middle of season four. God, you watch a lot of television. Well, you know what? You don't. You waste your time watching the NBC. Well, just to playoff time. All right. I was hoping we'd have some news on whether or not what happened.

Let me just share this with you about Chase Young. Yeah. There's no news, but did you ever see what I tweeted about Chase Young last week? No. Okay. Here is what Washington football coach Ron Rivera didn't say about team captain Chase Young. Quote, absolutely. It is good to have Brandon here.

He most certainly is a leader. He's an influential person on our team, and it's good to have a guy like that here. Are you talking about Brandon Sheriff? Yes. That's what Ron Rivera did not say about Chase Young. Yeah, there was something else that he said to about the appreciation he had for the 86 players that showed up to a voluntary event. and that there was recognition of how important it was to him and the staff that they be there. I thought that that was also a little bit telling as well.

But yeah, I'm reading your quote about Brandon right now. Yeah. But those Washington football fans, they say, hey, no big deal. No big deal. Leave the man alone. Well, there's simpletons because there is something there to this. he may end up being a great player and maybe the greatest player in franchise history

when all is said and done. But in the moment not showing up for this is a mistake. It's not an irreparable mistake at all. And it's probably not one that's really going to impact that much. But that doesn't mean that it wasn't a mistake. You know, from what we know, there wasn't like this legitimate reason other than he wanted to work out in his own way.

with his own people. And if that's the case, I think that's a mistake. I think he should have been there. Especially if you're a team captain. All right. Oh, here's, now I'm going through your Twitter timeline. So this woman, we watch Spit Nails for six episodes now becomes Mr. Rogers for the series finale. It's a great picture of her. She's spectacular looking. Not so much in this show, but in real life. All right. That's it for the day. Back tomorrow. Thanks, Tommy. I'll talk to you Thursday. See you, boss.