Evaluating the Future Bond(s) Market: Steroid rumors and attitude ensures Barry Bonds' great ability will remain under appreciated. (702)

Carolina Panthers fans have every reason to be disappointed. There were high hopes heading into the playoffs, only to see those hopes dashed via a performance more worthy of the Detroit Lions than a division champion. Fans should be demoralized. The sense of abandonment is akin to being a conservative in today's Republican Party. Now, who to blame?

The easy answer is quarterback Jake Delhomme. His six turnovers certainly contributed to Arizona complete dismantling of Carolina, in Charlotte before a national primetime audience. But Delhomme is simply what he is. He's a serviceable quarterback at best. Good, occasionally excellent, but seldom consistent and always capable of laying an egg at the most inopportune time. He has that Favre attitude with, well, Delhomme ability.

In addition to criticizing Jake, fans and pundits have called for head coach John Fox's job. Based on Saturday night alone it sounds like a good idea. Arizona was obviously better prepared than Carolina, taking the Panthers out of their game and handing them an embarrassing whipping. The Panthers staff abandoned the running game far too early, opting for full panic mode. Fox was out coached.

However, to call for his departure is premature at best, perhaps even downright foolish. A coach's job is to position his team for a run at a championship, and success must be judged over the long haul, not on one thoroughly disappointing evening. Fox did what a coach is expected to do in 2008. If you're ready to can John Fox because of the Arizona debacle you would likely have given up on some of the NFL's coaching legends.

Do you remember Chuck Knox? I do. He steered a Buffalo Bills franchise that had won only five games in two years back to competitiveness and produced winners in Seattle during the 1980s. He spent his best years guiding the Los Angeles Rams to a 54-15-1 record and five division titles between 1973 and 1977. But Knox's Rams didn't win a championship. He couldn't get past Tom Landry's Cowboys or Bud Grant's Vikings.

Speaking of Bud Grant, his Minnesota teams won 11 NFC Central titles over a 13 year span and were able to best the Cowboys, at least occasionally. Unfortunately, he ran into the Chiefs, Dolphins, Steelers and Raiders in the Super Bowl, losing all four games. Bud Grant is now in the Hall of Fame having never won a Super Bowl.

How about Dan Reeves? He directed the Denver Broncos to three Super Bowls that they had no business reaching. Of course, he had John Elway. But lest you think his success was due solely to Elway's cannon-like right arm, remember that he led Atlanta to their only Super Bowl appearance with the fragile Chris Chandler at quarterback.

Marty Schottenheimer coached 21 seasons in the NFL and enjoyed success at every stop. His teams won eight division titles, made 13 playoff appearances and finished below .500 only twice.

Reeves and Schottenheimer were successful coaches whose teams were competitive and in position to win championships. It just didn't happen.

Andy Reid continues to overachieve with under talented Eagles teams. He's coached in five NFC Championship games and one Super Bowl. He's one of the most underrated coaches in football. Jeff Fisher continues to build and rebuild the Titans. He may be the most underrated coach in football. Neither man has won a championship. And we haven't even mentioned Marv Levy.

Whose name is mentioned for every coaching job these days? If you said Bill Cowher take a gold star. Cowher reached the Super Bowl in his fourth year with Pittsburgh (1996) but wouldn't win a title until 2006. Along the way his Steelers lost four AFC championship games on their home field. Yet Bill Cowher is considered a coaching genius, and rightly so.

Each of these coaches put their teams in position to win championships. John Fox is following a similar path in Carolina. That's not to defend his team's performance against Arizona, nor to say the day won't come when a new direction won't be necessary for both Fox and the Panthers. That time isn't now.

Fan anger is based on the expectation that the Cardinals would roll over for Carolina. Expecting victory was justified. Not considering the possibility of losing was shortsighted and foolhardy, as is demanding Fox's head. However, if you must have change at all cost, I hear Rod Marinelli is available.

I enjoy football. And since it is far easier for a writer to write about a subject of personal interest, I will take this space to write about football.

Week One of the 2006 NFL season has come and gone. Over the course of five days worth of games there were some interesting developments, all of which have by now been properly "pundited" by the proper pundits. Even so, I will still offer a few of my own observations and thoughts on what took place in the NFL on Week One.

The Detroit Lions should return to their blue jerseys and forever abandon those ugly black ones. Any team that would show up for the season's opening game, at home, in front of a packed house, and wear such bland attire deserves to lose 9-6.

There are signs of life for Cincinnati's defense. Holding the Chiefs to 10 points on their home field is an impressive start. If they can play that kind of defense all year, and their offense performs as it did last season, they may reach the franchises third Super Bowl. For younger fans, yes, the Bengals did enjoy a few good years before Marvin Lewis came along.

The above analysis may be applied in reverse to the Baltimore Ravens. Scoring 27 points on Tampa Bay, long known as a defensive team, can be a sign of good things to come. It may also tell the Tennessee Titans that they let Steve McNair get away a season too soon.

For Pittsburgh to begin their title defense with a win over an improving Miami team is a good omen no matter what the situation. Considering that they did it with backup Charlie Batch at quarterback makes the win even more impressive.

The Carolina Panthers turned in the weekend's worst performance by a contending team. The Falcons thoroughly dominated them at the line of scrimmage, rushing for well over 200 yards against what is supposed to be the league's best defensive line. The only positive for the defensive line is that they didn't fare as bad as the Panther offensive line. Atlanta defensive end John Abraham spent so much time in the Panther backfield that he should have been issued a white jersey and a silver helmet.

Drew Bledsoe tossed three interceptions in the Cowboys loss at Jacksonville. If this keeps up I suspect Terrell Owens won't make it until the end of September before publicly calling for Dallas to trade for Brett Favre.

I was a Raider fan in the 1970s. I loved Stabler, Hubbard, Casper, Sistrunk, and the whole crew from the Madden era. For that reason it was difficult to watch Art Shell`s Raiders be so completely embarrassed by San Diego on Monday Night Football, a domain they once owned.

Speaking of Oakland, it was a bad weekend for teams with a pirate theme. Just three years ago the Raiders played the Tampa Bay Buccaneers in the Super Bowl. This weekend those two teams were beaten a combined 54 to 0 on their home fields. And Tampa Bay would have been a shoe-in for the most inept offensive performance of Week One had it not been for the egg laid by the Raiders.

The teams scheduled for home games in Week Two may want to consider moving to a neutral site. Visiting teams won 11 of the 16 games played on the opening weekend. And it wasn't a fluke by any means. In their 11 wins the visiting teams outscored home teams 243 to 99, an average of nearly two touchdowns per game.

To add further humiliation to the home teams, three of them were shutout. The Bears, Ravens, and Chargers blanked the Packers, Buccaneers, and Raiders respectively. It marks the first time since 1991 that three teams were shutout on the same weekend. It makes you wonder when the last time was that three home teams were shutout on the same weekend, and if it has ever happened on Opening Day.

As if anyone needed more evidence that professional soccer is a crashing bore, along came the 2006 World Cup. Let's apply what happened there to other sports and see how soccer stacks up.

The final second has expired in the Super Bowl and the Panthers and Colts are tied. Yet we do not see Payton Manning attempt to guide the Colts to a winning score, nor will Julius Peppers have a chance to sack Manning, force a fumble, then rumble fifty yards for a winning touchdown. In fact, there is no sudden death overtime at all. Instead, John Kasay and Adam Vinateri kick a series of field goals. Whoever makes the most determines the winner.

Now let's go to the Fall Classic, where the Yankees and Cardinals have battled to the bottom of the ninth in Game 7 at Yankee Stadium. The Yanks rally in their half of the ninth to tie the score. But there is no 10th inning; neither team takes the field. Instead, Albert Pujols and Alex Rodriquez emerge from the dugouts, bats in hand, for a homerun derby. Whoever hits the most homers determines the World Series Champion.

Shift your attention to golf. It's a beautiful Sunday at Augusta. Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson stand tied on the 18th green. They have traded the lead for 71 holes and were the final pairing on both Saturday and Sunday. Both men sink dramatic birdie putts. But they don't go to 16 for a sudden death playoff. No sir! They stand on the 18th green and exchange 20-foot putts to decide which of them will don the Green Jacket.

The scenario can be applied to the major stage of other sports as well. Can you imagine the NBA Championship or the Final Four being determined by a mere free-throw shooting contest? Just think of the boos that would rain down from Philadelphia fans if the Flyers attempt to win Lord Stanley's Cup were reduced to swapping slap-shots. And if the NASCAR points race ended in a tie, would we be satisfied to determine the champion based on which crew could fill their car with gasoline the quickest?

These scenarios sound preposterous. We are looking at the grandest stage in each sport. Never would they be decided by such trivial contests. Yet that is exactly how the World Cup unfolded.

This was the biggest game on soccer's highest pedestal. It was their Lombardi Trophy. And its grand champion was determined via a game of glorified kickball. Thus, the World Cup finale was as anti-climatic and uninspiring as the tournament itself.

As if this wasn't embarrassment enough for a thoroughly embarrassing sport, the arrogance of the French expanded into outright stupidity.

Zinedine Zidane, whose name sounds more akin to the Arabian Nights than the Paris lights, is France's best player. And he was ejected when his team needed him most for what can only be describe as a stupid penalty. Let`s put this in a perspective that Americans will quickly understand. What if Joe Montana had been tossed during that last-minute drive in Super Bowl XXIII for head-butting a Bengal player?

Of course, there is some satisfaction to be had in a Frenchman parading his innate foolishness before the entire world.

In the end, the dullness of the World Cup was overshadowed only by the sheer banality of the tiebreaker. And it provides Americans with one more reason to harbor disdain for soccer.

Barry Bonds is among the greatest talents ever to play the game of baseball. He entered the league with speed, base-running skills, a great glove, and the ability to hit for average and power. Willie Mays tutored him and his father, Bobby, was a great player as well. Despite his talents, credentials, and accomplishments, the public image of Bonds has never been positive. The saddest part of his tarnished persona lies in the fact that it is largely self-inflicted and needless.

Accusations of Bonds' use of steroids may never be absolutely proven. But there is enough circumstantial evidence to convict Bonds in the court of public opinion and baseball`s historical circles. The release of "Game of Shadows" accuses Bonds of "juicing" since 1998. There is Barry's association with Victor Conte, founder of BALCO, who has spent time in the pokey on charges related to steroid distribution. And then there is the escalation of Bonds' homerun power at a time when most athletes are slowing down and his obvious bulkiness compared to his earlier days in Pittsburgh.

Even so, baseball's investigation into the use of performance drugs isn't likely to produce concrete evidence one way or the other. It's also worthy of mention that Bonds passed every drug test administered since baseball began testing in 2003. Baseball cannot credibly strip Bonds of his achieved records without a "smoking gun", as it were. But even if Bonds becomes the career homerun king he will never enjoy the respect and adulation commanded by Hank Aaron, and it will be mostly Barry's fault.

Let's assume that Barry is guilty of "juicing". Is that the reason for his great performance? Even without steroids he would be a threat to pass Ruth and then Aaron. He may not be quite to 700 homers yet, and there may have been a few balls that would have remained in the park, but for the most part Bonds would stand about where he is now with or without steroids. Being "juiced" may have put more balls into McCovey Cove, but they would have been in the right field bleachers anyway.

Hitting a baseball requires several key ingredients not necessarily tied to strength. There's hand-eye coordination, timing, quick hands, recognition, and balance to name just a few. Without regard to steroids Bonds still had to hit the ball at just the right moment with just the right part of the bat. Anything less and steroids would only have made pop-ups and fly outs go higher. If you have watched the Giants play over the last eight years you know that Barry hasn't missed many hittable pitches.

Bonds always possessed homerun power. His increased homerun totals over the last eight years can be attributed to increased learning and pitch recognition just as readily as to increased strength. It is only the monumental nature of the blasts that may be attributed to the use of steroids.

Baseball fans are a rather forgiving lot, and Bonds isn't the first player to see a legacy tarnished to some degree. Mark McGuire and Sammy Sosa are still accepted despite similar drug allegations. Gary Sheffield and Jason Giambi aren't shunned even though they have admitted steroid use. Mickey Mantle was forgiven his playboy lifestyle because of his amiable personality. And Joe DiMaggio, Steve Carlton, and Ted Williams were all revered despite their apparent lack of public relations skills.

Bonds has taken every negative trait mentioned above and combined them into one unmarketable package. For that reason he will never receive the appreciation his ability demands due to the air of surliness, aloofness, and cheating -real or perceived- that has dogged his relationship with teammates, fans, and media. No matter what records Bonds establishes in his career he will never be well liked. And if he passes Ruth or Aaron anywhere other than Pac Bell Park he will almost surely be booed.

Surliness didn't keep Ty Cobb out of the Baseball Hall of Fame, and charges of cheating didn't stop spitball artist Gaylord Perry from baseball enshrinement either. But the combination of the two may leave Barry Bonds to play gin with Pete Rose just outside the city limits of Cooperstown.