Top Sports Stories

 

 

Waratahs make a statement with Chiefs win 27 May 2016, 11:41 am

The Waratahs have produced their most scintillating 80 minutes of the season as they out-gunned the Chiefs in an emphatic 45-25 win in Sydney.

Video 27 May 2016, 11:40 am

Video 27 May 2016, 11:39 am

Video 27 May 2016, 11:36 am

Stephen A.: 'I don't blame Westbrook for laughing' 27 May 2016, 11:35 am

Stephen A. Smith believes Westbrook deserved to laugh off the idea that the two-time MVP is an underrated defender. Smith says Westbrook is un-guardable and Curry is no match.

Video 27 May 2016, 11:35 am

 

 

Latest Blog Entries

 

MLB

NFL

 

 

 

 

05/27/2016 08:47 AM
College baseball player executes epically spectacular bat flip

We all know about the greatest bat flip in recent memory, Jose Bautista flipping his bat with authority after he hit a home run for the Toronto Blue Jays in the 2015 ALDS. Now all bat flips must be measured against that one, the mother of all bat flips. 

[Join a Yahoo Daily Fantasy Baseball contest now]

You might think that all other potential bat-flippers would be scared to flip, knowing they wouldn't measure up. But the Univeristy of Miami baseball team, the Hurricanes, isn't scared. They have given the world a bat flip worthy of being measured against the Bautista bat flip.

Now that is a Bat Flip. After the player sends the baseball into the stratosphere, he watches it fly and holds the bat out in front of him. And he keeps holding it as he walks up the first base line, staring into his own dugout at his teammates. Then he gives the bat a mighty heave and it twirls away from him.

That epic flip was executed by Hurricanes player Edgar Michelangeli, who hit a three-run home run in the ninth inning of a very important game on Thursday. The Hurricanes are currently playing in the ACC (Atlantic Coast Conference) Baseball Championship, and Michelangeli's homer put the Hurricanes up 8-7 over the North Carolina State Wolfpack, and they'd hold on to the lead to win the game. That win brought the Hurricanes to 2-0 in the tournament, and on Saturday they face Florida State (also 2-0) before the final round of the championship on Sunday.

There are still more games to be played in the ACC Baseball Championship, but Edgar Michelangeli has already won the bat flip championship. Unless, of course, someone else in the tournament wants to try and outdo him. Any takers?

More MLB coverage from Yahoo Sports: 

The StewPod: A baseball podcast by Yahoo Sports
Subscribe via iTunes or via RSS feed

- - - - - -

Liz Roscher is a writer for Big League Stew on Yahoo Sports. Have a tip? Email her at lizroscher@yahoo.com or follow her on twitter! Follow @lizroscher

 

05/27/2016 09:29 AM
Aaron Rodgers thinks Randall Cobb being mic'ed up punctured lung

Everyone seems to love when NFL players are mic'ed up. Except perhaps NFL players themselves.

Well, strike that — many players appear to love the attention it brings, but what about injury? Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers believes that his top receiver last season, Randall Cobb, suffered a punctured lung in the playoff loss to the Arizona Cardinals because of the microphone pack that's strapped to NFL players when they're mic'ed.

[Yahoo Fantasy Football is open for the 2016 season. Sign up now]

Rodgers joined former teammate A.J. Hawk's podcast and made it clear he thinks the cumbersome mic pack was the blame when Cobb fell down on top of it after making a spectacular catch — one that ultimately didn't count. Adding injury to insult and all that ...

“Randall Cobb had a serious injury last year in a playoff game and I believe — as I think he would as well and the team [would] — that that was caused from him being mic’d up,” Rodgers said. “Because he fell on his mic pack and he had an injury to his insides that kept him out of the game and probably would have kept him out of the rest of the playoffs [had the Packers won]. The puncture spot, or the injury spot, was directly adjacent to his mic pack.”

Pretty fascinating stuff. That technology has been a big way for the NFL to unveil players' personalities more, to metaphorically take off the helmets and shed light on the action on the field. Mic'ed up segments are incredibly popular with fans, and the league likely isn't getting rid of them anytime soon.

In fact, we're more likely to see it more often. After all, injuries such as the one Cobb suffered don't appear to happen all that often. So what if everyone is forced to wear a microphone during games?

“Might have to call it a career,” Rodgers said, laughing.

But he clearly doesn't like it in general, and not just for the chance of a fluky injury. For Rodgers, it's making his job harder.

“Yeah, I think it’s too much information,” Rodgers said. “In 2008 there used to be no headset on defense, so the defense had to signal in every play and that was part of the whole Spygate issue and filming signals and what not. But now you have mics on both guards most of the time and you pick up everything that the quarterback says when we’re at home and sometimes on the road as well.

"I think that’s a competitive edge for the defense and it makes you have to work that much harder with your dummy words and your live and dead words. I mean, that’s part of the game there, but I think that the access is a little bit much."

Rodgers added that it "takes away from the authenticity of the game" and that he doesn't "feel comfortable mic’d up.” Of course, our only guess is that Cobb didn't feel too comfortable either when he slammed his body down on top of a boxy chunk of plastic strapped to his body that caused him to miss a playoff game that the Packers eventually lost.

[h/t PFT and Awful Announcing]

- - - - - - -

Eric Edholm is a writer for Shutdown Corner on Yahoo Sports. Have a tip? Email him at edholm@yahoo-inc.com or follow him on Twitter!

 

 

 

 

NBA

NHL

 

 

 

 

05/27/2016 07:32 AM
Russell Westbrook, Kevin Durant find Stephen Curry's defense funny

When you're the unanimous MVP and the greatest shooter in history, everything about your game gets glorified, which is probably why Golden State Warriors star Stephen Curry picked up three First Team All-Defensive votes, even though backcourt mate Klay Thompson generally draws the tougher guard.

And when Curry came up with a clutch steal against Oklahoma City Thunder star Kevin Durant that all but iced " target="_self">a 120-111 victory in the waning moments of Game 5, Durant and teammate Russell Westbrook were asked by ESPN reporter Michelle Steele whether the NBA's steals leader was "underrated as a defender."

The question was a good one, because it drew a glorious response from both Westbrook and Durant.

Westbrook simply giggled, if only because complimenting opposing players isn't really his thing, although he did offer this assessment of Curry before Game 1: "He's a shooter. He's nothing I haven't seen."

The Thunder point guard ranked second behind Curry in steals this season and picked up nine more First Team All-Defensive votes than the two-time MVP, so he probably understands that the steals stat isn't necessarily a reflection of solid man-to-man defense. Besides, a few plays after Curry's steal put the Warriors up 111-101 with a minute to play, Westbrook picked Curry's pocket and sliced the lead to six.

[Follow Dunks Don't Lie on Tumblr: The best slams from all of basketball]

Meanwhile, Durant, who isn't much of a giggler, offered a response that was the verbal equivalent.

"I mean, getting steals, I don't know if that's — that's a part of playing defense. He's pretty good, but he doesn't guard the best point guards. I think they do a good job of putting a couple of guys on Russell, from Thompson to [Andre] Iguodala — and Steph, they throw him in there sometimes. He moves his feet pretty well. He's good with his hands.

"But, you know, I like our matchup with him guarding Russ."

For the record, Westbrook finished with 31 points, eight assists and seven rebounds in defeat, adjusting his averages for the series to 28 points, 11 assists and 6.6 boards, regardless of who's defending him.

Although, according to ESPN Stats & Information, Westbrook has committed seven turnovers, scored 0.70 points per play and shot 8-of-25 from the field (32 percent) with Curry contesting 20 of those 25 shots as his primary defender this series — 0-for-3 in Game 5 — and the Thunder star has shot 37-of-84 (44 percent) and scored 0.97 points per play against every else. So, maybe the MVP is a tad underrated.

- - - - - - -

Ben Rohrbach is a contributor for Ball Don't Lie and Shutdown Corner on Yahoo Sports. Have a tip? Email him at rohrbach_ben@yahoo.com or follow him on Twitter!

 

05/27/2016 10:13 AM
Tarasenko didn't disappear, Vlasic just dominated (Trending Topics)

Because hockey observers must have an inexhaustible supply of opinions on all things, one of the things that got talked about a lot in the now-finished Western Conference Final was that Vladimir Tarasenko was a no-show.

He finished the series with two goals and no assists in six games, and both those strikes came in garbage time in the series' only elimination game. He mustered 15 shots on goal, tied for the most on the team, but that number would have only been fifth on the Sharks. That's how badly not only he, but his entire team got pushed around.

Star players get paid to show up and all that. That's what the people were yelling about Tarasenko's non-performance, because this sport in particular seems to place undue pressure on star players to perform, and blame them when an entire team fails. This despite the fact that even the sport's busiest players — high-end defensemen — only play about half the game in best-case scenarios for their teams. Star forwards probably play closer to 35 percent of the game.

Tarasenko ended up with a little more than 110 minutes out of a possible 360. He probably would have liked to play more, but that's not his call. And it does circle back, a little bit, to the idea that Ken Hitchcock underused him despite the fact that the Blues were often in search of goals throughout the series.

But again, Tarasenko wasn't providing them for all but the final 15 minutes or so, leading one to wonder whether Hitchcock was putting entirely too much faith in the Jori Lehteras and Troy Brouwers of the world.

A reasonable observer, though, would argue that Tarasenko's inability to score in this Western Conference Final wasn't a result of him necessarily underperforming, but rather the fact that Marc-Edouard Vlasic just ran him straight into the ground with frightening consistency. 

Just two numbers to keep in mind for the rest of this piece: Four. And Zero. Remember those two numbers. 

The idea that Vlasic in particular is a dominant defender against top goalscoring talent is not new, but it seems to have really taken seat in this postseason. Adam Gretz had a good breakdown of how well he handled the top goalscorers on the Nashville Predators and into this round (I'm not willing to call shuttering Tyler Toffoli the hardest minutes possible against Los Angeles), but the job he did against St. Louis in particular was frighteningly efficient. 

At 5-on-5, Vlasic played 47:11 of his nearly 100 minutes over six games against Tarasenko, by far his most common opponent. During that time, Tarasenko's teammates were out-attempted to the tune of just a 42.9 percent raw possession number. Adjust for score situation — because the Sharks spent much of the series up multiple goals — and things get even uglier.

But against everyone else, Tarasenko actually pushed play very slightly (50.6 percent, 39-38), which you'd expect from a player of his talent level, even against a club as good as the Sharks.

For the series, Tarasenko ended up looking quite bad, yes, but so did the entire team. San Jose was just significantly better in almost every aspect, and even as the Blues won twice, most people had to acknowledge, “Well, they were pretty lucky there.” For the series, they ended up a minus-38 or so in score-adjusted possession, gave up almost 47(!) more more scoring chances, and generated fewer than 38 high-danger shot attempts of their own. They committed more penalties, and got outscored at full strength a whopping 14-6. A pretty convincing argument could be made that they were doomed from the start.

Let's put it this way: Entering the series, Tarasenko was a high-quality player. Not only was he scoring plenty of goals and racking up assists (4-2-6 against Chicago, 3-4-7 against Dallas), he was a solid driver of just about everything you could want from a player, relative to the rest of his team. The only area in which he lagged behind was, interestingly, goalscoring, because he was merely a break-even player in the first two series — which you might expect given the high-end firepower on Chicago and Dallas — while the rest of the Blues outscored those teams' depth players to the tune of 60 percent goals-for. 

But when it came to the San Jose series, Tarasenko didn't disappear as long as you knew where to look. He was right in Vlasic's pocked the entire time:

Now, you look at those numbers and you say, “Hey, he wasn't a drag in relative goalscoring or high-quality chance generation.” True enough, and that's probably about what you'd expect for a player of his caliber. But what you have to also realize is that even with the positive high-danger chance impact, he still checked in at just 43.6 percent for the series. And goals-for? He was at just 33.3 percent, while the rest of the team scraped the bottom of the barrel at 28.6 percent.

The Blues got absolutely smoked in this series, from front to back, and if you're going to blame Tarasenko for any of it, I think that's a bit reductive. He wasn't good, to be sure, but the rest of the team was jaw-droppingly awful as well. Or, more to the point, San Jose was just that much better.

But how do we know Vlasic was that dominant, and this wasn't just a product of the entire team playing a brutally efficient six games? Even if you didn't watch a single second of this series — possibly in deference to how badly St. Louis was always going to get fed its lunch  — all you'd have to do is look at the numbers.

Let's actually circle back to where the numbers “four” and “zero” are concerned in Vlasic's 99:59 TOI at 5-on-5 in this series:

The Sharks gave up just four high-danger chances with Vlasic on. They gave up zero goals.

You can “small sample size” that all you want, but that's just dominant hockey. 

It helps that the team scored goals by the bucket in this series, averaging nearly four a game. But if we're talking about the big reasons the Sharks advanced, the way Vlasic made Tarasenko fall into a black hole is probably No. 1.

And when he's effectively a second-pairing defenseman, that poses too many matchup problems for just about anyone to handle.

Ryan Lambert is a Puck Daddy columnist. His email is here and his Twitter is here. 

All stats via War on Ice unless otherwise stated.

MORE FROM YAHOO HOCKEY:

 

 

 

 

Motor Races

 

 

 

 

 

Enjoy a Motor Race Properly
(SportNewsConnection.com)

It is undeniable that we all get excited to attend any sports event. But it is also true that a proper knowledge of the game makes it even more interesting. Motor races are not any exception. You can get the most of it only when you know what is happening. So check out for some proper strategies.

Read more ...
 

 

 

 

... and more

 

 

 

 

 

05/27/2016 10:13 AM
Tarasenko didn't disappear, Vlasic just dominated (Trending Topics)

Because hockey observers must have an inexhaustible supply of opinions on all things, one of the things that got talked about a lot in the now-finished Western Conference Final was that Vladimir Tarasenko was a no-show.

He finished the series with two goals and no assists in six games, and both those strikes came in garbage time in the series' only elimination game. He mustered 15 shots on goal, tied for the most on the team, but that number would have only been fifth on the Sharks. That's how badly not only he, but his entire team got pushed around.

Star players get paid to show up and all that. That's what the people were yelling about Tarasenko's non-performance, because this sport in particular seems to place undue pressure on star players to perform, and blame them when an entire team fails. This despite the fact that even the sport's busiest players — high-end defensemen — only play about half the game in best-case scenarios for their teams. Star forwards probably play closer to 35 percent of the game.

Tarasenko ended up with a little more than 110 minutes out of a possible 360. He probably would have liked to play more, but that's not his call. And it does circle back, a little bit, to the idea that Ken Hitchcock underused him despite the fact that the Blues were often in search of goals throughout the series.

But again, Tarasenko wasn't providing them for all but the final 15 minutes or so, leading one to wonder whether Hitchcock was putting entirely too much faith in the Jori Lehteras and Troy Brouwers of the world.

A reasonable observer, though, would argue that Tarasenko's inability to score in this Western Conference Final wasn't a result of him necessarily underperforming, but rather the fact that Marc-Edouard Vlasic just ran him straight into the ground with frightening consistency. 

Just two numbers to keep in mind for the rest of this piece: Four. And Zero. Remember those two numbers. 

The idea that Vlasic in particular is a dominant defender against top goalscoring talent is not new, but it seems to have really taken seat in this postseason. Adam Gretz had a good breakdown of how well he handled the top goalscorers on the Nashville Predators and into this round (I'm not willing to call shuttering Tyler Toffoli the hardest minutes possible against Los Angeles), but the job he did against St. Louis in particular was frighteningly efficient. 

At 5-on-5, Vlasic played 47:11 of his nearly 100 minutes over six games against Tarasenko, by far his most common opponent. During that time, Tarasenko's teammates were out-attempted to the tune of just a 42.9 percent raw possession number. Adjust for score situation — because the Sharks spent much of the series up multiple goals — and things get even uglier.

But against everyone else, Tarasenko actually pushed play very slightly (50.6 percent, 39-38), which you'd expect from a player of his talent level, even against a club as good as the Sharks.

For the series, Tarasenko ended up looking quite bad, yes, but so did the entire team. San Jose was just significantly better in almost every aspect, and even as the Blues won twice, most people had to acknowledge, “Well, they were pretty lucky there.” For the series, they ended up a minus-38 or so in score-adjusted possession, gave up almost 47(!) more more scoring chances, and generated fewer than 38 high-danger shot attempts of their own. They committed more penalties, and got outscored at full strength a whopping 14-6. A pretty convincing argument could be made that they were doomed from the start.

Let's put it this way: Entering the series, Tarasenko was a high-quality player. Not only was he scoring plenty of goals and racking up assists (4-2-6 against Chicago, 3-4-7 against Dallas), he was a solid driver of just about everything you could want from a player, relative to the rest of his team. The only area in which he lagged behind was, interestingly, goalscoring, because he was merely a break-even player in the first two series — which you might expect given the high-end firepower on Chicago and Dallas — while the rest of the Blues outscored those teams' depth players to the tune of 60 percent goals-for. 

But when it came to the San Jose series, Tarasenko didn't disappear as long as you knew where to look. He was right in Vlasic's pocked the entire time:

Now, you look at those numbers and you say, “Hey, he wasn't a drag in relative goalscoring or high-quality chance generation.” True enough, and that's probably about what you'd expect for a player of his caliber. But what you have to also realize is that even with the positive high-danger chance impact, he still checked in at just 43.6 percent for the series. And goals-for? He was at just 33.3 percent, while the rest of the team scraped the bottom of the barrel at 28.6 percent.

The Blues got absolutely smoked in this series, from front to back, and if you're going to blame Tarasenko for any of it, I think that's a bit reductive. He wasn't good, to be sure, but the rest of the team was jaw-droppingly awful as well. Or, more to the point, San Jose was just that much better.

But how do we know Vlasic was that dominant, and this wasn't just a product of the entire team playing a brutally efficient six games? Even if you didn't watch a single second of this series — possibly in deference to how badly St. Louis was always going to get fed its lunch  — all you'd have to do is look at the numbers.

Let's actually circle back to where the numbers “four” and “zero” are concerned in Vlasic's 99:59 TOI at 5-on-5 in this series:

The Sharks gave up just four high-danger chances with Vlasic on. They gave up zero goals.

You can “small sample size” that all you want, but that's just dominant hockey. 

It helps that the team scored goals by the bucket in this series, averaging nearly four a game. But if we're talking about the big reasons the Sharks advanced, the way Vlasic made Tarasenko fall into a black hole is probably No. 1.

And when he's effectively a second-pairing defenseman, that poses too many matchup problems for just about anyone to handle.

Ryan Lambert is a Puck Daddy columnist. His email is here and his Twitter is here. 

All stats via War on Ice unless otherwise stated.

MORE FROM YAHOO HOCKEY:

 

 

 

 

•- Sports Commentary Connection
•-
Sports Blog Connection
•-
Sports Data Connection
•-
Sports Culture Connection

 

 

Resources

 

 

MLB Scoreboard & Boxscores
MLB Schedule
MLB Standings
MLB Stats
MLB Salaries by Team
Interactive MLB Stadium Maps

NFL Scoreboard
NFL Team-By-Team Draft Picks
NFL Free Agency Tracker
NFL Team-by-team schedules
NFL Draft Player Rankings
NFL Odds

NBA Scoreboard
NBA Standings
NBA Stats
NBA team-by-team schedules

NHL Scoreboard
NHL team-by-team schedules

Betting Trends & Match-Up Reports


Hints & Tips

Do you like online betting and online gambling sites? Get the best places for sports betting online, exclusive
free sports betting picks and great signup bonus offers.

Choosing the right sportsbook or bookmaker means to find the most safe, secure and financillay reliable. Only when you accomplish this you have the peace of mind for placing wise bets on the various sports competitions, whether it is golf, football, basketball, baseball, hockey, soccer, cricket, horse racing, or even boxing.

And if your are looking for casino games like roulette, blackjack or slot machines nothing is better than playing them for free. Want to know where?
Try
free online roulette now!.

Yes you can find online casinos on google BUT how can you know if it's good enough or worth your money? If that question is in your mind then the first step is visiting a reliable casino reviews site.

And to not go too far from sports there are even a few sports themed slots and
online pokie machines you can play.
Basketbull Slots is a perfect example in which a sports game combines with a few farm animals to form a great entertaining online slot.



Signing Day

2016 Team Ranking

ACC Schools
Big Ten Schools
SEC Schools
Big East Schools
Big 12 Schools
PAC-10 Schools
Recruit Tracker

Most Requested Blogs

- Awful Announcing
-
The Big Lead
-
Sports Media Watch
-
The Onion/Sports

Popular Articles

- Financial Management Is All For ...
-
A Few Sports to Bet on in America
-
Reasons Why Intelligent Horse Betting ...
-
Larry Drew to coach the Milwaukee ...
-
Enjoy a Motor Race Properly
-
6 names that meant something for ...
-
Mayweather Jr. the king of boxing
-
Cleveland Browns
-
Houston Texans
-
Cincinnati Bengals
-
Buffalo Bills
-
Indianapolis Colts
-
Miami Dolphins
-
New York Jets
-
New England Patriots
-
Baltimore Ravens
-
Minnesota Vikings
-
Detroit Lions
-
Pittsburgh Steelers

 

 

 

 

 

MLB Team Pages
MLB Beat Writers' Blogs

- Angels (L. A. News)

Blog

- Angels (LA Times)

 

- Angels (Long Beach Press)

 

- Angels (OC Register)

Blog

- Athletics (Contra Costa Times)

 

- Athletics (Oakland Tribune)

 

- Athletics (San Fran Chron.)

Blog

- Athletics (San Jose Merc. News)

 

- Astros (Houston Chron.)

 

- Blue Jays (Toronto Globe)

 

- Blue Jays (Toronto Star)

Blog

- Braves (Atlanta Journal)

Blog

- Brewers (Milw. Jrnl.-Sent.)

Blog

- Cards (St. Louis Post-Dis.)

 

- Cubs (Chicago Sun-Times)

Blog

- Cubs (Chicago Trib.)

Blog

- Cubs (Daily Herald)

 

- Diamondbacks (AZ Repub.)

Blog

- Dodgers (L. A. Daily News)

Blog

- Dodgers (L. A. Times)

 

- Dodgers (Long Beach Press)

 

- Dodgers (OC Register)

Blog

- Giants (Contra Costa Times)

 

- Giants (Oakland Trib)

 

- Giants ( San Fran. Chron.)

Blog

- Giants (San Jose Merc. News)

 

- Indians (Akron Beacon)

 

- Indians (Cleveland P-D)

Blog

- Mariners (Everett Herald)

 

- Mariners (Seattle P-I)

Blog

- Mariners (Seattle Times)

Blog

- Mariners (Tacoma News)

Blog

- Marlins (S. Fla. Sun-Sent.)

Blog

- Marlins (Miami Herald)

 

- Marlins (Palm Beach Post)

 

- Mets (Bergen Record)

Blog

- Mets Blog/Lohud. News

 

- Mets (NY Daily News)

Blog

- Mets (NY Post)

Blog

- Mets (NY Times)

Blog

- Mets (Newark Star-Ledger)

 

- Mets (Newsday)

Blog

- Nats Blog/Wash Post

 

- Nationals (Wash. Times)

 

- Orioles (Baltimore Sun)

 

- Padres (San Diego Trib.)

 

- Phillies (Bucks Cnty. C-T)

Blog

- Phillies (Phila. Daily News)

Blog

- Phillies' Blog/Inquirer

 

- Pirates (Pitt. Post-Gazette)

 

- Pirates (Pittsburgh Trib.)

Blog

- Rangers (Dallas M. News)

Blog

- Rangers (Ft. Worth S-T)

Blog

- Rays (St. Pete Times)

 

- Rays (Tampa Bay Trib.)

 

- Red Sox (Boston Globe)

Blog

- Red Sox (Boston Herald)

Blog

- Red Sox (Providence Jrnl.)

 

- Reds (Cincinnati Enq.)

Blog

- Rockies (Denver Post)

Blog

- Royals (K. C. Star)

Blog

- Tigers (Detroit News)

Blog

- Tigers (Michigan Live)

Blog

- Twins (Minn. Star Trib.)

Blog

- Twins (St. Paul Press)

Blog

- White Sox (Sun Times)

Blog

- White Sox (Chicago Trib.)

 

- White Sox (Daily Herald)

 

- Yankees (Bergen Record)

Blog

- Yankees Blog/LoHud. News

 

- Yankees (Newark Star-Ledger)

 

- Yankees (NY Daily News)

Blog

- Yankees (NY Post)

Blog

- Yankees (NY Times)

Blog

- Yankees (Newsday)

 

- Hardball Blog/Joel Sherman

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NFL Team Pages
NFL Beat Writers' Blogs

- Bears (Chicago Sun Times)

Blog

- Bears (Chicago Tribune)

 

- Bears (Daily Herald)

 

- Bengals (Cincinnati Enq.)

Blog

- Bills (Buffalo News)

Blog

- Broncos (Denver Post)

Blog

- Browns (Columbus Dis.)

 

- Browns (Cleveland P-D)

 

- Bucs (St. Pete. Times)

Blog

- Bucs (Tampa Bay Trib.)

Blog

- Cardinals (AZ Republic)

Blog

- Chargers (San Diego U-T)

Blog

- Chiefs (K. C. Star)

 

- Colts (Indy Star)

Blog

- Cowboys (Dallas News)

Blog

- Dolphins (Miami Herald)

Blog

- Dolphins (Palm Beach Post)

Blog

- Dolphins (S. Fla. Sun-Sent.)

Blog

- Eagles (Bucks Cnty. Times)

Blog

- Eagles Blog/Phila. Daily News

 

- Falcons (Atlanta Jrnl.-Con.)

Blog

- 49ers (Contra Costa Times)

 

- 49ers (Oakland Trib.)

 

- 49ers (San Fran. Chron.)

 

- 49ers (San Jose Merc. News)

 

- Giants (Bergen Record)

Blog

- Giants Blog/Hudson News

 

- Giants (NY Daily News)

Blog

- Giants (NY Post)

Blog

- Giants (NY Times)

 

- Giants (Newark Star-Led.)

 

- Giants (Newsday)

Blog

- Jaguars (Jacksonville T-U)

 

- Jets (Bergen Record)

Blog

- Jets Blog/Hudson News

 

- Jets (NY Daily News)

Blog

- Jets (NY Post)

Blog

- Jets (NY Times)

 

- Jets (Star-Ledger)

 

- Jets (Newsday)

Blog

- Lions (Detroit News)

Blog

- Packers (Milwaukee J-S)

Blog

- Panthers (Charlotte Obs.)

Blog

- Patriots (Boston Globe)

Blog

- Patriots (Boston Herald)

Blog

- Patriots (Providence Jrnl.)

 

- Raiders (Contra Costa Times)

Blog

- Raiders (San Fran Chron.)

Blog

- Raiders (SJ Mercury News)

 

- Rams (St. Louis Post-Dis.)

 

- Ravens (Baltimore Sun)

Blog

- Redskins (Wash. Post)

 

- Redskins (Wash. Times)

 

- Saints (N. O. Times-Pic.)

Blog

- Seahawks (Everett Herald)

 

- Seahawks (Seattle P-I)

Blog

- Seahawks (Seattle Times)

Blog

- Seahawks (Tacoma Trib.)

Blog

- Steelers (Pitt. Post-Gaz.)

Blog

- Steelers (Pittsburgh Trib.)

 

- Texans (Houston Chronicle)

 

- Titans (Tennessean)

Blog

- Vikings (Minn. Star Tribune)

Blog

- Vikings (St. Paul Pio. Press)

 

 

 

 

 

NBA Team Pages
NBA Beat Writers' Blogs

- Blazers (Portland News)

Blog

- Bobcats (Charlotte Obs.)

Blog

- Bucks (Milwaukee J-S)

Blog

- Bulls (Chicago Sun Times)

Blog

- Bulls (Chicago Trib.)

 

- Bulls (Daily Herald)

 

- Cavs (Akron Beacon)

 

- Cavaliers (Cleveland P-D)

 

- Cavs Blog/The News-Herald

 

- Celtics (Boston Globe)

Blog

- Celtics (Boston Herald)

Blog

- Celtics (Providence Journal)

 

- Clippers (L. A. Daily News)

Blog

- Clippers (LA Times)

 

- Clippers (Long Beach Press-Tel.)

 

- Clippers (OC Register)

 

- Grizzlies (My Fox Memphis)

Blog

- Hawks (Atlanta Jrnl.-Const.)

Blog

- Heat (Miami Herald)

Blog

- Heat (Palm Beach Post)

Blog

- Heat (S. Fla. Sun-Sent.)

Blog

- Jazz (Deseret News)

Blog

- Jazz (Salt Lake City Trib.)

Blog

- Kings (Sacramento Bee)

Blog

- Knicks (Bergen Record)

Blog

- Knicks Blog/LoHud. News

 

- Knicks (NY Daily News)

Blog

- Knicks (NY Post)

Blog

- Knicks (Newsday)

Blog

- Knicks (NY Times)

 

- Lakers (L. A. News)

Blog

- Lakers (L. A. Times)

Blog

- Lakers (Long Beach Press-Tel.)

 

- Lakers (OC Register)

Blog

- Magic (Orlando Sentinel)

Blog

- Mavs (Scout.com)

 

- Mavericks (Dallas News)

Blog

- Mavericks (Ft. Worth S-T)

Blog

- Nets (Bergen Record)

Blog

- Nets (NY Daily News)

Blog

- Nets (NY Post)

Blog

- Nuggets (Denver Post)

Blog

- Pacers (Indy Star)

Blog

- Pelicans (N. O. Times-Pic.)

 

- Pistons (Detroit News)

Blog

- Raptors (Toronto Globe)

 

- Raptors (Toronto Star)

Blog

- Rockets (Houston Chron.)

 

- Sixers (Phila. Inquirer)

Blog

- Spurs (San Antonio News)

Blog

- Suns (Arizona Daily Star)

 

- Suns (AZ Republic)

Blog

- T-Wolves (Minn. Star Trib.)

Blog

- T-Wolves (St. Paul Press)

Blog

- Thunder (NewsOK)

Blog

- Warriors (Con. Costa Times)

Blog

- Warriors (Oakland Trib.)

Blog

- Warriors (San Fran Chron.)

Blog

- Warriors (San Jose Merc. News)

 

- Wizards Blog/Wash. Post

 

 

 

 

 

Special thanks to:

 

Sports Betting
Free Casino Games
Sport News
Video Poker Site
 

 ©2016 SportsNewsConnection.com. All Rights Reserved. | Are there resources that we have not considered? ... Contact us | Disclaimer