Lionel Messi finally signed his eagerly anticipated Paris Saint-Germain contract on Tuesday night to complete the move that confirms the end of a career-long association with Barcelona and sends PSG into a new era.

PSG said in a statement that the 34-year-old Argentina star signed a two-year deal with the option for a third season.

“I am excited to begin a new chapter of my career at Paris Saint-Germain,” Messi said. “Everything about the club matches my football ambitions. I know how talented the squad and the coaching staff are here. I am determined to help build something special for the club and the fans, and I am looking forward to stepping out onto the pitch at the Parc des Princes.”

No salary details were given, but a person with knowledge of the negotiations earlier told The Associated Press that Messi is set to earn around 35 million euros ($41 million) net annually. The person said on condition of anonymity before the contract was signed.

“I am delighted that Lionel Messi has chosen to join Paris Saint-Germain and we are proud to welcome him and his family to Paris,” PSG chairman Nasser Al-Khelaifi said. “He has made no secret of his desire to continue competing at the very highest level and winning trophies, and naturally our ambition as a club is to do the same.”

Throngs of PSG fans gathered at Le Bourget Airport in Paris to welcome Messi, who was wearing a T-shirt featuring “Ici c’est Paris” — “This is Paris.”

The words are a long-familiar refrain from a favored fan chant at Parc des Princes stadium, where Messi is to be presented to them before kickoff of Saturday night’s game against Strasbourg.

Such was the fervor of his arrival that police had to push back to stop metal barriers from toppling over at the airport as fans surged forward to get a better view. He then traveled into Paris with a police escort that included several officers on motorbikes and clad in black at the back of it.

As disbelief at landing one of soccer’s all-time greats turned to sheer enthusiasm, many gathered for a glimpse of Messi at the stadium. They got their wish as the smiling superstar briefly waved to them before he underwent a medical check.

Earlier, Messi’s father and agent, Jorge, had also confirmed his son was moving to PSG in a brief exchange with reporters at Josep Tarradellas Barcelona-El Prat Airport before he took his flight in the early afternoon.

Messi arrived with his wife and three children and boarded a private jet.

“With it all, toward a new adventure. The five together,” Antonela Roccuzzo said on Instagram alongside a photo with her husband on the plane.

PSG supporters have seen their club transformed over the last decade since the influx of Qatari sovereign wealth investment linked to the emir. Once Messi’s Barcelona contract expired — and the Catalan club was unable to afford to keep him — PSG was one of the few clubs that could finance a deal to sign the six-time world player of the year.

Messi’s arrival gives PSG formidable attacking options as he links up with France World Cup winner Kylian Mbappe and Brazil forward Neymar.

“Back together,” Neymar posted on Instagram over a video of them hugging, playing for Barcelona.

While PSG had to pay 222 million euros (then $261 million) to sign Neymar from Barcelona in 2017, there was no transfer fee for Messi.

Messi became the most desired free agent in soccer history after his attempts to stay at Barcelona were rejected last week by the Spanish league because the salary would not comply with financial regulations, with the Catalan club burdened by debts of more than 1.2 billion euros ($1.4 billion).

PSG coach Mauricio Pochettino quickly made contact with his fellow Argentine after Barcelona announced last Thursday that Messi would be leaving the club he joined as a 13-year-old.

Messi won every major honor with Barcelona and was granted a tearful exit news conference on Sunday to signal the end of an era. Only Cristiano Ronaldo in the current era challenges Messi’s status as an all-time great.

PSG will be hoping not only that Messi helps the team regain the French title it lost to Lille last season, but finally win the Champions League.

If Pochettino uses a 4-3-3 formation, the front three could see Messi deployed on the right with Neymar on the left and Mbappe between them as the center forward.

The quandary for Pochettino would be how to use Angel Di Maria, whose goal sealed the Copa America title last month, and another Argentine attacker — Mauro Icardi. It’s a tactical challenge most coaches would relish, with a 4-2-3-1 or 3-5-2 also in the mix to accommodate the attacking talents available.

What should be less demanding is PSG complying with UEFA’s Financial Fair Play. Some flexibility has been provided in the rules due to the pandemic and changes are due to the system that were designed to stem losses. It is PSG president Al-Khelaifi who, as chairman of the European Club Association and a member of UEFA’s executive committee, is involved in the process of discussing a wider update to FFP that could allow more unchecked spending again.

Read More

As the Bears prepare their next quarterback of the future for his first NFL preseason, the last one tried to explain what went wrong.

Speaking to Bills reporters Tuesday in Orchard Park, N.Y., quarterback Mitch Trubisky was peppered with questions about why his Bears stint ended the way it did — in disappointing fashion only four years after the team made him the No. 2 overall pick.

Trubisky said he could sense the Bears losing interest in him before deciding not to pick up his fifth-year option in May 2020.

“I kind of saw it coming, just the way I was progressing,” he said. “Year 2 was really good and then Year 3 and 4, not as good. I was dealing with some injuries and some other things going on there, but like I said, it was disappointing but it wasn’t a surprise.

“Throughout the process, you can kind of see that they were just continuously believing in me less and less, and that’s just kind of how that process went.”

If Trubisky has an argument, it’s that the Bears benched him after barely 10 quarters of football in 2020 — despite him winning the first two games of the season. Otherwise, though, it’s hard to imagine a franchise showing greater public belief in a draft pick than the Bears did in Years 1-3, when they never signed a quarterback to threaten his starting job and refused to say a negative thing about the North Carolina alum.

Trubisky said there was “definitely” pressure that came with being the No. 2 pick.

“You’re playing in one of the biggest markets in the country and it’s a tough football town,” he said.” But I went out threw and won games. I continued to get better. I’m just happy to be where I am now.

“But people are always gonna have something to say about your journey and what everything goes to. But not everybody could have done what I did.”

A reporter referenced Trubisky’s record as the starter — 29-21 — and asked if he got a raw deal.

“I really don’t like to dwell on the past and I don’t want to go too far into it,” he said. “The point of this game is to win. Numbers are numbers and stats are stats. What i was trying to do is go out there and win games. I feel like now if given the opportunity I can go out and help my team win.

Read More

Chicago Bulls: Difficulty finishing games rears head again by Anish Puligilla

Former Chicago Bears quarterback, Mitch Trubisky, audibly subtweeted the team that gave him his NFL start in a press conference with his new team, the Buffalo Bills.

“It’s just really nice to be a part of a great team and be somewhere where people want you here,” Trubisky said. “And they care about how you’re progressing as a player and as a person.”

Shot to the heart. Maybe the most accurate shot he’s taken his whole career was right at the heart of Bears fans with this quote.

Bears fans might be surprised like I was after watching the full interview to see that Trubisky was a little reluctant to say he was appreciative of his time in Chicago. Before we dive deep into the interview, let’s go over how his progress went over his four years in Chicago.

Former Chicago Bears quarterback Mitch Trubisky said that he wasn’t surprised the Bears declined his 5th-year option.

Mitch: “Throughout the process, you can see that they continuously were believing in me less and less. Happy to be in a team where you are wanted.”

(Via @WKBW)

— Daniel Greenberg (@ChiSportUpdates) August 10, 2021

Trubisky’s first year was a work in progress. After taking over for Mike Glennon, Trubisky recorded a 4-8 record in the 12 games he played. He threw for seven touchdowns and seven interceptions while averaging 183 passing yards per game on a 59 percent completion percentage. Not great.

His sophomore year was clearly his best season. He played 14 games, leading the team to an 11-3 record. He was named to his first Pro Bowl, throwing for 24 touchdowns and just 12 interceptions. He also ran for over 400 yards and three more touchdowns. Plenty of progression.

His progress quickly declined in his third and fourth years. He never eclipsed the passer rating nor the QBR he did in 2018 and was handcuffed to Nick Foles in his final season. The Bears declined his fifth-year option, which he said he “wasn’t surprised” about and referred to his regression over the final two years to support the front office’s decision.

Mitch Trubisky on why he ultimately chose Buffalo and how he thinks things are going

“It’s just really nice to be part of a great team and be somewhere where people want you here and they care about how you’re progressing as a person and as a player” #BillsMafia @WKBW pic.twitter.com/diVZNdpxKO

— Matthew Bove (@Matt_Bove) August 10, 2021

“Throughout the process, you could see they were believing in me less and less and that’s kinda how that process went,” Trubisky said.

While it is certainly disheartening to watch the franchise that drafted you stop believing in you, the NFL and professional sports avenue is extremely unforgiving. The expectations are high, and if you can’t live up to them, you will be forced out.

Trubisky continuously mentioned that he was discouraged by the fact that the opportunity wasn’t given to him to return to Chicago after completing his rookie contract.

The decision by the front office to release him was extremely warranted given his inability to perform at a starting level. Also given the fragility of the front office’s future outlook, the decision to let Trubisky roam in free agency was an easy one to make.

While Trubisky is clearly upset with the Bears, it doesn’t sit right knowing that he was unhappy with how the coaches and management “treated” him during his tenure. The Bears did give him a chance. They never tried to trade or cut him. They gave him his full rookie year contract as the starting quarterback to figure things out. Simply, he couldn’t figure it out.

The evidence strongly points to the decision to cut him as Trubisky explained in his press conference that the opportunities to compete for a starting spot on another team weren’t there in free agency. This shouldn’t come as a surprise after seeing how he handled the starting job in Chicago.

Trubisky could never live up to the mentality that Justin Fields has come into his new team.

He always talked about the work he put in before each season. He glamoured over the fact that he and now Houston Texan, Anthony Miller, practiced routes together in the offseason.

Fields was found at Halas Hall alone doing a workout before anyone got there. He also has a much stronger sense of self-discipline than Mitch and owns up to his mistakes.

Next: Chicago Bears Rumors: Justin Fields close to becoming starting quarterback

Not to be hung up on the fact that Trubisky talked poorly about the Bears, but the truth is the Bears are much better off. Feelings get hurt, career paths change, but that’s the name of the game. It’s a tough business.

Things will get hot and heavy when Trubisky returns to Chicago on Aug. 21 to face off against the man that replaced him in the preseason games, Fields.

Read More

Earth is getting so hot that temperatures in about a decade will probably blow past a level of warming that world leaders have sought to prevent, according to a report released Monday that the United Nations called a “code red for humanity.”

“It’s just guaranteed that it’s going to get worse,” said report co-author Linda Mearns, a senior climate scientist at the U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research. “Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide.”

But scientists also eased back a bit on the likelihood of the absolute worst climate catastrophes.

The authoritative Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, which calls climate change clearly human-caused and “unequivocal” and “an established fact,” makes more precise and warmer forecasts for the 21st century than it did the last time it was issued, in 2013.

Each of five scenarios for the future, based on how much carbon emissions are cut, passes the more stringent of two thresholds set in the 2015 Paris climate agreement. World leaders agreed then to try to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above levels in the late 19th century because problems mount quickly after that. The world has already warmed nearly 1.1 degrees Celsius (2 degrees Fahrenheit) since then.

Under each scenario, the report said, the world will cross the 1.5-degree-Celsius warming mark in the 2030s, earlier than some past predictions. Warming has ramped up in recent years, data shows.

“Our report shows that we need to be prepared for going into that level of warming in the coming decades. But we can avoid further levels of warming by acting on greenhouse gas emissions,” said report co-chair Valerie Masson-Delmotte, a climate scientist at France’s Laboratory of Climate and Environment Sciences at the University of Paris-Saclay.

In three scenarios, the world will also likely exceed 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) over pre-industrial times — the less stringent Paris goal — with far worse heat waves, droughts and flood-inducing downpours unless there are deep emissions cuts, the report said.

“This report tells us that recent changes in the climate are widespread, rapid and intensifying, unprecedented in thousands of years,” said IPCC Vice Chair Ko Barrett, senior climate adviser for the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

AP

With crucial international climate negotiations coming up in Scotland in November, world leaders said the report is causing them to try harder to cut carbon pollution. U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken called it “a stark reminder.”

The 3,000-plus-page report from 234 scientists said warming is already accelerating sea level rise and worsening extremes such as heat waves, droughts, floods and storms. Tropical cyclones are getting stronger and wetter, while Arctic sea ice is dwindling in the summer and permafrost is thawing. All of these trends will get worse, the report said.

For example, the kind of heat wave that used to happen only once every 50 years now happens once a decade, and if the world warms another degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit), it will happen twice every seven years, the report said.

As the planet warms, places will get hit more not just by extreme weather but by multiple climate disasters at once, the report said. That’s like what’s now happening in the Western U.S., where heat waves, drought and wildfires compound the damage, Mearns said. Extreme heat is also driving massive fires in Greece and Turkey.

Some harm from climate change — dwindling ice sheets, rising sea levels and changes in the oceans as they lose oxygen and become more acidic — is “irreversible for centuries to millennia,” the report said.

The world is “locked in” to 15 to 30 centimeters (6 to 12 inches) of sea level rise by mid-century, said report co-author Bob Kopp of Rutgers University.

Scientists have issued this message for more than three decades, but the world hasn’t listened, said United Nations Environment Program Executive Director Inger Andersen.

For the first time, the report offers an interactive atlas for people to see what has happened and may happen to where they live.

Nearly all warming that has happened on Earth can be blamed on emissions of heat-trapping gases such as carbon dioxide and methane. At most, natural forces or simple randomness can explain one- or two-tenths of a degree of warming, the report said.

AP

The report described five different future scenarios based on how much the world reduces carbon emissions. They are: a future with incredibly large and quick pollution cuts; another with intense pollution cuts but not quite as massive; a scenario with moderate emission cuts; a fourth scenario where current plans to make small pollution reductions continue; and a fifth possible future involving continued increases in carbon pollution.

In five previous reports, the world was on that final hottest path, often nicknamed “business as usual.” But this time, the world is somewhere between the moderate path and the small pollution reductions scenario because of progress to curb climate change, said report co-author Claudia Tebaldi, a scientist at the U.S. Pacific Northwest National Lab.

While calling the report “a code red for humanity,” U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres kept a sliver of hope that world leaders could still somehow prevent 1.5 degrees of warming, which he said is “perilously close.”

Alok Sharma, the president of the upcoming climate negotiations in Scotland, urged leaders to do more so they can “credibly say that we have kept 1.5 degrees alive.”

“Anything we can do to limit, to slow down, is going to pay off,” Tebaldi said. “And if we cannot get to 1.5, it’s probably going to be painful, but it’s better not to give up.”

In the report’s worst-case scenario, the world could be around 3.3 degrees Celsius (5.9 degrees Fahrenheit) hotter than now by the end of the century. But that scenario looks increasingly unlikely, said report co-author and climate scientist Zeke Hausfather, climate change director of the Breakthrough Institute.

“We are a lot less likely to get lucky and end up with less warming than we thought,” Hausfather said. “At the same time, the odds of ending up in a much worse place than we expected if we do reduce our emissions are notably lower.”

AP

The report also said ultra-catastrophic disasters — commonly called “tipping points,” like ice sheet collapses and the abrupt slowdown of ocean currents — are “low likelihood” but cannot be ruled out. The much talked-about shutdown of Atlantic ocean currents, which would trigger massive weather shifts, is something that’s unlikely to happen in this century, Kopp said.

A “major advance” in the understanding of how fast the world warms with each ton of carbon dioxide emitted allowed scientists to be far more precise in the scenarios in this report, Mason-Delmotte said.

In a new move, scientists emphasized how cutting airborne levels of methane — a powerful but short-lived gas that has soared to record levels — could help curb short-term warming. Lots of methane the atmosphere comes from leaks of natural gas, a major power source. Livestock also produces large amounts of the gas, a good chunk of it in cattle burps.

More than 100 countries have made informal pledges to achieve “net zero” human-caused carbon dioxide emissions sometime around mid-century, which will be a key part of the negotiations in Scotland. The report said those commitments are essential.

“It is still possible to forestall many of the most dire impacts,” Barrett said.

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

Read More

Robert Frost wondered whether the world will end in fire, or in ice.

While fire is clearly winning, I believe the world really ends through cowardice. Though “cowardice” isn’t the right word; the exact term is hard to put a finger on. “Denialism,” maybe. Head-in-the-sandism. The human tendency to see a hole in the ground, understand it is there in our path, then fall in it anyway, eyes open, because this is the route we always take, and we’ll be damned if we’re going to deviate. We’re no sidesteppers!

Long before people were denying the usefulness of masks or refusing life-saving vaccines, they were pooh-poohing global warming. It isn’t happening or, if it is, it’s caused by natural shifts. Not by people, oh no no no, we wouldn’t wreck our world through carelessness. Since it’s not our fault, there’s nothing we can do to stop it. Nobody actually pounds the floor with their fists and whines, “We don’t wanna! Doing stuff is hard!” But that is the general tone.

The past few years we’ve seen a series of heat waves, brutal droughts, record floods, massive storms. A gathering drumbeat of doom so loud even some Republicans suspect there might be something going on. The latest shoe dropped Monday, a report from the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Where to begin?

“All is lost,” is not a phrase you see much in professional journalism, even in the negative, “not all is lost,” used in Monday’s New York Times, trying to focus on the dwindling hope that a hotter planet, with melting ice sheets and rising seas might yet be mitigated. Though even that optimism is yanked away in the headline: “A HOTTER FUTURE IS NOW INEVITABLE, A U.N. REPORT SAYS.”

What is odd, to me, is that the same people denying climate change also crave upheaval. They’ll quote the Book of Revelations and announce the world is ending, based on nothing. But let the world’s scientists join hands and chant, “Yes, the world is indeed ending, at least as the cool green place we’ve known and loved,” and suddenly they’re covering their ears and humming. Then what’s with all the stockpiled weaponry? The freeze-dried food? Geez, climate change ought to be your dream come true.

I decided to read the report itself, rather than just reports of the report.

Formally titled “Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis” the report has a blue cover and is … ah … 3,949 pages long. Quite a lot, really. Well, let’s begin. “It is unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land. widespread and rapid changes in the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere and biosphere have occurred.”

Stop right there. See, that’s the problem. It is NOT unequivocal, not unmistakable, not undeniable. People have been equivocating, mistaking and denying it for years. Not based on facts, mind you. But facts are not necessary, either for forming opinions or public policy. Fear is all that’s needed. Thus you have the governor of Florida telling the president, as he did this week, that diseased immigrants are bringing COVID into the country. Not his the-bullets-will-not-harm-us masking policies.

And “cryosphere”? Where has that been all my life? The word actually means the frozen parts of the planet, glaciers and ice caps and such. But isn’t it a perfect term for the piercing wail of eternal right wing grievance? I’ve said it before, nobody cries like a bully. But really, I wish just once they could grasp how pathetic all this oh-poor-me-I’m-a-victim poopy baby act is to people who aren’t collapsed in a corner, terrified. I mean, I fully see and understand that the planet is entering a grim crisis phase that will last the rest of my life. And I’m not particularly upset.

Why? Several reasons. First, it’s done now, as the report concludes. Second, it’s utterly out of my hands, other than this little squeak here. Third, I realize that predicting doom goes back to the Bible. Yet here we are.

Finally, are people not part of nature? Blaming ourselves for wrecking the planet separates humanity as Lords of Creation. We don’t blame the dinosaurs and prehistoric plants for dying and creating coal beds. Why blame ourselves for digging up the coal up and burning it? Because our brains are slightly bigger? Obviously not big enough.

Read More

Amid his ever-changing stance on how serious preseason games are, Bears coach Matt Nagy faces a dilemma with rookie quarterback Justin Fields. He needs to see Fields in game action to gauge his progress, but it’d be a big risk putting the future of the franchise behind a makeshift offensive line Saturday against the Dolphins.

“The only way we can evaluate is by seeing him play,” said Nagy, adding that he’ll likely scheme for extra protection. “He’s gotta get valuable reps.

“We gotta be able to evaluate — that’s the beauty of the preseason — but we also need these guys for Week 1. It’s that Catch-22. You play somebody and all of a sudden they get hurt and go, ‘You dummy. Why’d you do that?’ The other [side] is you don’t play them and [people] say they need the reps.”

Nagy expects Andy Dalton and the rest of the starters to play one or two series, but didn’t specify how long Fields will go.

Fortunately for the Bears, the Dolphins are here all week, so even if Nagy opts to play third-stringer Nick Foles the majority of the game, Fields and Dalton will get important work during the week — especially in Fields’ case. The joint practices Wednesday and Thursday might even be more valuable to him than running a vanilla version of the offense for a segment of the game.

The midweek sessions ive the Bears and Dolphins a controlled environment that’s as close as possible to the real thing before their game at Soldier Field. Nagy has been in regular communication with Miami coach Brian Flores for at least a few weeks to coordinate plans.

“That’s the benefit of being able to get with another team,” Nagy said. “Our guys are so used to seeing the same stuff… It’s a total changeup now.”

The Bears’ offensive line trouble has surely been part of the Nagy-Flores discussions. Not only is there concern about whether the group could protect Fields and Dalton on Saturday without its projected starting tackles and right guard James Daniels, but the Bears had a practice recently in which they didn’t have enough healthy linemen for separate units in the first- and second-team offenses.

Aside from that, Nagy is eager to see Fields let it rip and show what he knows against an unfamiliar defense. The Bears have been working with their first-round pick for about three months, and Nagy believes he’s ready for a test.

“I want him to cut it loose and play without thinking,” Nagy said. “Stay within what we do and the progressions, but let your personality show on the football field.”

Nagy was particularly encouraged in that regard after Fields snapped back from what Nagy called a “just OK” performance Saturday to deliver possibly his best practice since arriving. Nagy and position coach John DeFilippo raved about the way he played Sunday and saw it as a substantial step forward. Most notably, he showed “really calm feet” in the pocket under pressure.

“What we’re looking for from him is the ability to rebound from a poor decision,” Nagy said. “That is one of his strengths. He’s shown that to us. So now when you get to the game, how is all that gonna go? We won’t know that until we see it.”

Read More

Out of football since being cut by the Jets last September, former Rams and Giants linebacker Alec Ogletree was visiting his buddy Robert Quinn at Halas Hall earlier this month — watching Quinn’s sister, Jasmine Camacho-Quinn, win a gold medal in the 100-meter hurdles at the Tokyo Olympics.

“Just was gonna be here for a couple days and then go back to Georgia,” Ogletree said. “My agent called me and asked me where I was at. I said, ‘I’m in Chicago.’ He’s like, ‘Uh, don’t leave. They want to sign you.’

“Just right timing, I would say. I’m appreciative of the opportunity to come in here and still get a chance to play and show them I can still be here.”

Ogletree already has made the most of the opportunity. He had an interception in his first practice with the Bears last Thursday, then three on Friday, one on Saturday and one more on Sunday to give him six interceptions in four practices. Ogletree is a long way from proving he deserves a roster spot — he was signed only after reserves Josh Woods (quadriceps), Joel Iyiegbuniwe (hamstring) and Christian Jones (COVID-19 list) missed practice time. But he’s taken a giant first step by getting the attention of the coaching staff.

“He’s doing great,” Bears coach Matt Nagy said. “What a credit to him to come in here and we’re down on some numbers at inside linebacker and all he is doing is making plays. You can’t ask for more than that.”

Ogletree, a first round draft pick by the Rams in 2013, started seven seasons in the NFL before his career stalled. The Giants cut him after the 2019 season. The Jets signed Ogletree during Week 1 last year but cut him after two games. He was all but out of football before the Bears called.

“You’re a free agent and you’re just out there in the market and — especially with COVID and stuff now, things are a lot different than they were before,” Ogletree said. “It’s definitely a lot of unknowns — and when you have that, you can have a bad thoughts. But you just have to keep the faith and keep believing that you are special and you can do it and given the right opportunity, the right chance, things can work out for you.”

In that regard, Ogletree couldn’t have asked for a much better opportunity. he joins a Bears defense with a Bears’ defense that has plenty of playmakers. And with starting inside linebackers Roquan Smith (groin) and Danny Trevathan (knee) not practicing Tuesday, Ogletree was getting first-team reps with Jones.

“It inspires me to come here and do my part,” Ogletree said. “You have guys that have been around, make plays, that are big-time players in this league. For me, it’s about playing at the same standard as those guys, doing my part and making sure I’m ready to go. It’s been a little [while] since I’ve had a front like that. But it’s definitely inspiring.”

Ogletree, who turns 30 on September 25, feels he still has it (“I’m like a good wine. I feel like I get better with age.”). And like any player in his position, he’s motivated to prove disbelievers wrong.

“At a certain point, you have little bit of pride, and that’s one of the things I learned this offseason,” he said. “You’ve done things in this league — good, bad, whatever — but it’s what can you do for me now?

“I kind of understood that, and it helped shape my mindset in terms of getting back in the league. I wanted to come in and show I can still do it. I never lost it. People can say different. But if I believe in myself, that’s all that matters to me.”

Read More

Editor’s Note: Sally Nemeth, an early force in the growth of Chicago as a city that nurtures new plays, died on July 30 at age 62 in Los Angeles after a long illness. Though she had moved away from Chicago in 1995, her influence continues to be felt by those who worked with Nemeth here in the 1980s and 90s. Douglas Post wrote this remembrance and history of Nemeth’s work and that of the peers whose careers grew up around her.

As memory serves, the invitation came in the form of a letter with a graphic of green balloons coming out of a green typewriter. Sally Nemeth was asking if I wanted to be a part of the Chicago New Plays Festival Company, a collective of local playwrights and directors dedicated to the development and production of new work for the stage. Formed in 1984 by Sally, Steve Scott, and Linda Walsh Jenkins, the group would meet every few weeks in a rehearsal room at Lifeline Theatre where we would read and discuss this work, and our initial membership would include writers Anne McGravie, Scott McPherson, Nicholas A. Patricca, Nancy Rawles, David Rush, Linda, and Sally, who would be our leader.

Have I mentioned that I accepted this offer with eagerness and enthusiasm? Well, I did, and was immediately glad I had done so. This was a lovely and smart group of people to spend time with and talk through the issues of writing for the American theater. And Sally was the perfect host. She was serious, but not too serious. She was flexible when she needed to be, but also had a clear idea of where she wanted us to go. And she was a terrific writer.

The following year, we were asked to be a part of the Organic Greenhouse Project, a developmental wing of the Organic Theater Company that was dedicated to nurturing new work and theater artists. Other organizations that were invited to be part of this venture included City Lit Theater Company, specializing in literary adaptations; Red Key Productions, an acting ensemble; The Design Unit, a local design resource group; The Directors Group, a collective of area directors; Fanfire Productions, a company centered on women’s issues; and MinaSama-No, an Asian American troupe.

None of us had a permanent home, or even a semipermanent home, and so we would make use of the multifaceted building on Clark Street as a foundation while receiving access to the Organic’s rehearsal and performance spaces, as well as sets, lights, sound, and costumes. This proposition came to us courtesy of Tom Riccio, who was the new artistic director at this institution, and Sally wisely accepted, though I’m sure she ran it by us for review.

I should mention that Sally and Steve Scott, who headed up The Directors Group, had formed an alliance and so we had a team of interpreters of our texts as we advanced our mutual artistic interests. This team included Sydney Daniels, Kyle Donnelly, Steven Ivich, Kate Loewald, Mary Ellen McGarry, and Susan Padveen. We would often draw on them for their insights and work together whenever we could.

Approaching December of that year, Ron Falzone, who headed up the Greenhouse Project, let us know that there was space available for a full production on their second stage if we had something that could be put up fast. The Organic Lab Theater had 65 seats, a tiny light booth, and an even tinier dressing room, and I had a musical adaptation of Kenneth Grahame’s The Wind in the Willows that I felt was ready to go. Sally told me we had $2,500 in the bank. That was it. If we lost this money, we were starting from scratch. Somehow I talked her into letting me mount my show as an offering for the holiday season. It was very well-received and we doubled our investment. Sally thought she was the smartest producer in town and, to my way of thinking, she was. Simultaneously, another musical version of Grahame’s story opened on Broadway. It cost exactly a hundred times as much as ours and lost everything. Our show ran for four weeks. Theirs lasted four days.

Sally would go on to produce three alternating evenings of our one-acts and playlets called The Summer Shorts Festival. On Tuesdays and Fridays, audiences could see Nick Patricca’s The Dream Machine and Hail Mary; and David’s “Life” is Only 7 Points. On Wednesday and Saturdays, they could take in Sally’s Celestial Mechanics, Visions of Grandeur, Word Games, and Holding the Bag; Nancy’s A Spot in the Shade; and Anne’s Oona and the Oyster Girl. And on Thursdays and Sundays, they could attend Scott’s Scraped and my triptych Belongings and Longings. It was the summer of 1986 and we got to collaborate with many of our pals who were a part of The Directors Group. That winter we coproduced a revival of The Wind in the Willows with Bailiwick Repertory. Sally made sure that we also participated in the Organic Greenhouse’s All-Chicago Play Project, a marathon reading series of 32 new works. She also introduced us to Dramatic Publishing Company, who promptly put three of our plays into print.

The next year, we expanded our ranks to include local scribes Robyn Dana Guest, Richard Strand, and Kathleen Thompson. For our second Summer Shorts Festival, we programed two evenings of plays and monologues that featured Sally’s Pagan Day and One Wolf; Nick’s Hail Mary II and Father; Kathleen’s Opalina and Kindness; and Robyn’s Readin’, ‘Ritin’ & ‘Rithmetic. Richard’s Can You Hear Me, Mr. Szczepanski? and David’s Times with Lorenzo were presented on alternate nights along with my farce Detective Sketches.

This was a remarkable outpouring of work from our collective and none of it could have happened without Sally’s fortitude and ingenuity. She kept us centered. And she kept us moving ahead. It is a rare thing to meet someone who is happy being a playwright among playwrights. Sally was one of those people.

Eventually she needed to step back from her responsibilities and so turned the reins over to Nick, which was a prudent choice. Chicago New Plays, as we were now called, would continue to coproduce full productions, partial productions, and readings with the Commons Theatre. We also took part in another marathon event when seven of our full-length plays received readings at The Open Eye New Stagings Lab in New York City. We continued to meet. We continued to talk about each other’s work. We stayed friends.

Scott would go on to write Marvin’s Room. Nick would write An Uncertain Hour. And Sally’s play Mill Fire would have its premiere at the Goodman Theatre, while Spinning into Blue would be produced at Victory Gardens Theater and Holy Days would open in London. She received grants from the National Endowment for the Arts and the New York Foundation for the Arts, as well as a new play commission from South Coast Repertory.

Eventually Sally moved to Los Angeles, where she started writing for television. Her work on the series Law & Order won awards from the American Bar Association and the National Council on Crime and Delinquency (now called Evident Change). In 2006, Knopf published her first novel, a work for young adults called The Heights, the Depths, and Everything in Between. And somehow she found time to teach and to remain an activist for her community.

I will always remember Sally as a vibrant, smart, full-hearted, and talented woman. I owe her a lot. She is a part of my personal history. And she is a part of the Chicago theater movement and what continues to make this city such a great place to be a playwright. v

Read More

PHOENIX — The seven-year-old Arizona Bowl has wrestled with how to stand out on television when there are dozens of postseason college football games flooding the airwaves in late December and early January.

So in an unexpected twist, game officials won’t even try.

The Arizona Bowl recently announced a partnership with Barstool Sports for its Dec. 31 game in Tucson, Arizona. The multiyear deal with the digital sports platform — notable for its occasional off-color humor and brash founder Dave Portnoy — not only includes naming rights but also broadcasting rights, which means the game won’t be on ESPN or CBS.

Instead, it’ll be streamed on Barstool’s multiple platforms like its website, app and social media. The game pits members of the Mountain West Conference and Mid-American Conference.

“This is something I think the college football world is ready for,” Arizona Bowl executive director Kym Adair said.

It’s an intriguing pairing but also comes with some risk. The security of playing on ESPN or CBS over the holidays ensures that eyeballs will find the game. Even though TV ratings across most sports have been on a steady decline, last year’s Arizona Bowl drew about 1.77 million viewers on CBS.

It’s likely that the Barstool deal means the Arizona Bowl will have considerably fewer viewers.

What they lose in sheer numbers, they hope to make up for in interaction and engagement.

“We’re not inhibited by a traditional way of doing things at Barstool Sports, so we can re-imagine the experience in a way that makes it more interactive and entertaining for fans,” Barstool CEO Erika Nardini said in an email. “The chance to bring our audience, our humor, our love of the game is something we’re very fired up about and we promise to deliver sports fans a reason to watch.”

The Arizona Bowl isn’t the only college sporting event exploring online-only options: Notre Dame’s football season opener on Sept. 11 against Toledo will stream exclusively on Peacock, which is NBC’s streaming service.

Adair said there are several reasons she’s excited about the Barstool partnership.

For starters, it allows the Arizona Bowl to keep its desired slot on New Year’s Eve. Though broadcast rights are important, ticket sales and community engagement matter, too. Adair said she wants college football fans in Arizona to know the game will always be played on Dec. 31, allowing families to plan vacations and family gatherings and build a tradition.

Adair also said Barstool does remarkably well with the coveted 18- to 35-year-old demographic, which is notoriously tough to reach.

“Advertisers can’t find them but Barstool has them,” Adair said. “There’s incredible energy surrounding the bowl right now and fans can’t wait to see Barstool’s take on a bowl game.”

Nick Carparelli is the executive director at Bowl Season, a nonprofit which promotes the tradition of college football’s postseason system. He’s worked in the NFL and for the Big East Conference, Under Armour and Notre Dame at various times in his career, giving him a broad understanding of trends in college football.

He said he’s intrigued by the Arizona Bowl’s partnership with Barstool. He added that it should also be attractive to NCAA student-athletes, who consume sports and media much differently than previous generations.

“There are some newer bowls that are trying to grow, develop a strong presence in their community, and they’re in position to be a little more creative in how they market and brand themselves,” Carparelli said. “The Arizona Bowl fits in that category. I thought it was very creative to partner with Barstool Sports.

“It certainly engages a different type of audience then the traditional college football audience, which is good for the game in general.”

Read More

Socialist aldermen fired back Tuesday against colleagues’ accusations that their “defund and disrespect movement” set the stage for “brazen acts of violence against police officers,” including the weekend slaying of Officer Ella French.

“The killing of anybody is wrong. That’s No. 1. The problem is, when the police do it, it’s overlooked. But, when they get killed, it takes two-point-five seconds to find and catch somebody,” said always outspoken Ald. Jeanette Taylor (20th).

“In the history of … people being murdered by the cops, only two cops in the entire country have been indicted. That’s Laquan McDonald’s killer and George Floyd’s. What does that say about this system? Even when we have it on video — even when we have all the witnesses.

“This is not one against the other. This is about, if you take a life, you deserve to get caught. That’s not what happens when you kill everyday folks.”

What set Taylor off were the remarks of two aldermen who are among the City Council’s staunchest defenders of Chicago police officers: Anthony Napolitano (41st) and Nick Sposato (38th).

In arguing that Mayor Lori Lightfoot did not deserve the cold shoulder she got from rank-and-file police officers at the University of Chicago Hospital or the tongue lashing that the retired police officer father of French’s critically-injured partner gave her, both aldermen pointed the finger at their socialist and progressive colleagues in the City Council.

“This blood is on their hands without a doubt. They’re the ones who created this whole anti-police movement that has made these brazen acts of violence against police officers [possible]. … this is created by them. This whole defund and disrespect movement that they have started. These pieces of s–t are the ones that created this and talk anti-police,” Napolitano said.

Sposato agreed “some of the Commies are just constantly bashing the police and saying bad things about ’em and want to defund ’em.”

Tyler LaRiviere/Sun-Times

To say Taylor was furious would be understating it.

“Who are the socialists and the progressive aldermen in the City Council? They’re Black and Brown. He’s racist all day long for saying some crap like that,” Taylor said of Napolitano.

Taylor said her ward and Napolitano’s are a “tale of two cities.” She challenged him to see for himself by making a temporary move from the Far Northwest Side ward to her impoverished South Side ward. He wouldn’t last a week, she said.

“Come and be at a job where he makes $10-an-hour, his rent is $800 and he don’t pay his lights or gas or he can’t buy his kids some shoes because he’s trying to pay his rent. His privilege allows him to say stuff like that,” Taylor said.

“Try trying on this Black skin.. … Walk around and be me for a day. … I dare him to say the blood is on our hands. No. The blood is on the people who pulled the trigger.”

She added, “Jon Burge. … What is his excuse for that?” Taylor was referring to the notorious CPD commander accused of using torture to extract false confessions.

“Laquan McDonald, Rekia Boyd. Where’s the moral there? This ain’t about anti police. This is about people who have power and abuse it. Don’t act like police haven’t abused their power. Defund talks about stop putting so much money in the police because it does not make our community safe.”

Tyler LaRiviere/Sun-Times

Ald. Carlos Ramirez-Rosa (35th), chairman of the Socialist Caucus, branded Napolitano’s claim that socialist and progressive aldermen have “blood on their hands” as “utterly ridiculous.”

“Most Chicagoans — reasonable Chicagoans — would reject it as unhinged and not connected to reality,” Ramirez-Rosa said.

In rejecting the anti-police narrative, Ramirez-Rosa argued the “vast majority” of federal coronavirus relief funds went toward police payroll.

He also pointed to $500 million in police misconduct settlements the city has shelled out over the last decade and to the tentative agreement with the Fraternal Order of Police that will give rank-and-file officers a 20% raise over eight years.

“I don’t think there’s a city hall that does more to support its police than the city of Chicago. To say that there’s not enough support for police is pretty asinine,” he said.

“Do they want people to wrap themselves in a Blue Lives Matter flag and spout out empty platitudes? We need real solutions in this moment. Now’s not the time to be engaging in right-wing talking points that are just red meat for your base. It’s about coming together as a city to figure out, how do we solve the crisis that we’re in?”

Read More