"Of all the award shows, the ESPYs have got to be the dumbest award show there is. First of all, award shows in general are sort of silly and ridiculous and we know they're just for creating publicity, but at least it makes some sort of sense within that framework to have an awards show for movies, or television, because there is no way with those to know which is the best. But when we're talking about sports -they actually play the game. We don't have to give an award to the best team. We know who the best team is - they've already won! That's the great thing about sports, there's a built-in objective mechanism by which we can ascertain who the winners are. But no, you have to win a second time in a tuxedo, and a spokesmodel has to hand you a trophy; that's what's important."
--Bill Maher
"I love John Walsh, and I have a fond feeling for ESPN. But I find the ESPY Awards objectionable. We already have awards. The World Series is an award. An MVP is an award. We don't need more awards. They make up this crap so they can fill time with it - the worst."
--Bill Wolff, former ESPN producer
You may be surprised that even though bowling seems to garner little respect in the sports world or among the public at large, there IS an ESPY award for "Best Bowler." I didn't agree with last year's choice of Walter Ray Williams Jr. over Kelly Kulick, but Walter Ray did have a good enough year that his selection wasn't the travesty this year's was.
This year, Jason Belmonte was selected "Bowler of the Year" and received his award on last night's ESPY broadcast. Now Jason has been known to read this blog on occasion, and I want to make it perfectly clear to him and to everyone else that I'm not slamming Belmo when I say that he didn't deserve to win the award. As I think I've made very clear on this blog, I stand in awe of Belmo's talent and skill and think he's one of the best bowlers on the planet and destined to get better and better still. However, I don't see any way in proverbial hell that he was this season's "best bowler."
If we look at the PBA Tour stats, at least three bowlers on tour had better seasons that Belmo did. Of course, there was PBA Player of the Year Mika Koivuniemi. But there were also Chris Barnes, who led the Tour in overall points, and Bill O'Neill, who surpassed Belmo in every statistical category. So, why did Belmo get the award?
I have to think it's because people voted without looking at the stats or caring what they revealed. I have to conclude that, at least so far as bowling is concerned, the ESPY award for "Best Bowler" was the result of a popularity contest or, perhaps, a coordinated voting campaign and not the result of an informed and reasoned pick of the highest performing bowler of the year.
I'm guessing that Jason knows this as well as anyone and is not as happy about his award as he'd like to be. I'm sure he'd like to know, in his heart of hearts, that he deserved it. But the one good thing about it is that it seems to show that the Bottlegate episodes have not significantly lessened his popularity with the bowling public. Nor should they.
Do you believe that Belmo deserved to win this year's ESPY award, and, if not, who do you think DID deserve it?
