Pro Wrestling is awesome and must be defended.

 On a random Saturday morning in  1987, in between the hours of 10-11 a.m., following a delicious pancake breakfast and an another side-splitting episode of Pee Wee's Playhouse, I happened upon a program that quite literally changed my life forever. I can't tell you why I decided to stay in that day, most likely because it was cold outside, thereby cancelling swimming or tennis ball home run derby.

I will never forget those glorious strains of 80's saxophone music, nor will I ever stop chasing the wonderful, pastel-colored euphoria that kicked me square in the face as I laid eyes, for the first time, on real-life, gigantic, flesh-and-blood superheroes preening, flexing, and throwing each other around. I had just discovered professional wrestling, and I was immediately hooked.

It is practically impossible to accurately describe pro wrestling to the uninitiated without using a whole bunch of homo-erotic verbage.  At the age of 7, none of this ever occurred to me, and even after coming to the realization, years later (thanks to my skeptical friends who enjoyed disparaging the sport), that pro wrestling is essentially 2 muscular men in their underpants, oiled up, and performing a choreographed, interpretive dance based on a soap opera, I was in far too deeply to care. They had no idea what they were talking about, anyhow. They had never seen Ric Flair with his entourage of ladies, or Miss Elizabeth holding the ropes open for the "Macho Man", or "Ravishing" Rick Rude select one lucky, swooning lady to receive a kiss after each victory. I knew. I was initiated.

Being initiated, and proud of it, has led to a lifetime of being forced to defend my sport from all types of nay-saying. Besides the aforementioned homo-erotic-ness of it all, Vince McMahon, the Godfather of the WWF (I'll never say "E") had the gall(!), in an effort to avoid paying fees to various state athletic commissions, to come on television and admit that my beloved sport was "pre-determined". That pro wrestling was, in fact, not an athletic contest, but "sports entertainment". Notice, he never says "fake".

I suppose, looking back, that we (the initiated) always had an inkling of this, but we WANTED to believe. Pro wrestling is far more fun when we can suspend our disbelief. Those guys in the 1980's and 1990's at least TRIED to make me believe it was real. Gorilla Monsoon and Jesse Ventura called the "matches" like they were legitimate contests, and the whole package just had a big fight, main event-type feel to it. Once McMahon made his confession, WWF could start heading in a more ridiculous, over-the-top direction, and that's exactly what they did, although it's hard to argue that there was anyone more over-the-top and ridiculous than the Honky Tonk Man, and he was around for years prior to the announcement.

The Honky Tonk Man, the longest reigning  Intercontinental Champion in  history. We really believed this man could beat up another man.

Of course, this led to the antagonistic skeptics  publicly shunning wrestling once again, this time, not for it's gayness, but for it's phoniness. This argument really bugged me, and on multiple levels. First of all, if wrestling is so fake, let me put you in a Boston Crab. Tell me if it hurts. If that doesn't convince you, let me bash you in the face with a folding steel chair, then pick you up and drop you, head-first, onto a canvas mat. Do you have some amazing power over gravity that I am unaware of? If so, please feel free to criticize wrestling to your heart's content.

Second of all, what is this insistence on "informing" me, every time I bring wrestling up, that it is fake? I don't inform you of how Sons of Anarchy, or Gilmore Girls, or Family Guy, or any number of stupid "reality" shows you watch are fake each time you set your DVR to record them, or when you are discussing them the next day. Do you think you are telling me something I don't already know? Are you mercifully rescuing me from my own stupidity? Thanks, but if you want to rescue someone from their own stupidity, you should try writing a letter to one of those vapid broads on The Bachelor.

Note: This is the LAST TIME I will ever discuss, admit, or even acknowledge any comments about pro wrestling's "fake-ness"

Now, there is a new criticism of wrestling that has come to light, and it could very well be the most annoying of them all. Recently, the WWF re-introduced Jack Swagger, a character that up until 3 weeks ago, had met with only mild success (despite a brief heavyweight championship reign) and, even more damning for a pro wrestler, only a  luke-warm crowd response. He was best known for being an accomplished amateur athlete who couldn't cut in in the professional "catch-as-catch-can" style, and for his speech impediment. Then, this happened:

Notice that Swagger still has very little personal charisma. Most of the talking is done by Zeb Coulter (a fantastic name, I hope it IS a mockery of that horrific train wreck known as Mann Coulter). Notice the Don't Tread on Me flag hanging behind them. When I saw this, my original thought was: "Wow. This guy is incredibly unlikable. He sounds just like a Tea Bagger. This will get a TON of heat from the audience."

It never, ever crossed my mind that Swagger and Coulter were misrepresenting the Tea Party, or that they were ACTUALLY associated with it. I  simply believed that they were lampooning it for the enjoyment/aggravation of the wrestling audience, which is exactly what it's all about. We pay our money for them to harass/annoy/enrage us, then to watch them get their butts kicked by "the good guys.

After emerging victorious in the Elimination Chamber, Swagger earned  the right to face Alberto Del Rio at WrestleMania. Del Rio is the current heavyweight champion, and also happens to be Mexican. On Monday night, the night after the EC, Swagger and Coulter returned with this:

At another point that same evening, during Swagger's match, color commentator Jerry Lawler mentioned, obviously tongue-in-cheek, that Zeb Coulter has been receiving fan mail from Glenn Beck and Alex Jones. As a regular viewer of wrestling, and as someone who has spent the majority of his life listening to people criticize, ridicule, and mock the sport, it never occurred to me then that anyone outside of my circle of initiates would ever hear or see this. Sure, the WWF hoped to get people talking, as word of mouth leads to  more eyes on their product, and that certainly wouldn't upset them. But anyone who watches wrestling regularly would never bat an eyelid at any of this, not really, not enough to get mad OUTSIDE the pro wrestling universe. This sort of this happens CONSTANTLY. Google search for Sgt. Slaughter, Iron Shiek, Mohammed Hassan, Nikolai Volkoff, or John Bradshaw Layfield. See what I mean? 

So, on Tuesday morning, when I was perusing the interwebs, looking at the news, I was quite shocked, and mildly amused, to find out that Alex Jones and Glenn Beck were OFFENDED by Swagger and Coulter. I never really pegged them as the pro-wrestling-viewing type. Anyhow, Jones and Beck both believe that this Swagger gentleman's character is an attempt by WWF/Vince McMahon to embarrass the Tea Party, or to exact revenge on it for not supporting Linda McMahon in the Connecticut senatorial race. Imagine that. Someone embarrassing the Tea Party! As if they have any shame, or are capable of being embarrassed. Clearly, Alex Jones and Glenn Beck are not among the initiated. Here's what Beck had to say. Pay special attention to how many times he uses the word "hate", being that he is a God-loving Mormon and all:

Glenn Beck's egotistical, paranoid insanity

Trust me, the viewing is worth it. 

Now, according to Beck, wrestling fans are stupid, Linda McMahon is a neo-con (but the higher-ups there at WWF are liberals), Panda people are wussies, and calling someone a "great American" is a mockery of Sean Hannity. Notice that Glenn Beck never spends a moment attacking what Coulter actually SAID. Not one of the parallels he points out dawned on me, because I don't pay attention to him, which, in turn, is because he is a lunatic. Which also happens to be why he DID see all those parallels.

Of course, Beck is uninitiated, so I wouldn't expect him to "get it". My question is this: If wrestling fans are so stupid, and the whole thing is so beneath you, why are you so frustrated with this character? If it is so silly and inaccurate, why does it threaten you? Methinks thou doth protest too much...

Here is a select sampling of some comments left by Beck's followers:

"WWE is desperate for ratings. Wish they would tell the public and their fans how fake everything about wrestling really is."

"Given their miserable ratings their flagging sales, this whole stunt reeks of desperation. I predict they will soon go the way of AOL."

"Fuck the WWE!  It's just a bunch of gay ass dudes in spandex!"

"Glenn should go and convert all the wrestling fans with logic. Wait that is impossible they probably suck off the government tit and sit on there(sic) asses while we fight for our rights as afforded to us through our founding documents. Just saying beeeeouch!"

All of those arguments are totally original, and I've never heard them before. O.K., so that last one is pretty good. Maybe all the initiated just need to be converted with logic. The kind of logic that dictates we should take a "sport" that they insist is "fake" and "gay" super-seriously. So seriously, in fact, that when these characters, who are otherwise worthy of my disdain and mockery, says something I may agree with, I should protest mercilessly.  These are the people who are calling ME stupid.

I am so accustomed to defending pro wrestling that I would like to think I am the Grand Supreme Champion of the art.

I think I shall allow "Dr. D." David Schultz the last word.

The Rondo Theories.

Rajon Rondo is probably my favorite team's most exciting player. This causes me tremendous pain.

I have been closely acquainted with Rajon Rondo ever since he got lucky enough for me to intensely doubt his talent, all the way back at the beginning of the 2007-2008 season. 

After a string of high-quality, post-Danny Ainge point guards like Sherman Douglas, Dee Brown, Dana Barros, and Sebastian Telfair, I had grown accustomed to excellence at the 1.  Especially considering we had just traded Chauncey Billups away.

Rajon Rondo had the starting point guard job thrust upon him in the summer of Ray Allen and KG. Along with Kendrick Perkins, he was the only guy Kevin McHale DIDN'T want in exchange for Kevin Garnett. It is my opinion that on that day, they (Rondo and Perkins) became some form of basketball soul mates. They were the scraps, the 2 "other" guys on this 5-man team. 

Rondo had already "survived" a draft day roster purge when "we"* acquired Ray Allen, and now, he was the only person left after the KG robbery. We literally gave up our whole team for KG, and it was worth it.

Therein lies the beginning of my love for, and frustration with, Rajon Rondo. I will never forget Rondo's performance in game 6 of the 2008 NBA Finals. I have never enjoyed watching NBA defense as much as I enjoyed watching Rondo vs. Kobe in the 4th quarter of that game. 

Prior to that 2007-2008 season, I had little/no faith in Rajon Rondo's abilities. I was swiftly proven wrong, as Rondo began a 3-year arc (peak?) that culminated in career highs of 13.5 PPG, a .508 FG%, and a league-leading 2.3 SPG in 2010.

Something I could not possibly have realized that day in 2008, was just how much Rondo LOVES the national stage. Yes, he had performed dominantly in that game 6, but since I had no sample size, I could never have fathomed the depths of hunger and will-to-win that the 6' 3" point guard possesses.

Rondo actually GROWS whenever his team is being shown on national television. He seems to particularly relish beating the Lakers and Heat, which, whether the stats bare it out or not (I don't actually want to know), goes a long way towards endearing him to me.

This leads to the first of my Rondo theories, which I have learned I do not have sole possession of, even though I insist I did come up with it first. Rondo turns in his best performances while on the national stage. Google "Rondo National TV".  This first Rondo theory has become so commonplace, that it is now accepted as fact.

So why do I have frustration? Is there an asset an NBA team can possess that is as valuable as crunch-time, big-game dominance?

Rondo's numbers, in every category but assists, have decreased since that enchanted 2010 season. You may be asking why that is a bad thing, since a point guard averaging 11.5 assists per game is nothing to sneeze at. Quite the opposite, in fact. However, if he has become so utterly dominant on the national stage, but his overall numbers have dropped, doesn't that mean his day-in, day-out performance has suffered? His FG% has never been above 45% since 2010, which wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing if, as Coach Rivers has IMPLORED him to do, he took more shots. Rondo's commitment to passing is so intense that he actually takes it too far, passing on quality shots time and time again. A large majority of the shots he does take are ludicrously contested lay-ups, and when he actually gets good looks, it's usually because opposing defenses have backed off of him. They are practically daring him to hit 15-foot, wide open jumpers, and he often fails. Couple this with the fact that he, as a point guard, only shoots 60% from the foul line (a Shaq-esque number, to be sure), and know that cheering for Rondo on any given night can be incredibly taxing.

We continue to adore Rajon Rondo because, despite his obvious short-comings, he also leads the league this year in triple-doubles (5). This is more than TWICE the amount of triple-doubles the man who is second on the list (much to my delight, LeBron, with a mere 2) has turned in. In the last 5 postseasons (nationally televised), Rondo has achieved 8 triple-doubles, placing him atop THAT leaderboard, as well.   Rajon is capable of a transcendent basketball performance on any given night, and  they all seem to happen when it REALLY matters.

So I say again, Rajon Rondo is my team's most exciting player. KG may be the soul of the team, and Paul Pierce may be the best player, but Rondo is the most exciting.

This leads to my second, and just recently-formed, Rondo Theory. Any team who's point guard leads the league in assists and triple-doubles, then goes down with a season ending ACL injury, is bound to suffer because of the loss, right? Clearly, said point guard makes his teammates exponentially better.

Rondo is that point guard, and common wisdom was that when he went down, in the cruelest of nationally-televised-against-the-Miami-Heat ironies, the Celtics would be forced to blow up the team, trading Pierce and Garnett, ending an era, and entering re-building mode.

Rondo's teammates played that game with no knowledge of his injury. They won in double OT. Paul Pierce was informed of Rondo's injury by Doris Burke during the post-game interview.

Since Rondo's injury, the Celtics have played 6 games, and are undefeated.

How can this be? Ah yes, it all comes full circle. Remember how Rondo achieved the starting point guard job in 2007-2008? How he basically backed into it? No one had much faith in his ability to succeed, and many had faith that the Celtics would essentially be a 3-man team.

Rondo's overall numbers that season were not terrible, by any means, but they were not incredibly spectacular, either. KG was (essentially) healthy the entire season, the only season since he joined Boston he has been able to accomplish that feat. Pierce became the cold-blooded, clutch-time, Bird-esque finisher Celtic's fans had always hoped he would be, and Ray Allen was the dignified elder statesmen who seemingly shot 95% from beyond the arc. KG's killer instinct and swagger wore off on Rondo, and it was a frequent sight to see KG playing the big brother, patting his head, getting in his ear, and generally firing him up.

After that glorious 2008 Finals series, and having spent a year under the tutelage of the Big Three, version 2.0, Rondo began to grow in confidence. KG and Doc both publicly stated, by 2010, that the Celtics were Rondo's team. Those doubts about Rondo's abilities had evaporated.  He was the future of the franchise, the superstar on a squad full of them, the prototypical point guard that made his teammates better.

So how is it possible that the aging Celtics, who were a sub-.500 team this season while Rondo played, are now 6-0 in his absence, and have an overall winning percentage above .500?

Because we were wrong about Rajon Rondo. He is NOT the prototypical point guard that makes his teammates better.

Think about it. When you have guys like Ray Allen, Kevin Garnett, and Paul Pierce at the receiving end of your passes, you are bound to have high assist totals. When Kevin Garnett, 2008 Defensive Player of the Year and multi-time 1st Team All-NBA Defensive Team member is orchestrating the defense behind you, you are bound to look better than you otherwise would on that end.

My second Rondo theory is this: Rondo is made better by Paul Pierce and KG, not the other way around. How else could the Celtic suffer this supposedly team-crippling loss and go 6-0 since? Because the Celtics still have their best player and their heart and soul on the court. I would go so far as to say that Rondo was created by KG. He is KG's point guard, warts and all.

We were just wrong about Rajon Rondo. He is an excellent point guard, but we were putting him in the discussion with Chris Paul, Derrick Rose, and Steve Nash for best point guard in the league. This simply isn't so. Those guys make their teams better, Nash's current season notwithstanding. What would happen if Rondo was traded to Indiana, for example? Would they immediately improve? Honestly?

Don't get me wrong. I love Rondo, in all his triple-doubling, ref-bumping, trick-shooting glory. I would be absolutely crestfallen if he were traded. Part of his charm lies in his flaws. He may not be the best point guard, but he is our point guard, and we* feel like he loves being a Celtic.That counts for a lot. I am completely convinced that we could not get equal value for him in a trade, and believe that it would literally KILL Kevin Garnett if Rondo were to be traded.

Rajon Rondo is probably my team's most exciting player. This causes me tremendous pain.


*a term used as a synonym for the Dodgers, the Celtics, and the Vikings. I have earned the right to call us "we", even though I have no membership on any of those teams, nor can I make any impact on any of their games. Except that I can. If you don't get it, you never will.