This is a bullshit topic (which is why I'm burying this post at 7:00AM) but Sherman has re-invented his article so I'm re-tooling my takedown. Here are two points Sherman makes (among countless other ones I take issue with) that do a fair job of summing up his argument:
He takes issue with the notion that Jeter is winning it because of lifetime achievement but thinks that A-Rod should win it because he "embodies where sports are now". I fear he may be taking the word "Sportsman" a bit too literally.
- This feels like lifetime achievement.
- And Rodriguez should win this award. He embodies where sports are now. He is the intersection of illegal performance enhancers, advancements in sports medicine, celebrity and on-field genius.
The Sportsman of the Year award is a pretty arbitrary award given out for a certain mix of on and off-the-field achievements. There is no concrete mold into which the winner always fits, but I think it makes a whole lot more sense to give it to someone who has always represented a high level of class and character (not to mention success in competition) over someone who has been a notorious preening egomaniac in the year he was forced to admit that he did steroids.
Is that fact that he ceased to be a complete trainwreck remarkable in some ways? Yes. Does that make him deserving of any sort of award? Absolutely not.