Apologies to those of you here for witty banter and sports talk, but I'd like to get something somewhat serious off my chest.
Eric Rudolph was sentenced today to 4 consecutive life sentences for his bombing of Centennial Olympic Park here in Atlanta. He was sentenced last month to two consecutive life sentences for bombing a women's' clinic in Birmingham. Because parole doesn't exist in federal penitentiaries, barring a presidential pardon, Rudolph will never take another step as a free man.
And I am very glad.
In the summer of 1996 I was a rising sophomore at UGA, and I worked during the Olympics at the Swatch pavilion in Centennial Olympic Park. The Swatch pavilion was a sort of museum/kitschy watch store/event facility situated to the right of the main stage in the park. I served as a tour guide or host. Basically, I stood at the door and let people in in groups the museum part could handle. Upstairs there was a VIP area and we'd let athletes and celebrities come in the back door and eat and drink and watch the bands that would perform on the stage each night. I wore a Gold Medal from one of the Dutch men's' volleyball team. I met Mark Spitz and Peter Fonda. I almost spilled rioja on the matriarch of the ruling family of Spain. It was a good place to work. A lot was going on down there. I saw terrible bands, met people from all over, went to events at the World Congress Center across the park.
Then, on the middle weekend of the Olympics, things got crazy. The park was about 5 times more crowded than any other night of the games. Across the main lawn from our building was the Budweiser pavilion ("Bud World") and it was hilariously packed. All the staffmembers commented on how crazy things were that night. After the main bands (like Santana and shit like that), every night a band called Jack Mack and the Heart Attack would play songs for the 40+ set and then the park would close. I remember thinking that I couldn't wait for the park to close.
The staff at the Swatch pavilion had 7 or 8 positions we'd stand at. 3 or 4 of them were inside, one was at the front door that faced the Bud pavilion. And 2 were at the exit, which was right next to the Swatch store. About 10 yards in front of the exit was a large sound tower, at the base of which Eric Rudolph placed a large bag full of jagged metal and a detonation device.
If you remember any of the footage that was run on a loop on news programs right after the bombing, one of the best shots of the actual bombing was an interview with Janet Evans, the swimmer. She was doing an interview upstairs in the Swatch pavilion in front of the big window that faced the stage when the bomb went off shaking the building and causing loud crashing inside. I let her in the front door about 15 minutes beforehand.
When I let her in and when the bomb went off, I was stationed at the front door. The shape of the building jutted out and kind of blocked the view of the stage and the building was between me and the sound tower. This was lucky, I believe.
When the bomb went off, the concussion knocked me back a foot. I kind of staggered for a second and then wondered just what the hell it was. It sounded like an enormous speaker had exploded, but it didn't feel like that. I ran about 15 yards away from the building, to be able to see the stage. On the huge screens that were on either side of the stage I saw Jack Mack freaking out. It was clear that it wasn't just a blown speaker. Then I turned back to the Swatch building. Before I could walk back, a soldier, in full uniform, came running at me, yelling for me to get down. I did so quickly.
After about a minute or two on the ground, with panicked revelers running all over the place, I got up and walked quickly out of the park. Luckily, the Swatch company made us wear these ridiculous red and white striped polo shirts, so it was easy to spot my co-workers. It was also a little startling. Two of my coworkers were stationed at the exit of the building. I had rotated away from that position about 30 minutes earlier. Both of them had blood all over their shirts. One had been cut by some of the shrapnel, slightly. The other had run into other people who had been injured very badly by the bomb. It was a lot of blood. They were very shaken. We all were, I guess. But they were almost catatonic.
Security personnel kept yelling to get out of the area, since there were fears that the bomb was only an initial barrage, in order to get the innocent civilians out of the park, then a bigger one would detonate with only security personnel inside. We weren't moving much, because we were trying to find all of our coworkers. Finally, we all went our separate ways home. I took MARTA westbound to where I'd parked 9 hours before. The MARTA trains weren't moving very often. Everyone on the train looked like I did. Confused, a little scared, a little angry. I befriended a family on the train. I can't remember their names now. I remember they were from Oregon and their son was an athlete on the US rifle team. They said he'd medalled that day. A bronze medal. Best day of his life. They were celebrating in the park, in the family area behind the stage, when the bomb went off. I traded them a Swatch pin (notoriously hard to get and "valuable") for their AT&T Olympic Family Village pin (also notoriously hard to get and "valuable").
I went home and drank 3 beers in about 30 seconds. I called my parents, who were up at a lake house. They didn't know about the bombing, so by waking up and telling them, I freaked them out much worse than they would've been. Then I watched the news for about 3 hours. I heard about Alice Hawthorne. I heard about the Turkish journalist who'd been killed in the rush after the bomb. I felt lucky to be alive.
They determined that the bomb went off and sprayed shrapnel right at our building. There were cantaloupe sized holes at eye-level in our building. Had I been stationed at the exit, I may have been injured very badly or worse.
They shut down the park for a few days. Swatch paid us for the downtime, and hired a bunch of former Secret Service agents for our protection once the park reopened.
A few months later I was interviewed, via phone, by the FBI in connection with the bombing investigation. I didn't have much to add, except what I've written above.
So today Eric Rudolph was sentenced to spend the rest of his life in jail. And I'm happy. He's a monster, a pure terrorist in every sense of the word. And as terrible as he is, I feel more of a tangible tie to this case.
I believe he tried to kill me.
And I don't like that. And that's why I'm glad that our justice system still works, despite his abettors in the woods of Western North Carolina. I'm glad he'll never be free again. And I might sleep a little better because of it.
Monday, August 22, 2005
A personal note
Premiership Picks
Midweek edition. Last week: 4/8 right result, 0 right scores. Thus far: 10/18, 1 right.
Birmingham City v. Middlesbrough: 2-2. I think both these teams are headed for mid-table obscurity.
Portsmouth v. Aston Villa: 1-0. I'm sure Villa are better, but I'm not sure they're all that good right now.
Sunderland v. Manchester City: 1-2. Sunderland have problems in the back.
Arsenal v. Fulham: 2-0. Arsenal rebound from a disappointing performance.
Chelsea v. West Bromwich Albion: 4-0. Essien makes a big impact. On track for the title.
Blackburn Rovers v. Tottenham Hotspur: 0-1. Spurs the big surprise. They'll stay hot for a while, then cool off around the holidays.
Bolton Wanderers v. Newcastle United: 2-0. Bolton plays well at Reebok, Souness is gone before October.
Sunday, August 21, 2005
Droopy Dog Watch
Haven't done this in a while, but read something in his insider column (subscriber only) today that epitomizes what I don't like about the guy. He has incredible inside sources, but uses his column and his nationwide respect as a pundit to protect and promote his guys. It's a symbiotic relationship, and I don't think the readers benefit at all.
Here's the passage that clearly displays this bullshit:
Incidentally, in the 2002 draft, Francoeur was considered unsignable, headed to Clemson as a safety/outfielder. Boston, which did not have a first-round pick, had a pre-draft deal cut with Francouer. Braves scouting director Roy Clark found out, did the same deal with the 23rd pick, and Red Sox scouting director David Chadd cut a deal with a left-handed pitcher named Jon Lester, who may well be in Boston's rotation next season and may be, along with Liriano, one of the best left-handed prospects in the game.
Here are the problems with this passage:
1) This wasn't incidental to anything else in the paragraph (which was supposed to be about how good Francouer was but instead was all about an unnamed scout thinking he sucks because he doesn't walk).
2) Any guess if someone in the Red Sox org slipped this in to make them look good? 22 teams missed on Frenchy. 7 teams can pull the "we had a deal with him but the Braves swooped in ahead" card no matter if it's true or not. Unfortunately, only the Sawwwwwks have Gammons' jowls resting on their inner thighs.'
3) And isn't it lovely that even though the Sox missed out on a fantastic player, they just happened to have a great lefty fall into their lap. Just providence.
4) For 4 years I've heard the same story from 3 people, two of which are very close to Francoeur. The Braves deal was in place for months. Every other team was told Clemson was the only placed he'd go. He only wanted Atlanta.
This story is either intraoffice Sox asscovering (which none of his readers give a shit about) or it's 100% pure golden sunshine blown up the legion of Sox fans collective ass. Great player on another team? The local boys would've had him, and though they missed him they got something better instead.
Next time you see him on Baseball Tonight, close your eyes and imagine some old dude repeating Red Sox press releases. Next time you read a column by him, pretend you've stumbled upon a Red Sox Fan Fiction site.
Thursday, August 18, 2005
You without me is like Harold Melvin without the Blue Notes; You'll never go Platinum.
Snoop's football league draws controversy. Here's the line to draw your attention:
Walking with Xavier toward the parking lot, parents and coaches describe rapper Snoop Dogg as a modern-day Pied Piper luring football players with his song "Drop It Like It's Hot" blasting from a school bus pimped out with enough bass, TV screens and gadgetry to persuade any kid to sell out the old for the new.
Pied Piper? Is R. Kelly in on this league too? [insert 10 year old cheerleader joke here].
Seriously though, recruiting 10 year olds seems kind of weird to me. Chuuuuuuch.
Baby Braves
Pointing your attention to this article on the Hardball Times that ranks players by age and win shares. While I'm not entirely sure I understand (or buy into) win shares, it's an interesting concept. And there's fun news for Braves fans. The youngest category of rankings, the 21 year olds, has 3 Braves in the top 5 (Francoeur, McCann and Davies). Also, the oldest win share earning player is our man Julio. I'm not sure what this proves, except that the Braves rule.
Premiership Picks
A good start last week 6/10 right result, 1 right score. Unable to post tomorrow, so here's this weekend's picks.
Manchester United v. Aston Villa: 1-1. I see demonstrations and shit, and a disappointing result for Man U.
Newcastle United v. West Ham United: 2-2. I see fireworks, but because both teams kind of blow.
Tottenham Hotspur v. Middlesbrough: 1-0. Quick start for Spurs.
Liverpool v. Sunderland: 3-0. Sunderland has defensive problems.
Charlton Athletic v. Wigan Athletic: 2-0. Wigan looked OK last week. Road is a different animal. Charlton looked better than I'd guess.
Blackburn Rovers v. Fulham: 0-0. Mules fighting over a turnip... monkeys fuggin a football.
West Bromwich Albion v. Manchester City: 0-1. Boring.
Bolton Wanderers v. Everton: 2-1. Hard to get points away at Bolton. Panic at Goodison Park.
Chelsea v. Arsenal: 1-2. Marquee matchup. Arsenal looks a little bit better at this point.
UPDATE: I messed up this week transcribing. Left off Birmingham City and Portsmouth, which really screwed up 2 games. Apologies to all. The lesson: Blogging sober can only lead to bad things.
Wednesday, August 17, 2005
Hi. My name's LD and I'm looking for a fight.
I've been following an ongoing debate/exchange of bitchslaps between Heisman Pundit and Orson Swindle from EDSBS over how shitty the SEC's scheduling is. For the uninitiated, HP is a Pac-10 USC guy, Orson is a Gator. The short version of the debate:
Heisman Pundit says the SEC is "chickenshit" because they rarely leave the region for away games, schedule terrible teams at home instead for cash (which he thinks is no excuse) and the resulting wins unnaturally inflate their win totals and esteem in the national media polls.
Orson disagrees.
Apologies for the long post, but here's my take (in three thrilling parts):
1. "Leaving the region" is a canard.
SEC haters love to talk about how you never see SEC teams travel all that far and play teams "outside the region". John Walters at CNNsi.com wrote about it a few weeks ago. Naturally, he had to correct his column the next week because it was a stupid argument. First off, there is no inherent way to place a value on "leaving the region", because "leaving the region" doesn't mean anything. Put this way, Tennessee has gone on the road in recent years to play Notre Dame and Miami. Guess which one is farther away, South Bend or Coral Gables? Here's a hint - one is nearly 400 miles farther away from Knoxville. But wouldn't you know that the longer trip for the Vols would be a "regional matchup". Meanwhile if Kentucky were to travel less than 2 hours by bus to Cincinnati, it's leaving the region. In a similar light, there has to be another dimension to "leaving the region" - as what are the representative qualities of the team traveling or being traveled to? Should the SEC get credit if Vandy were to travel to Stanford for a game with the rough equivalent of two mules fighting over a turnip? Who gives a shit about that game? And what's the reason for the traveling? Big payday by a bottom feeder in a conference going on the road to a big fish? Why give credit for something like that?
The point is that leaving the region doesn't matter. Playing a good opponent on the road if it's less than a couple hours away is every bit as valuable as traveling across the country to play a decent opponent. In fact, I'd argue that it's better to play regional foes. When the schedule goes to 12 games, Georgia has scheduled a home/home with Colorado (more on that in a minute), which is fine. However, scheduling the Buffs is at the expense of getting back to a regular meeting with our closest (as the crow flies) rival, Clemson. Is Clemson any better or worse an opponent than Colorado? Who's to say by then, but now I'd say they're comparable at worst (Clemson's probably a little bit better). And I'd say there is a value to facing regional teams too. Using the Georgia/Clemson example, there are hundreds of Clemson fans in my office and in my community. I know like one Colorado fan. I know when UGA played Clemson a few years back there was genuine excitement around offices because it was a regional matchup. That interaction is missing with cross-country games.
So my point is: what's the big deal with "leaving the region"? It's an easy thing to tabulate and come up with a statistic that seeks to show one conference, by going on the road to play someone in another region, is "tougher" or less "chickenshit" than another. But that statistic is basically meaningless considering that there are no defined regions that make sense and the relative strengths or motivations of the teams playing on the road. A statistic like that proves nothing except that some teams are forced to travel farther than others because there are more schools in certain places. And, like so many debates in college football, that statistic requires someone to compare not just apples and oranges, but rather good apples to mediocre apples to delicious oranges to apples grown specifically for pies to orange juice and so on.
2. Making money is a bigger motivation for SEC schools than others.
I posted a comment about this on the Resource Blog before, but the issue keeps coming up (with Heisman Pundit sidestepping the argument). One of the main reasons SEC defenders use for why they don't travel as much is that they're trying to make more money, which is part of the game (and whether that's good or bad is a debate for another day). HeismanPundit says this is a ruse because other schools (Michigan, Texas) make lots of money and still travel on the road. OK, great for them. The thing is that of the top 10 moneymaking programs, 6 are in the SEC. That creates a microeconomy. UGA, UF, UT, LSU, Auburn and Alabama (and Arkansas, Ole Miss, USC) aren't competing against the rest of the country primarily. They're competing against each other first of all. Here's a hypothetical: say Auburn goes on the road for one more game than they need to, that could be $2M that is no longer in the budget. If Auburn brings in $2M less, and Alabama doesn't make that choice (and takes the money instead), Auburn might not be able to have as large a recruiting budget, or start payments on a note covering a new practice facility. And guess what? Alabama does have that money, from the extra home game. So Alabama puts that $2M into renovating skyboxes, or a new weight room. And when that 5 star D-lineman from Hoover takes a visit to both places and sees the shiny new facilities in Tuscaloosa and the declining ones in Auburn, guess where he's probably going to choose (I know, Tennessee, 'cause they pay him)? Auburn instead doesn't want to take that chance. So all SEC teams have to have at least 6 home games - just to keep up with the Joneses. And there are a lot of Joneses in the SEC. The competition for every last dollar is so much closer in the SEC. And that's what drives all those schools to the top. Greed begets greed. And there isn't a single school that would (or should, if they care about their fans) take a step back. The competition is not the same in the Pac-10. While it might be getting there in the Big 10/12, it isn't quite the same yet. Now, whether this is a good thing or not is another debate all together. But for now this is the reality. And that is why you should never see an SEC team schedule fewer than 6 home games. Of course, I wouldn't expect any team in a major conference to schedule fewer than 6 home games either. (more on this below)
3. Individual scheduling motivations tell a different story from a simple statistic.
One of the worst habits of a college football writer is to paint with broad strokes. As in "the SEC never plays anyone out of conference," or maybe "nobody out west plays any defense." Florida State, Miami, Oklahoma all have been out of conference games for the SEC. And USC has a great defense, and there have been very good defenses out west for years. The point is that when a writer makes an overreaching statement, he's bound to incorrectly include teams, and offering a cherry picked statistic doesn't prevent this fallacy.
With the scheduling controversy, HeismanPundit is way too broad in his statements. He might say once or twice that Tennessee has gone on the road and should get some credit,but then he follows it up with a long tirade against "the SEC". UT is a part of the SEC. If you want to say one thing honestly, you can't say the other. It requires much more effort of a writer, but in college football you pretty much have to address things team by team.
And scheduling is no different. Teams set their schedules with different restrictions, motivations and goals in mind. The SEC is no different from any other conference when it comes to that. Some teams have rivalries that limit the number of OOC games they can schedule. Georgia and Florida play a neutral site game that limits their ability to ensure they get 6 home games. Some teams have financial pressure put on them by major facilities improvements. Some teams get pressure to play close rivalries (like how the Florida legislature got involved to make UF play FSU). So before we go off criticizing the entire league, let's take a look at each team and how each has to set it's schedule and how it's done the past few years in terms of matching up with good teams on the road. FYI: I think 6 home games is minimally appropriate in an 11 game season. In a 12 game season, I think 7 one year, 6 the next is fine:
Alabama: No real restrictions on home games. Had home/home with UCLA and Oklahoma in recent years. Went on road to Hawaii for extra games during probation. Appears to take as many home games as possible, likely for added revenue to pay for the stadium renovations in progress.
Arkansas: No real restrictions on home games. Had h/h with Texas, regional h/hs with SMU and Memphis recently. Major improvements to stadium recently. Has gone for 7 home games (including the Little Rock games) frequently in 11 game seasons. One of the worst "offenders."
Auburn: No real restrictions on home games. H/hs with USC, GT, UVA, Syracuse recently. Typically has 1 very good opponent, 1 decent/mediocre opponent, and 1 terrible opponent.
Florida: Plays UGA in Jacksonville, so in odd years must have 3 home games to get to 6. Plus, has a home/home rivalry game with FSU, so in even years the one away game in a 11 game season is the Noles. The trial 12 game seasons allowed for a h/h with Miami. Pretty much impossible to schedule a h/h with anyone else and still have 6 games.
Georgia: Plays UF in Jacksonville, so in even years must have 3 home games to get to 6. Plus, has a home/home rivalry game with GT, so in odd years the one away game in a 11 game season is the Yellow Jackets. The trial 12 game seasons allowed for a h/h with Clemson, and upcoming with Colorado. Pretty much impossible to schedule a h/h with anyone else and still have 6 games.
Kentucky: Home and Home rivalry series with Indiana and Louisville, so only has room for one other OOC game each year. Wouldn't matter if they went on the road.
LSU: No real restrictions. Has gone on the road to Virginia Tech and Arizona. Usually schedules more than 6 home games. One of the worst offenders.
Mississippi: No real restrictions, but has had a h/h with Memphis (don't think it's really a rivalry though). Went on the road to Wyoming last year, but usually goes for 7 home games. Worst offender.
Mississippi State: No real restrictions. Has had h/hs with Oregon, Tulane, traveled to BYU, Houston, Memphis. Less ability to draw teams without a h/h, so goes on the road. Probably should play more home games for the money.
South Carolina: Has a h/h in state rivalry with Clemson. However, the big crowds tend to force them into scheduling home games. Went for 8 home games in '03. Rarely goes on the road other than Clemson (Virginia in '02). Deserves criticism.
Tennessee: No real restrictions. Has had h/h with Miami, Notre Dame in the last few years. Has had h/h with Memphis too (unsure if required). Has done what HP thinks they should.
Vanderbilt: No restrictions. Has had h/h with Duke, Navy, TCU, GT. Done what they should. No need to schedule more home games because they don't sell out anyway.
So there you have it. Of the 12 teams, LSU, USC, Arkansas and Ole Miss deserve whatever criticism. Alabama could do "better. " UGA, UF and UK are pretty limited in what they can do. UT and Auburn already do what HP thinks they should. MSU and Vandy don't matter really, but go on the road already. Basically, 1/3 of the league deserves the criticism that other pundits cast at the entire league. Awesome.
CONCLUSION
Basically, it boils down to this. If the criticism is that SEC teams don't play difficult and distant opposition on the road, the response is:
A) Several of the teams do play difficult or comparable teams on the road;
B) Some of the teams, because of schedule limitations, cannot play difficult or comparable teams on the road;
C) Playing distant opposition doesn't benefit a program all that much, and in some cases it is much worse than playing local;
D) There are several reasons to play home games, first of all the competition among SEC teams to have higher budgets.
I await the "USC does this" or "someone else does that" argument. Oh yeah, and apple jolly ranchers kick the balls off orange starbursts.
Tuesday, August 16, 2005
Bitch is a word you use for someone you disrespect.
You very much should take a listen to Krazee Eyez Killah. And thank you to DeeJay Swayzee for showcasing this, and thanks to Low-Bee for bringing sunshine into my life.
Direct link to song here.
Half Volleys
1) AJC's sports columnists are now free. Fish/Barrel.
2) Preseason top 10, bitches. Camden County Saturday in the Dome? Not a good sign.
3) Granny Holtz thinks UGA sucks. Apparently returning 16 starters (at a minimum) vs 11 starters is "down a little". Also "pretty good" must mean losing the two best offensive players and best D-lineman, along with 40 other scholarship athletes. USC has played us close in the past. I'm not thinking it this year. Plus, last time Spurrier came to Sanford he put the starters back in to get to 50. We don't forget that, and rest assured Mark Richt will know about that. This is the year to woodshed them. I think we take it. More to come later.
4) (third item) I think FB is the right spot for Milton. Still remember that nasty block he put on that UK blitzing LB two years ago, on a play we scored a TD on when the game was still in doubt. Plus, he wouldn't get many carries at tailback. I'm expecting a solid blocking game from him early in the season, then an AJC article about his leadership.
This column is, simply, a mess
I've never read much in terms of sportsblogs, mostly because they're so insular - unless you're a big fan of a particular team, they're usually too specific for the transient reader. But with the coming college football season, I've started reading a bit more. And that's a good thing, as I've learned a good amount. There is, however, one thing that seems universal among sportsblogs. And that is a tremendous loathing for Scoop Jackson. I've been reluctant to piss on the gas fire, since I don't really give a shit about 90% of what he writes. The subtle comparison of criticism of Dusty Baker to a lynching last week was, well, too soon to use that card. Unless he plans on using it all the damn time.
Today's column is on the Hawks. I would never assume to know more about anything basketball related than an award winning journalist for Slam or Hoop magazines. But damn if this column doesn't make me feel superior. The problem is factual errors. Before this went online, Scoop wrote, edited, rewrote it, and then his editor(s) read, edited, revised, fact checked and reedited it. And these people got paid to do these things.
Before I got to the bottom of the first page I was embarrassed for them all. Perhaps one of the main premises in the article is that the ownership structure caused the trade problems. Doesn't anyone at ESPN think they should get the ownership structure right?
The owners decided that Joe Johnson was worth $70 million and two first-round draft picks. They decided that Joe Johnson was the answer to all of their basketball problems. They decided that Joe Johnson was going to be their LeBron James.
Well, only two of them did.
Steve Belkin. He was the one owner who felt different. He felt that Joe Johnson wasn't worth all that, because in his mind (as opposed to the mind of Joe Quinn, the lawyer for the other two owners who compared Joe Johnson's arrival in Atlanta to Larry Bird's arrival in Boston), Joe Johnson wasn't all that.
When the asinineness clears, he's the one that might be right.
There are nine principal members of the LLC. One group of principals in Atlanta, another in Washington DC, and Belkin flyin' solo in Boston. All the Atlanta and DC members, the General Manager, and the President of the LLC were in favor of the trade. Belkin was the only one in the entire hierarchy of the franchise that opposed the deal. Belkin is the largest ownership interest holder in Atlanta Spirit LLC, but he still owns only 30%. The LLC Operating Agreement sets out that the Atlanta members, Washington Members and Belkin each have one vote on decisions, majority rules. For this trade, it was 2-1 in favor of doing the deal. The only reason why this was even a problem was that Belkin had the figurehead position of NBA Governor (one of the DC members is the Thrashers' governor). Belkin lost the vote, but then wanted to take his ball and go home. And as numerous article have set out, it was clear that Belkin's opposition to the deal on the merits was a complete ruse. Belkin did not want to pay the salary at all. It had nothing to do with what the Hawks gave up.
But somehow Atlanta LLC couldn't. The incompetence of the parent company of the Hawks, the NHL Thrashers, and Philips Arena, where the teams play, allowed a petty disagreement over a mid-level free agent to get out. To the media and to the public.
This is not a petty disagreement. Belkin wanted to spend 1/3rd less on salary than the other owners. Belkin wanted to spend less than half of the luxury tax cap. This was a fundamental philosophical argument over the future of the franchise. Do we want to take the NBA shared revenues, go cheap cheap cheap on the team and become the Clippers East, or do we want to invest in the club and try to win and maybe approach a wider audience. This is not a petty disagreement.
Scoop supports Belkin in this column, but bases his support on a false argument. It would be one thing to say "the Hawks overpaid for Joe Johnson". This is not the dispute between the members of Atlanta Spirit LLC. The dispute was getting Joe Johnson or not. If Scoop wants to have an academic debate over the costs, that's a fine idea for a column. But in doing so, if he had done any in depth research on the controversy, he would know that he shouldn't "take Belkin's side".
What does Joe Smith have to do with the Hawks? And what's with the Al Harrington bit? Scoop seems to imply he's wasting his talent on such a shitty team, but if he were good, wouldn't the team be better?
The rest of the article is all about how shitty the Hawks are. OK, they suck. They have a bunch of players who play the same position. Johnson isn't a traditional point guard. One of the picks they gave up might turn out to be the next Jordan or something. All decent points. Of course, he could also mention that the Hawks have swung and missed the last few years on free agents, and money unspent is money wasted. Or perhaps that the Hawks have enough picks from deadline deals the last few years that they have a good chance of still getting a top pick the next few years. I think the Hawks had to do something to get a little buzz in this city, which will support a basketball team worth watching. They might've overpaid, but nobody's going to give the Hawks a discount. The best thing about this trade controversy is that a miserly owner has been outed (and likely ousted). Anyone who likes basketball should think that's a good thing. While, sure, player salaries are way high, teams that suck from the shared revenue teat without adding anything to the league should be shunned. Belkin wanted to do that. Good riddance. Scoop Jackson was really on the wrong side of the issue. And then he wrote a factually incorrect article.
Another shitty Page2 writer. Hruby sucks. Shanoff offers a mistake a day, guaranteed. Just for the heck of it, Brian Murphy is lame. Jim Caple never met a story he couldn't turn maudlin. Skip Bayless courts controversy, then sucks the life out of his columns with his aging hipster shitty references. I like Simmons, but his Boston columns annoy me after a while. Just weak all together.
Edited (poorly) for clarity and because I wasn't satisfied with it.
USA v. T&T
We ought to get 3 points tomorrow. Do that and we can leave the Euros with their clubs for the later matches. Don't think Keller, Reyna, Beasley, Convey, Onyewu, etc don't know that. I expect a big outing from the USA. My guess is that Donovan nets at least one, T&T don't score. 3-0 USA.
Sunday, August 14, 2005
Links Updated
With College Football starting up, I added a bunch of links. It's also the first time I've linked to people with whose opinions I rarely agree (Heisman Pundit, EDSBS). Take a look and enjoy.
Thanks, ESPN, for reminding me why I hate everything
It's a conversation we've all had a million times. The conversation about how MTV no longer shows anything which can be considered "music television". It's a youth pop culture network and nothing more. When M2 started, the argument was that it would be a network where they'd actually show music all day. They basically gave up on the pretense that the original network would do that kind of thing. Then the slippery slope continued. Now, MTV2 rarely shows videos either. It's just a marathon of WildBoyz followed by an episode of Stankervision, followed by Beavis and Butthead for two hours. The argument, I suppose, is that if you want videos, watch MTV Jamz or MTV Hits (which don't really show a lot of the music I'd like to see). My point isn't that every single MTV and MTV2 show is bad (obvs, Wonder Showzen and the Real World Challenges rule). And if more people want to watch an episode of Punk'd for the 45th time instead of new videos, I can't really blame the network dudes for trying to make more money. But it isn't what I want to watch. VH-1 is even worse. Well, maybe it isn't. They do the exact same thing only with lamer shows. Probably the only thing that makes it worse is the slogan "Music First", which I don't know if they still use since I don't watch it. What sucks is the way both of these networks went from doing one thing that I liked (videos) to doing a bunch of original programming and celebrity recut bullshit (and repeating ad infinitum). And now what I liked to watch is spread out over like 8 channels and kind of hard to find.
Which brings me to ESPN. In Mexico, I watched some of their ESPN channels and I was stunned to notice something. They show sports. Like, all day long. Sportscenter is on at like 9 in the morning for an hour, and then at 6 in the evening and 11. They have Cronometro, which is a roundtable show that's on once a week. Then they have a weekly car racing show. Then the other 140 hours a week they show things like volleyball or track and field or swimming or soccer or baseball or shit, anything. It ought not be so startling - a sports network actually showing sporting events - but it is. And it is because ESPN here fills about half its hours (or more) with shows about sporting events, instead of the actual events. You have the talking head shows: PTI, Around the Horn, The Stephen A. Smith yelling hour, Rome, etc. Then there's the preview or recap shows, which usually amount to more airtime than the actual events themselves - College Gameday, NFL Countdown, NBA Shootaround, Baseball Tonight, NFL 2Night, RPM 2Night, etc. And now there's plenty of "original programming" to displace actual sports - Poker, Tilt, Poker, Stump the Sweaty Dude, Poker, The Stu Scott Boo-Yaa Hour, Poker, Hu$tle, Poker, 3, Poker, The Junction Boys, Poker, Newlywed Game with teammates (stealing programming ideas from NFL Network parody ads?), The Contender, Poker, I'll Do Anything, Poker, Playmakers, Poker, The Season, Poker, Dream Job and Poker.
Maybe the ratings are better than showing real sports. Maybe producing shit like that costs a fraction of the price as compared to getting rights to real sports. Maybe I can get sports programming on OLN, Golf Channel, Tennis Channel, the two Fox channels, CSS, etc. But this creeping VH-1-ification of ESPN is not good news. ESPN used to be the place where we could watch sports. If we wanted to watch dramas, we'd watch something else. If we wanted to watch the $100,000 pyramid, we'd watch the Game Show Network. They call themselves the "Worldwide leader in sports", not the "Worldwide leader in stuff sort of related to sports."
And the cherry on the top of the shit sundae that ESPN has become lately is the premiere tomorrow of ESPN Hollywood. Entertainment Tonight with athletes. Cribs, clothes, controversy and shit. This show is, without a doubt, the worst idea ESPN programmers have ever had. Worse than Cold Pizza. Worse than anything with Woody Paige drooling all over it. Worse than Sizemore's wigs in Hustle. Nobody wants to see this shit. If you ask any sportsfan, they'll say the worst thing about sports in modern times is the influence of greed, money, and arrogant celebrity. This show glorifies all the stuff people hate about sports, which really gets to the reason why it's on the air. It is not a show for people who like to watch sports. It is a show for people who want to watch pop culture television. I don't have a problem when E! shows the NASCAR Young Guns True Hollywood Story. I don't mind (aside from the above rant) when MTV Cribs is all NBA players. It's as if ESPN saw VH-1's "Fabulous Life of NBA Ballers" and got protectively sensitive.
There's a grand unifying theory at hand here. Bill Simmons wrote last week about how people who want to become sportswriters should think about how they want to cover the game. I thought about it for a while, and I think my viewpoint is that the games should speak for themselves. I don't like it when the personalities or externalities are bigger than the games themselves. So I don't understand why ESPN would make a show where the personalities and externalities are the focus. And it seems like for the past few years the programming on ESPN has crept toward focus on the personalities (creating their own personalities which unfortunately influence the way games are played) and externalities. And it isn't a good sign. I remember thinking a decade ago about how MTV didn't show videos as much as they used to. Now they don't show them at all. I truly hope ESPN doesn't fall into the same pattern. Show sports. Quit showing bullshit.
Added: I want to clarify that, while I don't like it, I don't think celebrity-driven pop culture bullshit shouldn't be on the air. My bone to pick is with ESPN ignoring what they used to do (and what got them legions of viewers) and instead doing things other networks already do. I don't like the trend on ESPN.
Friday, August 12, 2005
Premiership Picks
Slate wiped clean. I'll also pick the Champions' League at the group stage and the UEFA Cup once I can pronounce the team names.
Everton v. Manchester United: 1-2 Everton's return to earth begins.
Aston Villa v. Bolton Wanderers: 1-1 Neither team going anywhere.
Manchester City v. West Bromwich Albion: 4-0 I'm insane for thinking this, but WBA sucks.
Fulham v. Birmingham City: 0-1 Boredom.
West Ham United v. Blackburn Rovers: 0-0 No, wait, this is boredom. Only 95 fouls called in this.
Sunderland v. Charlton Athletic: 1-0 Irish favoritism.
Portsmouth v. Tottenham Hotspur: 0-2: Good start.
Middlesbrough v. Liverpool: 3-3 MOTD
Arsenal v. Newcastle United: 3-0 The embarrassment starts early, the firing watch starts.
Wigan Athletic v. Chelsea: 0-2 Wigan gets a bad draw to start out.
A triumphant return to posting with one that nobody is interested in
Tomorrow, the Premiership returns to action. I missed the start of the other English divisions last week, but I had planned to preview all the leagues. This year I feel like the Premiership isn't all that interesting, but I still have hope that some team that should be destined for mid-table obscurity can jump up and surprise the big 4. Probably not though. The battle for UEFA spots should be better, and the bottom should also provide some entertainment.
Keep bookmarked for laughs.
Premiership
Champions: Chelsea - an easy pick, but there's no real way to pick against them. Strongest in all parts of the field, except maybe up front. The only chance I see of others taking the title is if they get sidetracked in Europe.
Runners up: Manchester United - Going against instinct here. I figure a close call for 2nd-4th. Unsure if Van Der Sar is their answer in goal, but thinking Howard gets another chance soon.
Champions' League Slots: Arsenal & Liverpool - I actually think Liverpool might have the second best team this year, but fixture fatigue will cost them. Arsenal makes a run in Europe.
UEFA Slots: Tottenham Hotspur, Manchester City, Middlesbrough - Spurs are the surprise team of the season. Figure Villa and Bolton also close.
Relegated: Fulham, West Bromwich Albion, Wigan Athletic - Fulham sucks. Things will catch up with the Baggies. Wigan will be playing in front of exactly nobody in January. Other bad teams include West Ham, Sunderland, Pompey and surprisingly Everton takes a big tumble.
League Championship
Champions: Sheffield United - Good start so far, but I had a feeling about them anyway. It's well past time for a Sheffield team back in the Premiership.
Runners Up: Preston North End
Playoffs: Derby County, Norwich City, Wolverhampton Wanderers, Queens Park Rangers. QPR is the surprise team. Derby go up.
Relegated: Millwall, Brighton and Hove Albion, Hull City.
League One
Champions: Bradford City
Runners Up: Oldham Athletic
Playoffs: Nottingham Forest, Tranmere Rovers, Brentford, Port Vale
Relegated: Rotherham, Yeovil, Colchester, Milton Keynes Dons
League Two
Champions: Leyton Orient
Runners Up: Oxford United
Third: Darlington
Playoffs: Notts County, Wycombe Wanderers, Macclesfield Town
Relegated: Mansfield, Rushden & Diamonds
Monday, August 08, 2005
Cry Havoc!
Now that I'm married, I plan on filling this space with third generation Tim Allen comedy routines and reviews of According to Jim. In 9 days of marriage, I've confirmed (to myself) the fact that Men are from Mars and women are from Crazyland. And they don't know how to use the remote control or order at a drive through! And have you seen the way they leave haircare products in the bathroom!
Anyway, I've got big plans for the next month 'round here. Fewer movie reviews, more sports talk. Premiership starts Saturday. College football right around the corner. Plus, I'm totally inspired by Mexican ESPN's Cronometro, which is like the awesomest bastard son of PTI and The Sports Reporters.
I promise, no, I solemnly VOW that I will have more posts up this month than the number of times the word "like" is said on the average episode of Laguna Beach.
Yeah, Laguna Beach... did I have a conversation about those broads at the wedding? Hazy...
This is just a tease. The full wrath of my ringed typing fingers shall be felt. I mean, I missed Peter Gammons' Hall of Fame induction. And he talked about Mike Barnicle in it. It's almost as if he was daring me. Like I won't get into some gangsta shit. Bitch, your transitions lenses looked like you had my Mexican runs smeared all over your eyes. I got like two and a half months boiled up inside me.
Shit will be blowing up.
Monday, July 25, 2005
You got one chance. One Shot. Palms are sweaty, knees weak, arms are heavy
Time for a battle rap between The Masta Cylindaz vs. The Lords of the Rhymes.
Sclip FOLDED!
via SG Intern via Wired.
Cousin Eddie's Daughter Hruby Sue
Another bullshit article from ESPN.com Page 2's resident mouthbreather, Patrick Hruby. Well, I guess there are lots of mouthbreathers on salary there who contributed to the steaming pile that is this. The subject: stupid sports rules.
I didn't get very far into this, because RULE #1 is the most hackneyed, ignorant, moronic drivel ever written on ESPN.com, and reprinted annually just in time for the MLS All Star Game.
They write:
Offsides in Soccer: Soccer has never caught on in the United States. Why is that? Could it be the almost complete lack of, um... scoring? Forget offsides; everything short of pantsing the defender should be allowed on the way to the net.
In fact, pantsing should be allowed, too.
This annoys me to no end. Why stop at the offside rule? Why not get rid of the keeper? That'd increase scoring. And then let strikers use their hands. And run with the ball. And throw the ball into the net. Why not?
Obviously whoever wrote this part has no interest in soccer but wants to act like he does to other people who have no interest in soccer. This is so national media. Look. Some people like soccer. Some don't. It's growing fast as shit as is. There's no need to package the sport into something so it's more palatable to Americans. This is the one sport where what the American marketplace wants doesn't mean a damn thing.
Let me use a few comparisons to show how idiotic the idea is, on the merits.
People love scoring. In baseball, I'd get so mad when Smoltz would throw a 2 hit shutout against Clemens and the Braves would win 1-0. Boring as hell. We need more offense. It's time to lower the mound, move in the walls, add the DH to both leagues, remove one of the defensive fielders, give 4 strikes for an out, and make curveballs illegal.
Everytime I watch the NBA All Star Game, and I see players get 5 steps between dribbles and 4 of 5 guys don't even cross halfcourt to play defense, I think... man, every game should look like this. Defensive stops are so overrated, and why encourage set offensive plays by giving defensive flexibility. Instead, they should encourage 95 missed alley-oops each game.
And don't get me started on the NFL. A Steelers-Ravens 14-10 struggle with 3 goal line stands puts me in a coma. What the NFL needs is to be more like the Arena league. Scores under 70 are an embarrassment. The NFL therefore needs to make cornerbacks nonexistent. 11 on 9.
Soccer is soccer. If you don't like it, watch something else. Sure, a 0-0 draw can be a snooze fest. But it can also be incredibly exciting. Just depends on the action in the game. Scoring alone doesn't make a game interesting. Ask June Jones.
Soccer needs to develop in the US in the form that has made it the most popular game in the world. I'm sick of idiot sportswriters who don't know shit from shinola about soccer telling the readers what they're supposed to think of the game. Instead of trying to fit the round ball into a square hole, by imposing American style playoffs, free agency and draft structures, etc., soccer in America should embrace the things that make it so great in the rest of the world. MLS isn't ready yet, but someday there should be relegation. Individual clubs should use cash transfers. And the championship and cups should be totally separate, including no postseason playoffs. Make soccer different, that's how it'll make it's mark here. Not by making it the same as everything else.
Sunday, July 24, 2005
Tour de France
Greatness sometimes demands recognition. Lance Armstrong is an iconic figure, and I know that he'll be one of the iconic figures of our lifetimes. Truly fantastic performances. The highlight from 2001 (I think it was a climb to Alpe d'Huez) where Lance feigns exhaustion on an early climb, then stares at Jan Ullrich before kicking into a gear nobody else in the field has... just amazing. The stare back is akin to Ali's stare (the greatest sports photo of all time).
Next year, watch Alexandr Vinokurov kick a whole lot of ass if he has the right team around him. Guy's got huge balls in the way he finished the tour this year (though I think the tour organizers screwed Levi Leipheimer today).
update: I meant to write this yesterday... 5 of the top 20 riders are Americans. More top 20 finishes than any other nation. And Americans are some of the top team riders. This is about 8 years after Lance really started making news. That's where he really makes a difference. Sure, there were many before, but nobody put cycling on the map like Lance. He's created a wave. It's a fine time for him to retire, because his team is in good shape, the sport in his country is in great shape.
Flick the button
1. Hoop Dreams: I think I was scared off before by the 3 hour run time. Big mistake. One of the best films of the 1990s, and maybe all time. I can't think of another film that says so much about race, class, urban and suburban life, education, money, etc. When done right, sport can often provide the best canvas to discuss the realities sport is a diversion from. This should be required viewing for every high school student. Excellently made, incredibly fast paced. Just great. And the lady stayed awake throughout, which is amazing for a 3 hour movie after a large meal. Cadillac, and a really nice one.
2. The Bourne Supremacy: Second viewing, so this might not be fair, compared to other reviews. But I think my first time seeing it I was wrong about it. This is better than I originally thought. An action movie that has enough complexity to keep me interested, and the chase scenes are incredibly well done. I rewatched the first Bourne movie a while ago, and while it's still really good, I think this one might actually be a little better, mostly because it doesn't have to set up everything and it can get right to the plot. Action movies should be more like this. And while I'm at it, rent Bloody Sunday. One of the better films of the aughts, seriously. Sharp steak knife, and I'm close to calling it a cadillac.
3. Blade Runner: I need another viewing. Was kind of scatterbrained when I watched it. But I was really impressed by the world created. Definitely more visionary than Minority Report, which I guess is a natural comparable, but also not as exciting upon first view. I'll watch it again and then rate.
Two more weeks and then I'll post regularly
Meantime, I updated the links on the right. I'll probably update the football links weekly as the season grows closer.
Wedding next weekend, honeymoon the next week. Not a great excuse, but an excuse nonetheless.
Monday, July 18, 2005
Flick the button
Very productive weekend...
1. Naked - I'm interested enough to know that I need to watch this again before I make any real judgments about it. But I'm not sold on it yet, either. Often distracted by the voice of Knox Harrington, the video artist. And yet I wished I could slow him down to follow along better. Not fired, but not ready to rate.
2. The Lavender Hill Mob - I enjoy the Ealing films. This is a clever heist film that holds up pretty well. Not as captivating as Kind Hearts and Coronets, but I definitely liked it. Steak Knives.
3. Wedding Crashers - OK, put away the hating. It's actually pretty funny. I have a feeling it's a funnier script though. Director doesn't know comedy cadence. I couldn't hear the dialogue for six or seven scenes because of laughter in the crowd. Some of Vaughn's long speeches need pauses for the crowd to catch up. Also worth another viewing. Some excellent lines in this. But still could've been better. Sharp steak knife, compared to most POS comedies.
4. Hitch - Did someone say POS comedy? Two things of interest. A) I remember seeing the preview for this and it had the scene with Michael Rappoport. And that's the only scene he's in. Did they hire him just for the preview? Did he get less $$$? B) Not enough was made about how utterly disgusting using a Jet Ski in the Hudson River is. Moronic. Fired.
5. National Treasure - And now a piece of shit action movie. Without much action though. I guess I'm not the targeted demographic since I'm neither an 11 year old or his mother. Three things of interest. A) Can't someone help Jon Voight and Christoper Plummer out with their respective mortgages? B) How did Steve Zahn lose Justin Bartha's role? Fire the agent. C) Not enough is made about how utterly disgusting jumping off an aircraft carrier into the Hudson River is. Someone needs to update Robo-scripter 2010 because he's shitting out the same turds. Fired.
6. The Day After Tomorrow - OK, so perhaps you've figured out that I have a soft spot for shitty, big budget movies. The thing is, I have this weird idea that someone in Hollywood has to have seen something worthwhile in a movie like this to spend the money to bankroll it. Sure, 90% of the time I'm disappointed, even with low expectations, but I still feel like it's worth the risk. And that take doesn't really say much about this movie. Sure, it sucked. But it was more watchable than the last two. And it made me think Dick Cheney is a bastard. Fired, but not quite as terrible as it probably should've been.
The Gods, they speak to us.
"Except where I am convinced that an informer does not expect to benefit directly or indirectly by his accusations, but brings them from a sense of true patriotism and public decency, I not only discount their importance as evidence but I put a black mark against that informer's name and never afterwards employ him in any position of trust..."
Letter from Augustus to Livia
I, Claudius by Robert Graves, pg. 324
Things I'm glad I heard
Braves vs. Giants, Bottom 5th. Fog rolling in on the Bay. Loud audible ship foghorns.
Joe Simpson: "Normally I only hear that when I do games with Skip."
Tuesday, July 12, 2005
Sports and shit
1. Had a bunch of stuff to write about Wimbledon. Mostly because I followed my Russian cousin, Vera Douchevina. Roger Federer is good. I don't like the way the American press tends to view the womens' game as more interesting than the mens'. It's kind of like the way American soccer is covered. I've got nothing against the women, but I think the mens' game is a better product. I'm bored to death with the Williams sisters and the screaming with every shot gets on my last nerve. Mens' tennis has more power, and more cheek too. It's one of the few sports that I get the feeling doesn't take itself way too seriously. My favorite country club sport.
2. Continuing the tour of marginal sporting events that the lame ass summer offers us, Le Tour de France has begun (and almost over, for the most part), and while I am not anything close to an expert on cycling, I really enjoy following the tour. Mostly for geographical purposes, I think. I very much enjoy the coverage on OLN too. Phil Liggett has the perfect voice for the sport and actually makes the event very exciting, especially if you don't know what's really going on.
3. Announced World Baseball Classic - awesome, but expect 9 months of uncertainty and bitching from MLB players and owners. Sheffield is only the beginning.
4. Felipe Lopez wears a Vote For Pedro shirt under his jersey, according to Joe Buck.
5. This should probably be its own post, but Stewart Mandel is probably the biggest bitch of all college football writers. I'm not one to bitch about supposed bias, and I won't here. My beef with him is the way he cannot take any criticism at all. Sure, he might get 5000 emails a week from mouthbreathing message board fans who use all caps, but when he's wrong he should admit it. This question and response in this week's mailbag displays his douchitude:
C'mon now! How can you leave the University of Florida off your list of teams that could win the national title in hoops and football in the same year? With Urban Meyer calling the shots in the Swamp and Billy Donovan going deep in the tourney numerous times, including the championship game in '00 (not to mention the Andrew DeClerq-led Final Four appearance back in '94). --Tim Alessi, Beaver Falls, Pa.
You're right, I blew that one. The Gators are poised for a title run in hoops this year with Anthony Roberson ... oh wait, he left? ... well, Matt Walsh ... what, he bolted too? ... well, at least they have David Lee. ... no. He graduated? Oh right, that's why I left them off. Also, a little correction to Tim's revisionist history about Donovan's "numerous" deep tourney runs -- Florida hasn't made it out of the NCAA second round since the '00 title-game run, and Lon Krueger was the coach in '94.
Speaking of corrections, I apologize profusely to you, the readers, for not fact-checking a question submitted last week by Hunter Roberts of Richmond, Va. In defending Tennessee coach Phillip Fulmer, he made an allusion (which, I confess, I read right past) to him leading a program with "the most bowl appearances of all time." The Vols are second to Alabama in that department, as numerous Crimson Tide fans wrote in to point out, an accomplishment that's all the more impressive when you consider how often 'Bama has been banned from the postseason.
Shall we go through this piece by piece... First off, if you go back to Mandel's list the previous week of schools that could win titles in hoops and football, he doesn't stipulate that he's talking about next year alone. And he's got Michigan on his list, which has sucked a di-ock at basketball for the last decade. Mandel's list missed Florida, and more egregiously Maryland, who's had 10 win seasons and won a hoops title recently. Later in this week's mailbag he laughs off Michigan State, which is also a better pick than Michigan (or Ohio State if you ask me). So to take a look at the Gator fan's letter, Mandel disputes the argument by saying he was only talking about next year, which he wasn't, and even then Florida will probably be better than some of the teams he lists (and I'm the last person on earth to defend Florida). Then Mandel feels like he has to correct the writer. Defensive? Par for the course. See the next part.
Mandel corrects his own error on Tennessee's bowl appearances (a really stupid one for a college football writer, who has books and books of records and facts and who could easily fact check the shit he writes), but then slips in a shot at Alabama. Can't just admit a mistake and move on, gotta mock the people who pointed out the mistake. Oh, and remember that he gets paid to write his opinions and should be relied on to have some factual basis behind it. The people who write into these mailbags don't get paid a thing. Mandel is, if nothing else, a craven pussy. I will keep track of his defensiveness the rest of the year.
Flick the button
Scarface: The Howard Hawks version. Kind of dated, incredibly preachy. "WHAT IS THE GOVERNMENT GOING TO DO ABOUT IT? WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?" Ann Dvorak as Camonte's sister is the only thing about it I thought memorable. Again, a film that's been ripped off a bunch, and since I've seen the ripoffs so much, the original seems passe. Still, didn't enjoy it all that much. Fired.
Troy: I've got the same exact view of this as the General. It's written terribly, directed awfully, acted pretty poorly. But I couldn't help but like it. Probably just the Latin background nerdiness. Wouldn't recommend to others, but to me a steak knife.
Veronica Guerin: Damn you Cate Blanchett! A fan of her since way back when. And she's the only reason I watched this piece of shit. It should've been a TV movie. And it probably would've been better. Schumacher shouldn't be able to direct movies. And unforgivable is the obnoxious use of the Man U kit. The worst score and soundtrack of a movie I can remember. I still like Cate, but if she never has that same haircut, it'd be too soon. Fired as fuck.
Maybe I'll watch some decent movies next week. Ehh.
Where have I been?
Sorry to leave that half baked post on Hruby up so long. I still think his article was a piece of shit, but I could've done a better job of ripping it.
What have I been doing? A mix of wedding planning, lots of work and not much sleep.
I went to NYC last week on business. Stayed at the W hotel on Times Square. Definitely not cool enough to stay there. I was pretty much exhausted when I finally checked in (hour 19 of my day), and I wouldn't bet my life on it, but the young girl riding the elevator with me looked a whole lot like Ashlee Simpson, but with blond hair. Then the Lady told me that she's a blonde now. Es posible. Everyone who worked there had either a French or Australian accent. I enjoy Times Square because I like to make eye contact and say things like "Excuse me" to people who don't expect it and watch their reactions.
I've been watching a lot of Reno 911! lately which makes me feel like a big idiot for not watching it religiously before the last month or so. Junior freaking kills me. And I'm in lust for Johnson's fupa.
Fuck hurricanes. If Hurricane Harvey ruins my honeymoon, the middle name is officially changing. And I think it's really terrible about the guy on Kathryn Avenue. That street is right around the corner from me.
Sports randomness and movies to come...
Tuesday, July 05, 2005
Indulge me in a little espn.com bashing.
This article by Patrick Hruby on ESPN.com bothered me. Mostly because it's riddled with inaccuracies and biases that'd get him laughed at on a shitty Free Republic thread.
Let's first address who Hruby is. I liked some of his NFL columns, but I was always a little suspect by the "Hruby is a sports columnist for the Washington Times". I guess everybody's gotta get paid, but a rag that spews reactionary, racist lies for a mad cultist and dictator armer ain't the place I'd go looking for good writers to poach. I know Hunter S. Thompson used to write some political stuff that'd annoy right-leaning readers, but I also think he usually had his facts right too. And sure, this column is kind of tongue in cheek, but if you make jokes about a cow's dick, you oughta call it a bull.
Substance...
I cannot believe the editor allowed the first sentence in.
George Soros is a pot-endorsing, Bush-bashing billionaire.
Err... He's also an incredibly successful businessman, generous philanthropist, author, rags to riches story, etc. But let's focus on what Hruby says... Soros has contributed to legalization campaigns, but he's no Timothy Leary. The things I've read by him about weed talk almost exclusively in terms of the failure of the drug wars and the successes of weed as a medicine, which I will personally vouch for. I've seen Lyndon Larouche groups criticize Soros' stance on weed, but I can't get very far into it because of the anti-semitism and ignorance. As for Bush bashing, it's no secret that Soros disagrees with just about everything Bush has done. He wrote and paid for publicationof a full page ad against re-electing Bush. But if you actually read what he says, you see specific policy criticisms (which I'm not saying I agree with) and not personal attacks. This is just one example of bad argument making. Take a man's positions and characterize them as harshly as possible (or take the side of lunatics). Awesome job so far. But it gets worse.
Republicans say a Soros-owned team would send the wrong message, alienate Capitol Hill and generally presage the end of days, even more than gay marriage.
Democrats counter that politics and baseball don't mix, and that lawmakers should stick to more important matters. Like blocking presidential appointments.
Here's the root of the problem with the writer. Hruby requires the reader to have knowledge of and agree with ridiculous wingnut propaganda to figure out what he's writing. "Send the wrong message" only makes sense if all you know about Soros is drug legalization. Is $400,000,000 worth of philanthropic donations annually "sending the wrong message"? And how would a part owner of a baseball team "alienate" Capitol Hill? Of course the sarcastic "blocking presidential appointments" deserves its own paragraph but my head keeps spinning thinking about what an ignorant statement it is. Blocking incompetent and corrupt appointments is kind of important (whether it's Democrats or Republicans doing it). Now, repeating groupthink might be fine if you're some D-list blogger who has like 4 readers. But I don't think it's OK for a paid writer for one of the biggest websites in the world.
On the plus side, no one has invoked the Nazis, Hitler or the Holocaust. Not yet, at least.
Not so fast, Gonzalez. And at that, doesn't the quote from Rep. Davis smack of anti-semitism too? "Not the sort of fellow" we need in Washington? Especially when the former-Bush partner, Republican donor, rival bidder for the Nationals is the guy Nixon went to to eradicate Jews from the FBI...
Then Hruby matches up two thinly veiled threats at MLB and Soros by Republicans against a Democrat saying that what the Republicans are saying is ridiculous, and Hruby calls it "partisan feces-throwing." Head throbbing. OK, let's use a metaphor. Let's say Democrats proposed, building a bridge to the moon built with the bones of Mexicans executed trying to sneak into our borders. If Republicans opposed this because they'd prefer Chinese immigrants and refused to pass the bill, it might arguably be partisan sniping. But if the Republicans in the metaphor responded with "We shouldn't do that because it's absolutely ridiculous, wrongheaded and illegal," it's not partisan feces throwing. It's called intelligent governing. This is just another example of writers feeling like they have to say "Some say this, while others say that..." when it'd probably take fewer words to say "one group are acting like eight year olds in a sandbox, while others are calling them on it."
And from there on, it descends into terrible jokes, mixed metaphors and struggling sarcasm.
Namely, what's the point of being in charge if you can't throw your weight around? Or stick your schnoz where it doesn't belong?
Richard Nixon once drew up a play for Miami coach Don Shula to use in the Super Bowl. Ralph Nader publicly called on the NBA to review the officiating in a Lakers-Kings playoff game.
Just last week, a House committee approved separate bills to regulate boxing, steroid testing and Maria Sharapova's grunting. One of those is made up. Still, the fact remains that our duly-elected representatives meddle in athletics all the time.
Hey, Congress cleared up the steroid problem. Why not the Nationals' ownership bidding?And I, for one, welcome our political sports overlords.
So is it good to abuse power or not? I don't really see anything wrong with Nixon's play. I'd say Nader's complaint might be the only thing in the last 10 years I've agreed with Nader on. Government has been regulating boxing for centuries. And I think the steroids thing might be the only thing Bush has mentioned in the state of the union that the majority of the American people still agree with him on.
Hruby's paragraph long jokes on No Child Left Behind and NAFTA make no sense, in political or sports terms. And his CIA/Vlad Putin bit could've added Putin's KGB background (it's only been in just about every article about the purloined ring). Jay Leno would refuse to say the Freedom Fries and Oprah bit. Seriously. And the Tom Cruise thing has been written by every 4th grader with internet access.
Hruby links to the Pig Book, which is fine, I guess. I sort of wish he'd have said which party controls the budget drafting, debate, committee decisions, conference reconciliation, and approval power. But then again, if Hruby had written it, he'd probably have to clean the shitters at several mass weddings to get back in good graces.
But here's the thing that annoys me the most. Hruby follows the mythmaking and calls Ronald Reagan a "tax-slashing" president. Reagan did cut taxes in his first year in office, 1981. It was such a spectacular budgetary failure that he was forced to raise taxes immediately in response in 1982. He rolled back corporate taxes and income taxes. As a percentage of GDP, Reagan's '82 increase was larger than crazy tax and spend Clinton's 1993 tax increase. Then Hruby says how naming the Washington Airport after Reagan "ought to be enough". I've said this before to many people. Name bridges, theatres, schools, anything after Reagan. But the one thing that they should not name after Reagan is an airport. He tore up too many families when he fired the air traffic controllers.
But back to Hruby's awful writing...
Should a new era of federal sport oversight come to pass, critics surely will lambaste it as a dangerous step toward totalitarian government. I say au contraire. Bush is a former baseball owner. Representative Tom Osborne (R-NE) coached Nebraska football. In recent years, Congress has passed resolutions honoring John Stockton, Roger Clemens and the San Jose Earthquakes, as well as one authorizing the use of force against Iraq. Open your eyes: the sports-politics complex already exists. We are through the looking glass.
I guess when someone does something before they go into politics, it's the same as intrusive federal regulation of that something. I'm sure he had to think "I can't be this stupid" while he wrote this paragraph. And resolutions honoring people is also totalitarian. I'm surprised he didn't compare invitations for photo ops at the White House to Gitmo.
We are through the looking glass. Absolute idiots get paid to write for a living.
And as an antiseptic for the "it was satire" argument, yeah, but satire is supposed to have a point, and y'know, be funny. This article sucked bad. The editors never should've let this go on Page 2. And Patrick Hruby has proven himself a douche too.
For an actually intelligent take on the Soros/Nationals thing, see Sally Jenkins' article in the Washington Post. I agree with just about all of it. Especially the mocking of Tom Davis' petulance.
And now I'll go back to writing about movies and commercials and all kinds of crazy shit.
Flick the Button
Meet the Fockers: Quickly, this wasn't very good. DeNiro was entertaining in the original because of the natural, universal fear of a parent not liking a beau. In this, though, he's just a dick, and that's not that funny. Plays to the middle most of the time, which is lame. Teri Polo's bangs annoyed me throughout. Yer Fired.
Monday, June 27, 2005
NBA Draft tomorrow
First, go look at this. Drew Gooden rules.
Here's what I think will happen: Bogut to Bucks, Marvin to Hawks, blah blah blah. Don't really care for a while after that. Hawks blow their second pick and I guaranfuckingtee you that there will be more than 2 future All-Stars taken in the second round. Too many young players in the pool who have potential.
Here's what I would do were I the smartest guy on earth, Billy Knight: Draft Marvin, trade him for the best offer you can get that offers the chance at a top PG and a big man. If that means Charlotte (if D. Williams or Paul drop to 5, especially), great. If it means taking Channing Frye (who I think might be a better pick than Bogut for teams looking for a big man), great. I also like Joey Graham.
Ideal scenario for Hawks: Paul with 5, Graham or Hakim Warrick with the 13, Randolph Morris with the early second rounder, Louis Williams with the late second rounder.
Likely scenario for Hawks: Marvin Williams with 2, that midget PG from Washington (who I think sucks) with the early second rounder, some terrible European who will never sign with the late second rounder.
Awesome.
Simple Braves Post
Since I stopped posting, the Braves are 8-2 and Andruw has been kicking ass. So I don't want to ruin everything, but I had to say something.
Saturday, after Reitsma blew the lead, Andruw jacked one to win the game. Naturally, the dugout emptied to celebrate and welcome Jones at the plate. First dude out of the dugout, jumping around like a nine year old on a pogo stick? Tim Hudson. Dude. Get healthy. Ain't like we haven't been lucky as hell to eke by these last couple weeks.
Apparently Hudson had a good day throwing today. But, man. I was kind of pissed to see him running out like that.
Conspiracy theorists - how many days has he been out? 15?
Flick the button
Batman Begins: I tried to avoid other reviews of this because I actually wanted to see it, so I might duplicate other's opinions. I really liked it. Very surprised how they were able to get so many impressive actors to take bit or supporting roles. As with every comic movie, what I like to watch for is the way they've created a world within the framework of what is already known - using creativity to turn around what I already expected. Everything about this worked for me. It was realistic and fantastic. Clever, but not by too much. Well acted, and Bale made himself a star. One thing I thought worth mentioning was how the film invokes 9/11 (isolated island, fear tears people apart), but I didn't feel it hit me over the head with sentimentality or pull heartstrings. I think it was better than the other Batmans, and I'm having trouble thinking of a better movie of this kind (I really liked the first Spiderman, but this tops it). Cadillac.
Back?
Time to return to bringing my Levi Garrett fueled acidity back to the internet.
Why gone? Framed by Willie Green, who took over the coke game. Luckily I got Queen Bee on my side to convince the Warden in her own special way.
But now back to business, which is fucking up motherfuckers, naturally.
Thursday, June 16, 2005
An off season soccer post
Lee Bowyer is a freaking idiot. To the uninducted, he's a decent midfielder for Newcastle United, but he tends to get into a little trouble. There was a little bit of a racially motivated attack on a student back in 1998 when he played for Leeds. He also refused to accept the punishment he was given for the same incident. Then he cleated a player for Malaga in the head in a Uefa Cup tie, which earned him a 6 match European ban (that was extended because Newcastle is run by morons apparently). Most recently, with Newcastle having slim chances for a European slot, Bowyer and teammate Kieron Dyer get into a fight with each other (check the picture) during a game. Both sent off, crazy publicity.
So Newcastle's finally had enough of him, and they're letting him go for quite a bit less than he's probably worth. Birmingham City are willing to take him on to improve their mediocre lineup.
BUT...
The fans don't like the idea (even though they know he'd make the team better). The team president actually pleads with the fans to accept Bowyer with open arms, so he'll want to come on the cheap. The fans don't budge, talking about things like, oh, dignity and integrity. The team, not so much. The club president then says it's the fans who are being irrational. [In fairness, it was a small group of fans who protested originally, but I think they're dead right.]
Finally, it's Bowyer who says he probably won't come to Birmingham City. Because it is right and just that he should be the one to decide. And it'd be, like, gay and stuff to say something like, "I understand what the supporters are worried about, since I've made so many bad decisions, but I've learned from my mistakes and I can't wait to prove to these fans that I've changed and I can't wait to improve this club."
Any team that spends a dime on him deserves what they get. A lunatic that ruins chemistry.
Even Ron Artest isn't a comparable athlete. Wrap up Spree, Artest, and Jose Guillen together, and maybe you're close.
Doctor, Wyatt hurt when I pee?
The Wyatt Sexton story is hilarious to me. But how dumb does FSU think we all are? Sexton goes to a Dave Matthews concert (OK, maybe he does have mental problems) and then goes apeshit on some cops, but drugs aren't the problem... Right.
The question then is...
Is it that he's white, or is it that he's a coach's son? "It" of course is that the story is "His health is the more important thing..." rather than "FSU athletes out of control".
I'm going with coach's son for now, but I reserve the right to add whiteness later.
For Cocaine Bref
Over the last couple o' days I've heard Sam Prekop several times on XM. Sounds pretty good. Wish I'd seen him live, where I'm sure he's even better. Also, one of his songs was followed by Masters of the Hemisphere (Local Gov't or something like that?).
Channel was XMU. Do bands get paid for song plays on XM?
What, meme worry?
I've answered these things before, but I've never been tagged before. Weird. Kinda feel like an unwashed new ex-virgin. In any event, thanks Hillary. Although I think there are like two people who read this, and you're one... so I'm not sure who gets this next...
Here we go:
Total books I own:
Including text books and law bullshit, probably around 175 or so. I've left behind a bunch in different moves, so it was probably around 400-500
Five Books that had a big influence on me:
1. Don Quixote by Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra - No book punctures the heart of the dreamer, the rueful man, the lover, the man as much. And it is the funniest book ever written. The only thousand page book I could read over and over again.
2. The Simon and Schuster Young Readers' Atlas - Memorized the fuck out of this back in the day. This and the world map shower curtain form the basis of like half the shit I remember from ages 8-14. I've gotten drunk for free (trivia, not "Buy me a drink because I know the capital of Belize") many a time thanks to this book, which is good enough to make the list.
3. Sartor Resartus, or The Tailor Retailored by Thomas Carlyle - Personal choice here. The furthest I'll go is to say no book has changed my point of view of the world more than this.
4. Tie: The Dog Star by Donald Windham and Brighton Rock by Graham Greene - Two books of angst-ridden youth. I probably like the writing in The Dog Star better, it's set in ATL, and the author is a Georgian. Brighton Rock it so tight, though. And for a while I've thought about writing a screenplay based on it, but set at Coney Island, with Hot 97 as the radio station that does the promotions, and DMX in the role of Pinky. Both these books should be required reading for 18 year old boys/men.
5. Tie: The Great Brain by John D. Fitzgerald and A Harvard Education in a Book by the Editors of the Harvard Lampoon - Sense of humor means something, right? The Great Brain series gave me the scheming, the Harvard book gave me the snark.
I'd like to mention something newer that would've made the list had I more room (and yes, I know I cheated) - Read We Wish To Inform You That Tomorrow We Will Be Killed With Our Families: Stories From Rwanda by Phillip Gourevitch. An important, harrowing and oddly uplifting read.
Last Book I Bought:
It was Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close by Jonathan Safran Foer, but it was a gift for mi madre. For myself I think it was Bobby Fischer Goes To War: How The Soviets Lost the Most Extraordinary Chess Match of all Time, and it was a while ago when I bought it (I seem to buy enough for a stack, and then work my way through them). So long I can't really remember why I got it. But now that I think about it, I kind of want to read it.
Last Book I Read for the First Time:
I'll probably finish See No Evil by Robert Baer tonight, but technically it's Me Talk Pretty One Day by David Sedaris. Hit and miss funny. The chapter on his brother "The Rooster" made me shit my pants though.
Five Bloggers to tag: Heh. Nobody reads this drivel, especially when I only post once a fortnight.
Commenters, both, are free to post something.
Sunday, June 12, 2005
No excuses and no exceptions
This summer the Wrangler is interning with the Attorney General's office in Guyana. Just before he left he got a new car (as the result of a near death experience). His car came with 3 months of XM radio, which I have been able to enjoy. XM is pretty much awesome. I haven't been able to check out every station, because I get hooked on one and leave it for a while. UPop is probably the station I listen to most, but I also spend a lot of time on "Fred" the 80's alternative station.
But the main reason why XM rules: Friday morning, on the way to work.
In the Closet, volumes 1 through 5. In succession. No better way to start the day.
Much thanks to you, Mr. Wrangler.
Sports blow this time of year (and even worse when the Braves eat a dick)
Aside from all the bad news that just seems to pile up about Georgia Football (nothing new but that doesn't stop the AJC from devoting plenty of space to supposed problems), I can't find much to write about.
Well, Thursday the US Open starts. I'm no golf fan, but I appreciate the democratic way the Open determines the field. And this year congratulations to Franklin Langham and Ryuji Imada, former Bulldog golfers, who have qualified.
Imada was a springtime Red and Black fixture when I was in college, so it's good to see he's having some success. However, how crazy is the money structure in pro golf where Imada (or is it Ryuji?) has made $333,598 this year so far, but he's only 108th on the money list? That's an asston of money for someone who can't even be assured of keeping his tour card for next year. Actually, now that I think about it, that's pretty close to the league minimum for baseball and football. So maybe that isn't all that much. But also, I'd guess he needs to keep winning to stay on tour. Is money in pro golf bigger than the NFL or MLB? I never would've guessed so. Maybe I'm an idiot.
So this weekend look for old white dudes bitching about the rough and slick greens, in between cholestoral pill and mutual fund commercials.
Random or is it...
1. Blaine Boyer, member of the Wrangler's graduating class, gets the call up to the Braves. He becomes I believe the second Walton Raider to make the big leagues (Mark Pisciotta had a cup of coffee with the Cubs a while back). Bully for Blaine. First pro athlete who has been in my parents' house.
2. Speaking of how awesome Walton is, I saw an episode of Room Raiders the other morning. Douchebag gelhead goes through bedrooms, blah blah blah, vibrators, panties, dusty cabinets, etc. Anyway, the girl he picks (to win? a date with him?) is named Lauren and has a huge Walton Raider megaphone. Hell yes. Nobody got shit on fine ass Raider fillies. I pretty sure someone in my family knows this girl. Short brown hair. Neighborhood looked like Waterford Green. Not the Lauren we know well.
3. In fact, the MTV family of networks pretty much was LD central yesterday morning. First, WHS victory on Room Raiders. Then, I flipped to one of the other MTV channels (Hits or Jams, or something that actually shows videos) and four videos in a row have something in common with my daily life. First was Ciara's "Oh", which shows my office building in the background. Next, Chingy's "One Call Away", which also shows the office building. Then Fat Joe (featuring Nelly) brought "Get it Poppin'" which has him driving along the connector. ATL, bitches. And finally, (I think on Jamz, if I was watching the other channel) Youngbloodz "Damn!" which was filmed partly in the parking lot of Abdullah the Butcher's House of Ribs and Chinese Food (apparently they have excellent fried rice and rib tips), but also has a segment filmed in Decatur. Hard core as an eyesore, motherfucks.
4. Today's AJC (printed in the opinion section, can't find it online) also has a story about how Georgia has become crazy central. The banishment movement is catching on! Join the fun!
Flick the Button
1. William Shakespeare's Romeo + Juliet: Yet another movie I thought I saw long ago, but now I think I started watching, got a headache from the editing and camera jiggling and turned it off. Stylistically bold, but also could use a whole lot of refinement. Some, no, probably most, of the actors and actresses are just a little bit short of having the credibility to pull off the respective roles. If this were a much bigger hit, I fear that there would've been a dozen lookalikes - 11 of which would suck royally, but one which would probably be incredible. Bonus points because Benvolio played the dude with the hilariously terrible wig in Hu$tle. Fired.
2. The Ladykillers: Original, Ealing Studios version. I haven't seen the Coen Bros. version. Here's the thing with this movie: while I thought it was funny, the old lady annoyed me so much that I was really rooting for them to murder her. Guinness is unrecognizable, and hilarious. The heist seems just too simple too. Of course, I like heist movies - and I don't know whether this really is one. Might be just because it wasn't what I was expecting, but fired.
3: Kind Hearts and Coronets: Fantastic. Funny, well acted, well staged, ingeniously written. One of the best comedies before 1975, but it's not madcap (and probably why I like it more than most early comedies). Clever, but doesn't browbeat you with it's cleverness. A gentlemanly comedy. Cadillac.
4: The Magnificent Seven: Not as good as Samurai, but tough and manly and cool and clever. I wasn't drawn in as much as some of the other westerns, but it's still really good. Even with all the badass machismo, Coburn stands out. Throughout the movie I was trying to place the actor who plays Lee. Of course, that'd be Pootie Tang. My brain works in mysterious ways. Steak knives.
5: Duck Soup: I'm not much of a fan of Marx Brothers films and I have trouble saying why. I think they age poorly, and maybe because so many comics have ripped them off, the original jokes seem stale. And I know that isn't a good reason, but it's my experience. All that said, this is much better than the others I've seen. It's shorter for one thing, and doesn't rely on annoyance humor as much. Plus, Groucho doesn't really have to play a romantic character, which he can't pull off. It's funny. Made me laugh a lot. Cadillac.
Monday, June 06, 2005
Flick the Button
1. Emma: Not bad, but not as good as Clueless (seriously gay that I just wrote that). Paltrow is better here than in, well anything else I've seen her in (not saying too much...). Northam was probably miscast. He was too old (and I still think he's weird looking with that enormous gourd). I wanted to like it a little more than I did. Several scenes seemed way too staged, forced, unnatural. I'll be stingy. You're fired.
2. Welcome to the Dollhouse: Another movie I thought I saw a long time ago, but after watching it I didn't remember anything about 20 minutes in. Anyway, I'm not sure of what to do with this. I laughed my ass off at a few scenes, but then again, other scenes just didn't work at all. And those that didn't work outnumbered the ones that did by about 8-1. The acting was fine. The score was not in line with the rest of the film. The acting was very good. The wardrobe was spectacular. Not fired up enough by this though. You're fired.
3. The Hustler: Here's a movie with a score that works. The opening scene is fantastic. Long lull in the middle. Piper Laurie is a great wet blanket. It seemed like forever until things picked up again. I liked the scenes in Louisville, but the final scene was kind of a letdown. The first match with Fats is so great, that the second just couldn't keep up. Anyway, all the actors are great, but the lull in the middle and the final scene just make this a set of steak knives.
4. The Great Dictator: Well, it's kind of a mess, unfortunately. It's way too long, and the mixed identity plot doesn't work all that well. There are a few laughs, and the closing speech is pretty inspiring. It's well shot too. However, Chaplin's earlier works are a little more memorable, and there wasn't a boxing scene. That's unforgivable. Steak Knife.
Bulldog Update
A few random things...
1) Hoop Dawgs get back some scholarships. Great news, now let's use them. Ive got faith in Felton. This can only speed up the rebuilding. I'm on record to say that we'll make the tournament within 3 years (was it 2? I think it was 3 seasons...). I say we with 12-14 next year, 15-18 the next year, 18-21 the next. Now if we can use that extra one for Louis, I might revise that last sentence.
2) Anyone want to play Linebacker? Starting to get worried. That position is too key to our D.
3) I like the Colorado games on the schedule. Even though they're a little down right now, that's a program with enough recognition that they'll be back strong, probably when we play them. It wouldn't surprise me if they suck this year, Barnett gets canned, and a very good coach takes over and returns the program to elite status.
4) This Q & A with Michael Adams gets to why I'm kind of uncomfortable with him, and why I know tons of Dawg fans loathe him. He talks like a politician all the time, and even politicians don't talk like that about sports. Seriously, you'd see senators making bets and shit. But Adams never turns off the serious bullshit "we need to do what's right" sanctimony and fake PR fronting. At some point, we all want to hear the man say "I want to beat Florida and I couldn't give two shits if the guys who do it can read or not." Even if he can't say that, he can say something that doesn't look like it was drafted by the lawyers. Anyway, I ain't an Adams hater like a lot of folks, but I wish he'd lighten up a little. He can be serious about research.
