Posts
By Rick Morris
Schadenfreude. It's the German word for deriving pleasure from the misfortune of others.
I get accused of partaking of it fairly frequently, and I have to plead guilty to that. It's pretty fun to bask in people getting the figurative fecal matter that they deserve thrown at them -- don't knock it until you've tried it.
My latest opportunity in life to point and say, "what goes around, comes around" regards the useful idiots in Mittens' Hollow Army who are crying their pathetic eyes out about the prospect of the Republican presidential nomination being delivered to John McCain. Now, I should preface the following commentary by noting that I supported Fred Thompson previously (quite ardently, I might add -- and repeatedly -- and repeatedly again!), but I now support McCain in the sense that he is the only major candidate for president against whom I am not irretrievably opposed (how's that for a hearty endorsement?).
So, not to make the Mitt-Idiots feel worse -- ah, who am I kidding? -- OK, I revel in making them feel worse -- but it's their fault.
That's right, those who are the most ardent proponents of Trust Fund Willard at the moment -- like this shameless spinner who cancer-mongered Fred when he got into the race, in one of the scummiest displays in recent political history -- they are weeping, sniveling, crying and otherwise conducting themselves in the same fashion as their hero. How about the sight of Rich Boy Romney going into the fetal position last night about McCain's characterization of his Iraq position, as though Romney didn't spend a ton of his inherited wealth to dump slime via TV ads on everyone in the race thus far.
Mark Levin has recently taken to insulting Republicans opposing Romney as RINOs. But since the real fault for this state of affairs lies with all of the weasels who could have backed the only real conservative Fred Thompson but chose to back a fraudulent loser, the RINO Levin is in closest contact with these days is the man in the mirror.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Free Tony Bruno!
By Rick Morris
Tony Bruno is no longer performing his daily talk show on Sporting News Radio. He will be under contract for a few more months, but has been pulled from the air pending expiration of his contract.
As somebody who's been with SportsTalkNetwork.com for almost five years (well, four years and ten months), I can legitimately say that he's been the biggest influence on my work. I don't consciously imitate anyone, I'm too much of an individualist for that, but you can definitely tell that I'm a fan by some of the traits he has that I try to incorporate in my own way. Specifically, he's not afraid to try to inject humor and goofiness into sports discussions (and unlike most hosts, he understands that some of the best comedic material can come from making yourself the butt of some jokes), but also, he will show you his deep level of knowledge from time to time and not adhere to any radio "norms" about dumbing topics down for the audience.
I heard Bruno for the first time in the early '90s when he and Chuck Wilson were doing their awesome nightly show during the early days of ESPN radio. Wilson had a straight-laced, wholesome persona that meshed so well with Bruno, the smartass from Philly. So many shows try too hard to come up with an "Odd Couple" pairing and few ever work because it's hard not to sound contrived. Bruno and Wilson worked because, like truly great entertainers, they didn't try to force anything. They were simply themselves and they let their stylistic differences speak for themselves without trying too hard to call attention to them. In so doing, in a strange kind of way, they blended perfectly and just had incredible chemistry. To this day, when I talk radio with people, I always mention the pairing of Tony Bruno and Chuck Wilson and anyone who remembers them always agrees with me about how great they were together. Bruno's subsequent solo shows over the years have been outstanding as well, as he has worked well with anyone assigned to him.
I've done many shows during my time with STN, but one of my fondest programs was the first one I was on, Reality Check. Proving what a small world it really is, my old high school friend Dave Adams was one-third of the crew, along with our friend Ron Glasenapp and myself. Ron was the lead host and performed more of a neutral bus-steering type role on the show. As it happened, Dave has somewhat of a Chuck Wilson-type personality and as I mentioned, I have some tendencies toward a Bruno-type style. Our chemistry was really great together, and I felt it was a fitting tribute to that old ESPN radio program, when the hosts just clicked together so effortlessly just being themselves.
In a business increasingly hard to succeed in without being a corporate guy who fits a certain mold, Bruno is again going to be looking for a national platform for his great skills. You can keep up with his efforts in the meantime at his personal website and on his message board. He's not bashing Sporting News Radio at either place, so despite my frustration with the fact that I am deprived from listening to his program, I won't either. I will, however, in the spirit of the headline to this column, appeal to the Powers That Be at Sporting News Radio to reach a settlement with Mr. Bruno that will allow him to get on with his professional career as soon as possible. Like most of his fans, I feel it's the least they can do for him.
Tony Bruno is no longer performing his daily talk show on Sporting News Radio. He will be under contract for a few more months, but has been pulled from the air pending expiration of his contract.
As somebody who's been with SportsTalkNetwork.com for almost five years (well, four years and ten months), I can legitimately say that he's been the biggest influence on my work. I don't consciously imitate anyone, I'm too much of an individualist for that, but you can definitely tell that I'm a fan by some of the traits he has that I try to incorporate in my own way. Specifically, he's not afraid to try to inject humor and goofiness into sports discussions (and unlike most hosts, he understands that some of the best comedic material can come from making yourself the butt of some jokes), but also, he will show you his deep level of knowledge from time to time and not adhere to any radio "norms" about dumbing topics down for the audience.
I heard Bruno for the first time in the early '90s when he and Chuck Wilson were doing their awesome nightly show during the early days of ESPN radio. Wilson had a straight-laced, wholesome persona that meshed so well with Bruno, the smartass from Philly. So many shows try too hard to come up with an "Odd Couple" pairing and few ever work because it's hard not to sound contrived. Bruno and Wilson worked because, like truly great entertainers, they didn't try to force anything. They were simply themselves and they let their stylistic differences speak for themselves without trying too hard to call attention to them. In so doing, in a strange kind of way, they blended perfectly and just had incredible chemistry. To this day, when I talk radio with people, I always mention the pairing of Tony Bruno and Chuck Wilson and anyone who remembers them always agrees with me about how great they were together. Bruno's subsequent solo shows over the years have been outstanding as well, as he has worked well with anyone assigned to him.
I've done many shows during my time with STN, but one of my fondest programs was the first one I was on, Reality Check. Proving what a small world it really is, my old high school friend Dave Adams was one-third of the crew, along with our friend Ron Glasenapp and myself. Ron was the lead host and performed more of a neutral bus-steering type role on the show. As it happened, Dave has somewhat of a Chuck Wilson-type personality and as I mentioned, I have some tendencies toward a Bruno-type style. Our chemistry was really great together, and I felt it was a fitting tribute to that old ESPN radio program, when the hosts just clicked together so effortlessly just being themselves.
In a business increasingly hard to succeed in without being a corporate guy who fits a certain mold, Bruno is again going to be looking for a national platform for his great skills. You can keep up with his efforts in the meantime at his personal website and on his message board. He's not bashing Sporting News Radio at either place, so despite my frustration with the fact that I am deprived from listening to his program, I won't either. I will, however, in the spirit of the headline to this column, appeal to the Powers That Be at Sporting News Radio to reach a settlement with Mr. Bruno that will allow him to get on with his professional career as soon as possible. Like most of his fans, I feel it's the least they can do for him.
Monday, January 28, 2008
More of Vince McMahon's hypocrisy
By Rick Morris
Before addressing the main point here, the rampant, constant hypocrisy of Vincent Kennedy McMahon, let's quickly examine a side issue. We at FantasyDrafthelp.com believe in analyzing all matters, not just fantasy sports, on a spectrum from most likely to least likely outcomes. Having said that, there are four possibilities for the "miracle comeback" of John Cena, who returned to the ring less than four months after allegedly suffering a major pectoral injury that was supposed to sideline him a year -- and those scenarios are in this exact order of likelihood:
^ This "injury" was a work from start to finish (scars can be kayfabed!).
^ The "injury" was real, but hyped way beyond the level of seriousness so as to obtain the desired shock return.
^ Cena was hurt, but cut a lot of corners, health-wise (ALLEGEDLY!) in his rehab and return.
^ Cena was actually hurt as severely as advertised and did have a supremely fortunate rehabilitation that legitimately got him back much sooner than anticipated.
Let's now move on to the main point at hand. The notion that Vinny Mac is a hucksterish hypocrite of the first order is well beyond dispute. Whether he is shedding crocodile tears for the premature deaths and chronic addictions that his company has contributed to with regards to its performers, whether he is crying about the predatory business practices of Turner Broadcasting when he went after the old territorial promoters the same way in the '80s, whether he is whining about vendettas from federal prosecutors while allowing revenge politics to thrive in his own company, Vince McMahon has always been in a league of his own when it comes to saying one thing and doing another.
But, as strange as it may sound when addressing the role in history of the only man to preside over two national wrestling booms, his biggest and most grand hypocritical pronouncement of all has been to claim that he has his finger on the pulse of his audience and that he reacts accordingly. We saw yet again last night at the Royal Rumble how false this truly is when he allowed his company to drop the ball on the Jeff Hardy WWE Title reign that his crowds have been clamoring for so much.
Jeff Hardy was deprived of his ascension to the top of the company (and yes, the top spot on RAW is and always will be the pinnacle of WWE) just a few weeks of the thirty-year anniversary that Superstar Billy Graham passed the torch to Bob Backlund -- with both matches taking place at Madison Square Garden, no less! Vince McMahon played an opposite role in both scenarios, proving that he is not consistent in his actions whatsoever.
Recently, I viewed the excellent documentary "20 Years Too Soon: The Superstar Billy Graham Story," and I also read parts of Graham's memoirs. First of all, it should be mentioned just as a side note that Graham was not actually 20 years ahead of his time, it was more like 10 because his colorful muscleman gimmick was the mid-to-late '80s prototype. But I do believe what Vince McMahon said on the DVD: Superstar would have been a huge phenomenon on the scene if he had been given a babyface run as champion.
Take yourself back to February 1978 for a moment. Graham had been drawing huge heat and sellout crowds as WWWF Champion for his entire 10-month reign. As an early forerunner of the "cool heel," he was drawing the type of appreciation from fans that could have led to him becoming a red-hot main event face. One suggestion internally was for onetime tag team partner Ivan Koloff to attack Graham, officially turning the Superstar into a "good guy." I believe that this feud would have drawn insane heat, because the Sergeant Slaughter/Iron Sheik feud of 1984 proved that geopolitics could draw at the box office and the prospect of Graham going toe-to-toe with a Hated Russkie back in '78 would have been quite similar.
Superstar and Vince were on the losing end of that argument, however, because Vince's dad, Vince McMahon Senior was still the boss at that time and he had promised Bob Backlund a title run. The classic wrestling old-timer, Vince Senior simply didn't possess the imagination to understand how big Graham could be. He was wedded to the version of the wholesome face champion anchor. Bruno Sammartino had held the belt for approximately 11 of the 14 years leading into Graham's reign, with Latino face Pedro Morales occupying the title for most of the rest of the time. Bob Backlund, dubbed "The All-American Boy," seemed merely to be the logical successor to this lineage once Graham's "transitional heel" reign was over.
But the strong reactions Graham got at the time argue for the case that he would have been huge as a "good guy" champion just because he was so much different from the rest back in '78. While he never could have reached the status of an '80s Hulk Hogan had WWWE remained merely a regional Northeast territory, he could have exploited New York City, the world's greatest media market, to cement the area as the most dominant one anywhere. Vince Junior is absolutely right that his father and the other cronies in the inner circle missed the boat on Superstar Billy Graham's potential.
Graham makes the point convincingly in his memoirs that Backlund was the beneficiary of almost unprecedented help from the promotion during his almost six-year run on top (leaving aside the question of whether Inoki legitimately was the titleholder for a fortnight back in '79). Backlund continued to sell out all around the circuit, but benefited from the strategic positioning on cards of Andre the Giant, Jimmy Snuka after his hugely successful face turn and Bruno Sammartino's white-hot farewell feud with Larry Zbyszko. Previous champs had not needed that kind of assistance from the bookers; they had always been the predominant focus of the promotion. Billy Graham wouldn't have needed that help either had his wish been granted.
So Vince Junior made what we can probably hypothesize would have been the right call in 1978 with the man he said was 20 years ahead of his time. Coincidentally, 20 years later, Vince put the belt on another man being reacted to hugely by the crowds and not created by the company. Stone Cold Steve Austin was a completely self-made man in the WWF, overcoming the internal perception of him as a mid-carder for life and establishing himself as a made man in 1996-97. In '98, Vince listened to the people and made Austin the face main event anchor that they wanted him to be. Austin built on the foundation of the NWO and DX and made himself (along with perhaps The Rock later on) the face of the late '90s wrestling craze.
Flash forward another ten years.
The "Attitude Era" boom has been dead for most of the decade. Historians will argue about where it breathed its last; I believe that I saw it live and in person at the "InVasion" of 2001 in Cleveland when Steve Austin joined the WCW/ECW alliance in an infamous booking decision that killed wrestling's ultimate dream angle. Since then, Vince has thrown everything he could at the wall, elevating formerly-derided "Vanilla Midgets" to World Title status (Benoit and Eddy), trying to ride the remaining stars of the '90s (HHH, HBK, Undertaker), pushing newcomers to the moon (Brock Lesnar), toying endlessly with nostalgia (Hulk Hogan comebacks) and getting strongly behind homegrown products (Cena, Batista). None of these moves have brought the WWE back to the mainstream status it enjoyed twice before.
And to be fair, there's no evidence to suggest that Jeff Hardy is the missing link, ready to become a household word and carry the company to the third national boom. He might not be the "game-changer" the company needs -- but the aforementioned options have had their chances to step up to that level and none of them have succeeded.
Vince and his daughter, Stephanie (the infamous head of creative control), pushed Hardy to the main event in a cautious, almost-experimental way. They were certainly not cramming him down the throats of the people; rather, they put him in circumstances where he would be able to rise or fall based on the reactions he drew. He shot up like a rocket as the crowds made it clear in no uncertain terms that they were hungering for the dramatic change that a title reign from this superstar would promise.
And yet, his rise to main event status was just a tease in the end, as Hardy was built up merely to be fed to mediocre heel champion Randy Orton, who has himself been built up merely to be fed to the returning hero Cena. Essentially, the company passed on elevating Hardy so that they could put Cena back in the #1 face spot posthaste (technically, now that Cena is cashing in his title shot at No Way Out in February instead of WrestleMania, he could face Hardy for the WWE Title at 'Mania -- but there's no way the company is going to put Hardy in with Cena and even if they did, it wouldn't be to have Hardy go over in the end).
So Vince McMahon, who prides himself on being the ultimate visionary, has shown that he only listens to the public when he feels like it. Rather than take a chance on Jeff Hardy, the acrobatic youngster with unique (mostly non-verbal) charisma and a fundamentally-sound but exciting style in the ring, McMahon is staying with the tried and true: Cena, the man who has improved greatly in the ring, but been neutered by the creative department. When you see him get booed relentlessly by significant parts of the crowd, it's almost impossible to reconcile that with the fact that he was such a cool heel in the fall of '03 that the company was all but forced to turn him. Young males, perhaps the most critical part of the fanbase, boo him in significant fashion (especially in major markets) because he is seen as having the worst characteristics of Hogan (Chain Gang = Hulkamanics 2K8), Backlund (wholesome character over the last few years, none of those raunchy raps that got him over with the crowd), the Rock'n'Roll Express (annoyingly beloved by kiddies and teenyboppers) and Hogan/Backlund together (he's the face who isn't believable in terms of being in significant jeopardy because he ALWAYS overcomes the odds and keeps his belt). Jeff Hardy, a man who was once defined in terms of fan perception as being the choice of those teenyboppers and kids, has transcended his early fan appeal to become widely popular across the board. And yet, Vince McMahon hasn't the slightest curiosity about what would happen with Hardy at the helm -- because in the end, crowd sentiment doesn't matter to him if it goes against his preconceived notions.
On the Vince McMahon Devious Behavior Scale, that may not rate that high. But it does serve to remind us yet again of his complete hypocrisy and the extent to which his ego compromises the final product in the ring.
Before addressing the main point here, the rampant, constant hypocrisy of Vincent Kennedy McMahon, let's quickly examine a side issue. We at FantasyDrafthelp.com believe in analyzing all matters, not just fantasy sports, on a spectrum from most likely to least likely outcomes. Having said that, there are four possibilities for the "miracle comeback" of John Cena, who returned to the ring less than four months after allegedly suffering a major pectoral injury that was supposed to sideline him a year -- and those scenarios are in this exact order of likelihood:
^ This "injury" was a work from start to finish (scars can be kayfabed!).
^ The "injury" was real, but hyped way beyond the level of seriousness so as to obtain the desired shock return.
^ Cena was hurt, but cut a lot of corners, health-wise (ALLEGEDLY!) in his rehab and return.
^ Cena was actually hurt as severely as advertised and did have a supremely fortunate rehabilitation that legitimately got him back much sooner than anticipated.
Let's now move on to the main point at hand. The notion that Vinny Mac is a hucksterish hypocrite of the first order is well beyond dispute. Whether he is shedding crocodile tears for the premature deaths and chronic addictions that his company has contributed to with regards to its performers, whether he is crying about the predatory business practices of Turner Broadcasting when he went after the old territorial promoters the same way in the '80s, whether he is whining about vendettas from federal prosecutors while allowing revenge politics to thrive in his own company, Vince McMahon has always been in a league of his own when it comes to saying one thing and doing another.
But, as strange as it may sound when addressing the role in history of the only man to preside over two national wrestling booms, his biggest and most grand hypocritical pronouncement of all has been to claim that he has his finger on the pulse of his audience and that he reacts accordingly. We saw yet again last night at the Royal Rumble how false this truly is when he allowed his company to drop the ball on the Jeff Hardy WWE Title reign that his crowds have been clamoring for so much.
Jeff Hardy was deprived of his ascension to the top of the company (and yes, the top spot on RAW is and always will be the pinnacle of WWE) just a few weeks of the thirty-year anniversary that Superstar Billy Graham passed the torch to Bob Backlund -- with both matches taking place at Madison Square Garden, no less! Vince McMahon played an opposite role in both scenarios, proving that he is not consistent in his actions whatsoever.
Recently, I viewed the excellent documentary "20 Years Too Soon: The Superstar Billy Graham Story," and I also read parts of Graham's memoirs. First of all, it should be mentioned just as a side note that Graham was not actually 20 years ahead of his time, it was more like 10 because his colorful muscleman gimmick was the mid-to-late '80s prototype. But I do believe what Vince McMahon said on the DVD: Superstar would have been a huge phenomenon on the scene if he had been given a babyface run as champion.
Take yourself back to February 1978 for a moment. Graham had been drawing huge heat and sellout crowds as WWWF Champion for his entire 10-month reign. As an early forerunner of the "cool heel," he was drawing the type of appreciation from fans that could have led to him becoming a red-hot main event face. One suggestion internally was for onetime tag team partner Ivan Koloff to attack Graham, officially turning the Superstar into a "good guy." I believe that this feud would have drawn insane heat, because the Sergeant Slaughter/Iron Sheik feud of 1984 proved that geopolitics could draw at the box office and the prospect of Graham going toe-to-toe with a Hated Russkie back in '78 would have been quite similar.
Superstar and Vince were on the losing end of that argument, however, because Vince's dad, Vince McMahon Senior was still the boss at that time and he had promised Bob Backlund a title run. The classic wrestling old-timer, Vince Senior simply didn't possess the imagination to understand how big Graham could be. He was wedded to the version of the wholesome face champion anchor. Bruno Sammartino had held the belt for approximately 11 of the 14 years leading into Graham's reign, with Latino face Pedro Morales occupying the title for most of the rest of the time. Bob Backlund, dubbed "The All-American Boy," seemed merely to be the logical successor to this lineage once Graham's "transitional heel" reign was over.
But the strong reactions Graham got at the time argue for the case that he would have been huge as a "good guy" champion just because he was so much different from the rest back in '78. While he never could have reached the status of an '80s Hulk Hogan had WWWE remained merely a regional Northeast territory, he could have exploited New York City, the world's greatest media market, to cement the area as the most dominant one anywhere. Vince Junior is absolutely right that his father and the other cronies in the inner circle missed the boat on Superstar Billy Graham's potential.
Graham makes the point convincingly in his memoirs that Backlund was the beneficiary of almost unprecedented help from the promotion during his almost six-year run on top (leaving aside the question of whether Inoki legitimately was the titleholder for a fortnight back in '79). Backlund continued to sell out all around the circuit, but benefited from the strategic positioning on cards of Andre the Giant, Jimmy Snuka after his hugely successful face turn and Bruno Sammartino's white-hot farewell feud with Larry Zbyszko. Previous champs had not needed that kind of assistance from the bookers; they had always been the predominant focus of the promotion. Billy Graham wouldn't have needed that help either had his wish been granted.
So Vince Junior made what we can probably hypothesize would have been the right call in 1978 with the man he said was 20 years ahead of his time. Coincidentally, 20 years later, Vince put the belt on another man being reacted to hugely by the crowds and not created by the company. Stone Cold Steve Austin was a completely self-made man in the WWF, overcoming the internal perception of him as a mid-carder for life and establishing himself as a made man in 1996-97. In '98, Vince listened to the people and made Austin the face main event anchor that they wanted him to be. Austin built on the foundation of the NWO and DX and made himself (along with perhaps The Rock later on) the face of the late '90s wrestling craze.
Flash forward another ten years.
The "Attitude Era" boom has been dead for most of the decade. Historians will argue about where it breathed its last; I believe that I saw it live and in person at the "InVasion" of 2001 in Cleveland when Steve Austin joined the WCW/ECW alliance in an infamous booking decision that killed wrestling's ultimate dream angle. Since then, Vince has thrown everything he could at the wall, elevating formerly-derided "Vanilla Midgets" to World Title status (Benoit and Eddy), trying to ride the remaining stars of the '90s (HHH, HBK, Undertaker), pushing newcomers to the moon (Brock Lesnar), toying endlessly with nostalgia (Hulk Hogan comebacks) and getting strongly behind homegrown products (Cena, Batista). None of these moves have brought the WWE back to the mainstream status it enjoyed twice before.
And to be fair, there's no evidence to suggest that Jeff Hardy is the missing link, ready to become a household word and carry the company to the third national boom. He might not be the "game-changer" the company needs -- but the aforementioned options have had their chances to step up to that level and none of them have succeeded.
Vince and his daughter, Stephanie (the infamous head of creative control), pushed Hardy to the main event in a cautious, almost-experimental way. They were certainly not cramming him down the throats of the people; rather, they put him in circumstances where he would be able to rise or fall based on the reactions he drew. He shot up like a rocket as the crowds made it clear in no uncertain terms that they were hungering for the dramatic change that a title reign from this superstar would promise.
And yet, his rise to main event status was just a tease in the end, as Hardy was built up merely to be fed to mediocre heel champion Randy Orton, who has himself been built up merely to be fed to the returning hero Cena. Essentially, the company passed on elevating Hardy so that they could put Cena back in the #1 face spot posthaste (technically, now that Cena is cashing in his title shot at No Way Out in February instead of WrestleMania, he could face Hardy for the WWE Title at 'Mania -- but there's no way the company is going to put Hardy in with Cena and even if they did, it wouldn't be to have Hardy go over in the end).
So Vince McMahon, who prides himself on being the ultimate visionary, has shown that he only listens to the public when he feels like it. Rather than take a chance on Jeff Hardy, the acrobatic youngster with unique (mostly non-verbal) charisma and a fundamentally-sound but exciting style in the ring, McMahon is staying with the tried and true: Cena, the man who has improved greatly in the ring, but been neutered by the creative department. When you see him get booed relentlessly by significant parts of the crowd, it's almost impossible to reconcile that with the fact that he was such a cool heel in the fall of '03 that the company was all but forced to turn him. Young males, perhaps the most critical part of the fanbase, boo him in significant fashion (especially in major markets) because he is seen as having the worst characteristics of Hogan (Chain Gang = Hulkamanics 2K8), Backlund (wholesome character over the last few years, none of those raunchy raps that got him over with the crowd), the Rock'n'Roll Express (annoyingly beloved by kiddies and teenyboppers) and Hogan/Backlund together (he's the face who isn't believable in terms of being in significant jeopardy because he ALWAYS overcomes the odds and keeps his belt). Jeff Hardy, a man who was once defined in terms of fan perception as being the choice of those teenyboppers and kids, has transcended his early fan appeal to become widely popular across the board. And yet, Vince McMahon hasn't the slightest curiosity about what would happen with Hardy at the helm -- because in the end, crowd sentiment doesn't matter to him if it goes against his preconceived notions.
On the Vince McMahon Devious Behavior Scale, that may not rate that high. But it does serve to remind us yet again of his complete hypocrisy and the extent to which his ego compromises the final product in the ring.
Florida primary predictions
By Rick Morris
For the donkeys, in a yawner, Hillary will top 50% in what would have to be called the dubiously-named beauty pageant. That designation comes from political pundits looking for some way to offer some context to a glorified straw poll, since the Democratic National Committee yanked all the delegates away from the Sunshine State for moving its primary up without authorization. This victory will not, and should not, be taken as any time of substantive refutation for the mighty hiney-whooping she took in South Carolina over the weekend, but the shameless Clintonian spin machine will try to push that garbage anyway.
On the Republican side, the toughest prediction of any of the contests to date looms. John McCain and Mittens are running neck-in-neck continuously in the polls. Based on the very little I can discern from the polls in recent days, I give the slightest of edges to McCain based on apparent momentum coming from the endorsement of Governor Charlie Crist and the fact that he is trending better on Intrade at the moment. "America's Mayor Rudy" will be a distant third, a prelude to his coming withdrawal from the race, and The Huck's slide will culminate in a fourth-place plummet.
For the donkeys, in a yawner, Hillary will top 50% in what would have to be called the dubiously-named beauty pageant. That designation comes from political pundits looking for some way to offer some context to a glorified straw poll, since the Democratic National Committee yanked all the delegates away from the Sunshine State for moving its primary up without authorization. This victory will not, and should not, be taken as any time of substantive refutation for the mighty hiney-whooping she took in South Carolina over the weekend, but the shameless Clintonian spin machine will try to push that garbage anyway.
On the Republican side, the toughest prediction of any of the contests to date looms. John McCain and Mittens are running neck-in-neck continuously in the polls. Based on the very little I can discern from the polls in recent days, I give the slightest of edges to McCain based on apparent momentum coming from the endorsement of Governor Charlie Crist and the fact that he is trending better on Intrade at the moment. "America's Mayor Rudy" will be a distant third, a prelude to his coming withdrawal from the race, and The Huck's slide will culminate in a fourth-place plummet.
My Thoughts on the State of the Union Address
By Tony Mazur
In his eighth and final State of the Union Address, President Bush came out firing, flared nostrils and all.
I'm not a big fan of the non-stop applause breaks (there were roughly 70 of them). But when you look into the crowd from the overhead camera, you can see the divided room. The Republicans are standing and clapping, while the Democrats sat there, nodding off like Bill Clinton at a Martin Luther King, Jr. Ceremony.
Anyways, onto my thoughts.
President Bush brought up the fact that elementary school students are scoring higher on test scores than ever before. That includes African Americans and Hispanics. Democrats ripped on the president, saying the No Child Left Behind Act was a waste of time and money. It appears to be working now, isn't it?
Another topic was the Patriot Act. Since September 11th, 2001, there hasn't been an attack on American soil. We can thank the Patriot Act for that. There has been attempts to attack Los Angeles and other major cities in the United States, with no success. They tapped the terrorists' phone lines to stop the attack before it even started. They weren't tapping Joe Blow's cell phone in Middleburg Heights, Ohio. And if they were, what do you have to hide?
I'm glad Mr. Bush brought up the fact that we can find stem cells without aborting babies. You can find stem cells anywhere, not just from an unborn fetus. Us conservatives were all about stem cell research. We just didn't want to kill babies to do so, and we also do not want the federal government funding the research.
Can we start drilling for oil in America? Can we?
I only questioned a couple of parts in President Bush's speech. One of them was global warming. Global warming is a non-issue. Unless you can convince China to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases being released, don't waste your time. Not surprisingly, the Democrats stood up and cheered loudly when the term "global warming" was brought up.
The President brought up an interesting stat. More than half of the World's food aid comes from the United States. I understand that we are global power, but can we stop being the global police? AIDS is running rampant in Africa, and it won't stop no matter how much money you send overseas.
I'm still not completely happy with President Bush's stance on immigration. I'm all about bringing Mexicans into America to give them jobs, but they should go through an extensive process before receiving a green card. Either they take these strides, or build a giant wall on the banks of the Rio Grande.
I personally think the recession is a bit phony. Just throwing that out there. Tell me what you think.
All in all, I think it was a good speech. President Bush has less than a year left in the White House until he hands it over to the next gentleman. His approval rating may be low right now (who regulates the approval ratings, anyway?), but I feel that in the next 10-15 years, George W. Bush will be vindicated as a great president. Wait and see.
In his eighth and final State of the Union Address, President Bush came out firing, flared nostrils and all.
I'm not a big fan of the non-stop applause breaks (there were roughly 70 of them). But when you look into the crowd from the overhead camera, you can see the divided room. The Republicans are standing and clapping, while the Democrats sat there, nodding off like Bill Clinton at a Martin Luther King, Jr. Ceremony.
Anyways, onto my thoughts.
President Bush brought up the fact that elementary school students are scoring higher on test scores than ever before. That includes African Americans and Hispanics. Democrats ripped on the president, saying the No Child Left Behind Act was a waste of time and money. It appears to be working now, isn't it?
Another topic was the Patriot Act. Since September 11th, 2001, there hasn't been an attack on American soil. We can thank the Patriot Act for that. There has been attempts to attack Los Angeles and other major cities in the United States, with no success. They tapped the terrorists' phone lines to stop the attack before it even started. They weren't tapping Joe Blow's cell phone in Middleburg Heights, Ohio. And if they were, what do you have to hide?
I'm glad Mr. Bush brought up the fact that we can find stem cells without aborting babies. You can find stem cells anywhere, not just from an unborn fetus. Us conservatives were all about stem cell research. We just didn't want to kill babies to do so, and we also do not want the federal government funding the research.
Can we start drilling for oil in America? Can we?
I only questioned a couple of parts in President Bush's speech. One of them was global warming. Global warming is a non-issue. Unless you can convince China to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases being released, don't waste your time. Not surprisingly, the Democrats stood up and cheered loudly when the term "global warming" was brought up.
The President brought up an interesting stat. More than half of the World's food aid comes from the United States. I understand that we are global power, but can we stop being the global police? AIDS is running rampant in Africa, and it won't stop no matter how much money you send overseas.
I'm still not completely happy with President Bush's stance on immigration. I'm all about bringing Mexicans into America to give them jobs, but they should go through an extensive process before receiving a green card. Either they take these strides, or build a giant wall on the banks of the Rio Grande.
I personally think the recession is a bit phony. Just throwing that out there. Tell me what you think.
All in all, I think it was a good speech. President Bush has less than a year left in the White House until he hands it over to the next gentleman. His approval rating may be low right now (who regulates the approval ratings, anyway?), but I feel that in the next 10-15 years, George W. Bush will be vindicated as a great president. Wait and see.
Reliving the days of Bozo-Choke
By Rick Morris
To the long sad list of Cleveland sports futility we must add one more: the looming specter of the first perfect NFL team in 35 years, the same franchise that has already been crowned the "team of the decade" -- coached by a man run out of the North Coast in a cloud of futility 12 years ago. Why did Bill Belichick fail in Cleveland?
The question is often posed by people who did not have an up-close seat to the sorry state of the Browns franchise in the early and mid-90s. Those of us unfortunate enough to remember the coach once known as "Bozo-Choke" purposely designing bootlegs to humiliate his starting quarterback Bernie Kosar, kicking a field goal at the end of a game that his team would still lose by several touchdowns and blazoning in our minds forever the putrid phrase "Metcalf Up the Middle" -- well, we can tell you that the "genius" you're seeing in New England bears little or no resemblance to the goof we suffered through for five interminable years.
It's easy to miss this point on the surface. Now, as then, Belichick displays no social graces. He has a great mind for defense now, as he admittedly did then. But there are many subtle nuances in the job The Hoodie has done over the last several years with the Pats that indicate lessons that he learned the hard way in C-Town. Gene Wojciechowski does an excellent job in this ESPN.com article of breaking down everything that we in Cleveland observed during those painful years. In the long line of infamous Cleveland sports heartbreaks, the huge success of this man after using the Browns as a pathetic "training wheel" start to his pro career has to rank high on the list.
To the long sad list of Cleveland sports futility we must add one more: the looming specter of the first perfect NFL team in 35 years, the same franchise that has already been crowned the "team of the decade" -- coached by a man run out of the North Coast in a cloud of futility 12 years ago. Why did Bill Belichick fail in Cleveland?
The question is often posed by people who did not have an up-close seat to the sorry state of the Browns franchise in the early and mid-90s. Those of us unfortunate enough to remember the coach once known as "Bozo-Choke" purposely designing bootlegs to humiliate his starting quarterback Bernie Kosar, kicking a field goal at the end of a game that his team would still lose by several touchdowns and blazoning in our minds forever the putrid phrase "Metcalf Up the Middle" -- well, we can tell you that the "genius" you're seeing in New England bears little or no resemblance to the goof we suffered through for five interminable years.
It's easy to miss this point on the surface. Now, as then, Belichick displays no social graces. He has a great mind for defense now, as he admittedly did then. But there are many subtle nuances in the job The Hoodie has done over the last several years with the Pats that indicate lessons that he learned the hard way in C-Town. Gene Wojciechowski does an excellent job in this ESPN.com article of breaking down everything that we in Cleveland observed during those painful years. In the long line of infamous Cleveland sports heartbreaks, the huge success of this man after using the Browns as a pathetic "training wheel" start to his pro career has to rank high on the list.
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Stone Temple Pilots Reunion?
By Tony Mazur
If you're not a fan of '90s rock & roll, you may want to skip my very first post on The FDH Lounge Blog. However, if you are a fan, then you may want to check out this breaking news.
One of my favorite bands, Stone Temple Pilots, will be reuniting for some summer concerts. I am excited about it, especially because the reunion show is rumored to kick off at Rock on The Range at Crew Stadium in Columbus, Ohio, just two hours south of my lily white suburban neighborhood.
Stone Temple Pilots achieved success back in 1992 with their mega-selling album, Core. Core produced rock radio staples "Creep", "Plush", "Wicked Garden", "Dead and Bloated", and "Sex Type Thing". Two years later, Purple was released, featuring the crossover hit, "Interstate Love Song". Tiny Music... and No. 4, disappointed fans, even though No. 4 included their biggest hit, "Sour Girl". After 2001's failure, Shangri - La Dee Da, the band called it quits, due to Cleveland's own Scott Weiland's drug and legal problems.
After STP, Weiland joined Slash and other former members of Guns & Roses to form Velvet Revolver (by the way, I stopped counting down when Chinese Democracy will be released. I can't count that high). VR is arguably one of the most popular groups in recent years, due to the success of 2004's Contraband and 2007's Libertad. Their live shows feature covers of STP and G&R favorites. Robert and Dean DeLeo, former STP guitarists, joined forces with Filter frontman, Richard Patrick, to create Army of Anyone. The supergroup released an album in Fall 2006, but the future of the band looks bleak.
In an interview with Billboard, Slash confirmed that Stone Temple Pilots will reunite this summer for some shows.
As a fan of the genre, I cannot wait for an STP reunion. I do enjoy some of today's music, but the early to mid '90s produced some great, memorable tunes. About five years ago, I wrote a list of bands I would die to see (figuratively)
Red Hot Chili Peppers - Saw them on Halloween 2006 after the release of Stadium Arcadium. Great show.
Alice in Chains - Layne Staley passed away in 2002, and I knew it would only be a dream. AIC recruited a new singer and went out on tour. Damn House of Blues only holds a small amount of concert goers.
Nirvana - Another dream.
Stone Temple Pilots - Hopefully this comes true May 2008.
ZZ Top - Put on a heck of a show.
Sublime - While I'm still dreaming, I want a cool billion dollars.
Rage Against the Machine - Have reunited, but won't come to Cleveland because they find Chief Wahoo "offensive towards Native Americans".
This concludes my first post as a member of the FDH Lounge family. Don't worry, I won't always publish music-related posts, but I figured that some of our audience fits the demographic of the grunge genre. My posts will be quite diverse, ranging from sports headlines, to the political scene, to my feeling on the recently committed celebrity. I hope you enjoy my contributions to the FDH family.
If you're not a fan of '90s rock & roll, you may want to skip my very first post on The FDH Lounge Blog. However, if you are a fan, then you may want to check out this breaking news.
One of my favorite bands, Stone Temple Pilots, will be reuniting for some summer concerts. I am excited about it, especially because the reunion show is rumored to kick off at Rock on The Range at Crew Stadium in Columbus, Ohio, just two hours south of my lily white suburban neighborhood.
Stone Temple Pilots achieved success back in 1992 with their mega-selling album, Core. Core produced rock radio staples "Creep", "Plush", "Wicked Garden", "Dead and Bloated", and "Sex Type Thing". Two years later, Purple was released, featuring the crossover hit, "Interstate Love Song". Tiny Music... and No. 4, disappointed fans, even though No. 4 included their biggest hit, "Sour Girl". After 2001's failure, Shangri - La Dee Da, the band called it quits, due to Cleveland's own Scott Weiland's drug and legal problems.
After STP, Weiland joined Slash and other former members of Guns & Roses to form Velvet Revolver (by the way, I stopped counting down when Chinese Democracy will be released. I can't count that high). VR is arguably one of the most popular groups in recent years, due to the success of 2004's Contraband and 2007's Libertad. Their live shows feature covers of STP and G&R favorites. Robert and Dean DeLeo, former STP guitarists, joined forces with Filter frontman, Richard Patrick, to create Army of Anyone. The supergroup released an album in Fall 2006, but the future of the band looks bleak.
In an interview with Billboard, Slash confirmed that Stone Temple Pilots will reunite this summer for some shows.
As a fan of the genre, I cannot wait for an STP reunion. I do enjoy some of today's music, but the early to mid '90s produced some great, memorable tunes. About five years ago, I wrote a list of bands I would die to see (figuratively)
Red Hot Chili Peppers - Saw them on Halloween 2006 after the release of Stadium Arcadium. Great show.
Alice in Chains - Layne Staley passed away in 2002, and I knew it would only be a dream. AIC recruited a new singer and went out on tour. Damn House of Blues only holds a small amount of concert goers.
Nirvana - Another dream.
Stone Temple Pilots - Hopefully this comes true May 2008.
ZZ Top - Put on a heck of a show.
Sublime - While I'm still dreaming, I want a cool billion dollars.
Rage Against the Machine - Have reunited, but won't come to Cleveland because they find Chief Wahoo "offensive towards Native Americans".
This concludes my first post as a member of the FDH Lounge family. Don't worry, I won't always publish music-related posts, but I figured that some of our audience fits the demographic of the grunge genre. My posts will be quite diverse, ranging from sports headlines, to the political scene, to my feeling on the recently committed celebrity. I hope you enjoy my contributions to the FDH family.
Politically incorrect icons of yesteryear
By Rick Morris
We're linking to three excellent pieces from The Don and Tony Show blog to welcome our newest contributor to The FDH Lounge blog, our friend Tony Mazur. Along with another friend of ours, Don Peterson, Tony is the host of the aforementioned Don and Tony Show on SportsTalkNetwork.com Monday through Friday from 11 AM to 2 PM EST. Their show is in the timeslot that has traditionally anchored STN programming ever since its inception in 2002. As you will note if you listen to or view their program, read their blog or read Tony's words on this site subsequently, they are very talented individuals who have accomplished a great deal at an early age (a few years less than a half-century combined). Both gentlemen have produced for FDH-brand programs already and Tony has expressed an interest in building on the relationship, which we are happy to do.
As an example of the creativity you may expect here from Tony, here are three columns he produced for his show blog, all dealing with politically incorrect icons of yesteryear:
^ The Sleazy Strip Club
^ The Marlboro Man
^ Joe Camel
Yeah, this guy's going to fit in just fine! Welcome aboard, Tony!
We're linking to three excellent pieces from The Don and Tony Show blog to welcome our newest contributor to The FDH Lounge blog, our friend Tony Mazur. Along with another friend of ours, Don Peterson, Tony is the host of the aforementioned Don and Tony Show on SportsTalkNetwork.com Monday through Friday from 11 AM to 2 PM EST. Their show is in the timeslot that has traditionally anchored STN programming ever since its inception in 2002. As you will note if you listen to or view their program, read their blog or read Tony's words on this site subsequently, they are very talented individuals who have accomplished a great deal at an early age (a few years less than a half-century combined). Both gentlemen have produced for FDH-brand programs already and Tony has expressed an interest in building on the relationship, which we are happy to do.
As an example of the creativity you may expect here from Tony, here are three columns he produced for his show blog, all dealing with politically incorrect icons of yesteryear:
^ The Sleazy Strip Club
^ The Marlboro Man
^ Joe Camel
Yeah, this guy's going to fit in just fine! Welcome aboard, Tony!
Hottest Cartoon Characters
by Jason Jones
This post requires a little creative thinking. Try to suspend reality. Basically, as crazy as it sounds, imagine you are a cartoon character yourself (especially if you are a male), who would you be most interested in pursuing. Clearly there is a difference between...Date Material, Take Home To Mom Material, and Wife Material. Just thought I'd throw this together just for poops and giggles.
Warning: There are some doctored "Naughty Pictures" to aid those visual people.
1. Miss Buxley-Sexy Secretary in the Beetle Bailey Comic Strip
Whoever was the first man to have a fetish about secretaries and supposed naughty time at work, clearly was thinking of Miss Buxley. Even in the comic strip there seems to be a sense of sexual tension between Beetle and his boss over giving their attention to Miss Buxley.
2. Holli Would-The Smoking Animated Co-Star of Cool World
If you haven't seen this quasi-bad movie. It is a darker take on the Who Framed Roger Rabbit like live action mixed with animation. The Holli Would character is played in live action by Kim Basinger. She wishes she was this hot.
3. Jessica Rabbit-The Definition of Voluptuous-Who Framed Roger Rabbit
Admit it or not, Jessica Rabbit is just too much woman for any animated character, especially a silly rabbit. The movie alone has some merit and is entertaining, particularly for the kids. At least the creators gave the men something to keep our interest.
4. Lara Croft-Kicking Ass Gets A Lot Hotter-Tomb Raider Video Game, the Movie
For once it seems Hollywood got it right when attempting to make a video game-movie adaptation. The live action movie version is played by Angelina Jolie...enough said.
5. Belle-Sweet girl next door type-Disney's Beauty and the Beast movie
A smoking brunette who has the Disney inspired "heart of gold". Case in point, it's refreshing to see a smoking hottie turn down the successful big wig in town "Gaston" and eventually go for the big hairy overweight guy with a bad attitude. You've got to give a girl some credit, at the end the beast turns into Brad Pitt with eighties hair.
Six through ten coming soon...
This post requires a little creative thinking. Try to suspend reality. Basically, as crazy as it sounds, imagine you are a cartoon character yourself (especially if you are a male), who would you be most interested in pursuing. Clearly there is a difference between...Date Material, Take Home To Mom Material, and Wife Material. Just thought I'd throw this together just for poops and giggles.
Warning: There are some doctored "Naughty Pictures" to aid those visual people.
1. Miss Buxley-Sexy Secretary in the Beetle Bailey Comic Strip
Whoever was the first man to have a fetish about secretaries and supposed naughty time at work, clearly was thinking of Miss Buxley. Even in the comic strip there seems to be a sense of sexual tension between Beetle and his boss over giving their attention to Miss Buxley.
2. Holli Would-The Smoking Animated Co-Star of Cool World
If you haven't seen this quasi-bad movie. It is a darker take on the Who Framed Roger Rabbit like live action mixed with animation. The Holli Would character is played in live action by Kim Basinger. She wishes she was this hot.
3. Jessica Rabbit-The Definition of Voluptuous-Who Framed Roger Rabbit
Admit it or not, Jessica Rabbit is just too much woman for any animated character, especially a silly rabbit. The movie alone has some merit and is entertaining, particularly for the kids. At least the creators gave the men something to keep our interest.
4. Lara Croft-Kicking Ass Gets A Lot Hotter-Tomb Raider Video Game, the Movie
For once it seems Hollywood got it right when attempting to make a video game-movie adaptation. The live action movie version is played by Angelina Jolie...enough said.
5. Belle-Sweet girl next door type-Disney's Beauty and the Beast movie
A smoking brunette who has the Disney inspired "heart of gold". Case in point, it's refreshing to see a smoking hottie turn down the successful big wig in town "Gaston" and eventually go for the big hairy overweight guy with a bad attitude. You've got to give a girl some credit, at the end the beast turns into Brad Pitt with eighties hair.
Six through ten coming soon...
Saturday, January 26, 2008
South Carolina Democratic primary preview
By Rick Morris
With this race being the first primary since the debacle with the polls in New Hampshire, it's exceptionally difficult to get a read on what the results will be tonight. It seems certain that Obama will win, but that was what everyone said in New Hampshire. As always, I am supremely unafraid to stick my neck out, so I'll go with the following predictions:
Obama 43%
Clinton 34%
Edwards 23%
With this race being the first primary since the debacle with the polls in New Hampshire, it's exceptionally difficult to get a read on what the results will be tonight. It seems certain that Obama will win, but that was what everyone said in New Hampshire. As always, I am supremely unafraid to stick my neck out, so I'll go with the following predictions:
Obama 43%
Clinton 34%
Edwards 23%
FDH Lounge Show #24: January 27, 2008
By Rick Morris
This Sunday's edition of THE FDH LOUNGE on SportsTalkNetwork.com (8-11 PM EST) features the usual far-flung collection of content you have come to expect from the program "where nothing is off-topic."
In Hour One, even before the Opening Statements of The FDH Lounge Dignitaries, we will start right in with our first annual fantasy drag racing mock draft. Generally, the FDH brand puts all of our fantasy sports content on our Thursday program THE FANTASYDRAFTHELP.COM INSIDER (9-11 PM EST), but we are engaging in a little cross-promotion here and getting the listeners in the mode of fantasy sports (well, sort of!) for our second annual fantasy "I'd Hit That" draft coming up in February!
In Hour Two, the Opening Statements will commence, followed by another in our long line of classic political roundtables as we assess the winnowing fields of presidential candidates in both political parties. From there, we take a look at a unique and sad situation: the impact of Heath Ledger's passing on this summer's huge Batman blockbuster "The Dark Knight," where he plays the Joker in a role around which most of the marketing was slated to be built.
With that discussion carrying into Hour Three, we'll get back to the sports/sports entertainment part of the proceedings when we review the NHL All-Star Game from earlier that night in HotLanta, preview the Super Bowl and the broadcast extravaganza that always gains as much attention as the game itself, and finally recap that evening's WWE Royal Rumble pay-per-view with one of the WrestleMania main event participants being crowned. Join us as we celebrate the first show in our second year of existence, the show that is wider-ranging than any other in the solar system: The FDH Lounge.
This Sunday's edition of THE FDH LOUNGE on SportsTalkNetwork.com (8-11 PM EST) features the usual far-flung collection of content you have come to expect from the program "where nothing is off-topic."
In Hour One, even before the Opening Statements of The FDH Lounge Dignitaries, we will start right in with our first annual fantasy drag racing mock draft. Generally, the FDH brand puts all of our fantasy sports content on our Thursday program THE FANTASYDRAFTHELP.COM INSIDER (9-11 PM EST), but we are engaging in a little cross-promotion here and getting the listeners in the mode of fantasy sports (well, sort of!) for our second annual fantasy "I'd Hit That" draft coming up in February!
In Hour Two, the Opening Statements will commence, followed by another in our long line of classic political roundtables as we assess the winnowing fields of presidential candidates in both political parties. From there, we take a look at a unique and sad situation: the impact of Heath Ledger's passing on this summer's huge Batman blockbuster "The Dark Knight," where he plays the Joker in a role around which most of the marketing was slated to be built.
With that discussion carrying into Hour Three, we'll get back to the sports/sports entertainment part of the proceedings when we review the NHL All-Star Game from earlier that night in HotLanta, preview the Super Bowl and the broadcast extravaganza that always gains as much attention as the game itself, and finally recap that evening's WWE Royal Rumble pay-per-view with one of the WrestleMania main event participants being crowned. Join us as we celebrate the first show in our second year of existence, the show that is wider-ranging than any other in the solar system: The FDH Lounge.
A Message Board Reply I Never Posted
by Jason Jones
This is more or less a message to anyone who is less than polite/logical when posting on any message board (specifically a sports message board):
This is more or less a message to anyone who is less than polite/logical when posting on any message board (specifically a sports message board):
|
| |
|
Friday, January 25, 2008
Matthew Berry is a TOOL
by Jason Jones
In the previous post, I mentioned the idiocy of Matthew Berry. If need be, refer to said previous post to relate the following rules. Rules by Mr. Berry should not be adhered to, ever.
Rule 1
Your first fantasy rule to draft by is you must go running back/running back in the first two rounds. I disregarded that rule completely and it rendered, 2645 yds and 24 tds by running backs taken in the 5th and 8th rounds respectively.
Rule 2
Your second fantasy rule to draft by is to not get dazzled by rookie hype anywhere except running back. I believe he qualified this statement by adding "running backs" merely to save his azz. If you asked him ahead of the first regular season game, he would tell you that even Peterson did not merit a pick.
Rule 3
Your third fantasy rule to draft by is you must handcuff your stud running back. By "handcuff" we mean take the backup to that player. By insinuating that every team has a Portis/Betts combo, he comes off sounding almost intelligent. The only problem is that very few teams have a decent backup worth drafting. Generally, those teams are splitting carries and the result is two players stats might add up to one on another team.
Rule 4
Your fourth fantasy rule to draft by is to wait on wide receivers, because statistically speaking, they're a dime a dozen. "A dime a dozen", huh? 20 WR's had over 1,000 yds, that's almost 2 1,000 yard WR's per fantasy team. Check the previously mentioned team...2,933 yds and 31 tds between only 2 WR's.
Rule 5
Your fifth fantasy rule to draft by is to remember that we play with numbers, not names. No S#$T!!! Too bad you don't take your own advice on this one. Too often people refer to name recognition. Check the record, Berry is as bad at this one as anyone.
Rule 6
Your sixth rule to draft by is to not draft a kicker until the last round. This one not many people would argue with, but look at it closer. The difference between the best kicker and the 12th best kicker is almost 40 points. Its not about it being the last pick. If you are serious about winning a championship, you have to consider bye weeks. Is he claiming you should only take one kicker and punt the bye week? If not then you have to take a kicker before the final round. Besides, if you draft correctly in a 15 round draft, there are bench players who will never see the light of day. Clearly, it would make sense to draft a starting kicker ahead of a 5th WR or 4th RB.
Rule 7
Your seventh fantasy rule to draft by is that you can't win your league in the first few rounds, but you can lose it. Wow! Did you think that one up all on your own? This is where value is excessively important. That is about as obvious as saying, "You can't win with a team full of bench players"
Rule 8
Your eighth fantasy rule to draft by is not to be scared by the running back by committee. BULLS#$T!!!! Julius Jones, 588 yds 2 tds/Marion Barber III, 975 yds 10 tds = 1593/12. J.Lewis and A.Peterson = 2845/24. Running back by committee should be avoided if at all possible. Two starters getting the bulk of the carries will always beat a committee system. That's just basic math, I cannot believe he is this stupid.
Rule 9
Your ninth rule to draft by is to identify a sleeper is by seeing how they ended the previous season. Too many people already look at last season's stats only. The best example of this is Randy Moss. In OAK, he only put up 533 yds and 3 tds. Based on that idea, Moss is a sleeper; for the top third of the draft. It is so much more important to evenly analyze a players previous stats + outside circumstances. Any idiot would have thought Moss would have to put up drastically better numbers in NE over OAK. As for true sleepers, circumstances are absolutely more important than previous stats.
Rule 10
Your tenth rule to draft by is concentrate on facts and ignore the myths. People love to talk about contract years... Ok, maybe, but instead of worrying about the smaller details, how about just picking solid players with value and solid surrounding circumstances? Again, it seems Berry enjoys talking down the readers/listeners. At FantasyDraftHelp, we don't waste your time with the information you already know.
Rule 11
Your 11th rule to draft by is to look closely at the schedule. I'm not really worried about bye weeks. It's one week, if you have to take it on the chin, so what? But if fantasy football is all about matchups... I am so happy he put this one down. The biggest strike against Berry came when he strongly advised that anyone who owns Adrian Peterson MUST SIT HIM AGAINST THE CHARGERS. The Chargers had defended the run reasonably well. Berry puts way too much stock in matchups. The fact of the matter is, if a player is good/great, it shouldn't matter who he plays against. Earlier, Peterson put up 200 on Chicago, and at that point they still were considered an elite defense. The Giants have one of the worst cornerback units in the league, but they still did well against Randy Moss in Week 17. Matchups mean squat; for the most part. A matchup is not enough reason to sit your stud players. Matthew Berry, I dare you to respond!
Rule 12
Rule No. 12 to draft by is to know the tendencies of a head coach. Lots of people are high on Philip Rivers this year, but while I like his skills, Norv Turner has never had a top-10 fantasy quarterback. Is your foot in your mouth yet, numb nuts? Phillip Rivers was the 15th best fantasy QB (and considering he did not rank Derek Anderson, Ben Roesthlisberger, Kurt Warner, Jay Cutler, Jon Kitna, or Eli Manning in the top 15), that puts Rivers in the top 10. Rivers was also the 12th highest ranked QB in TD passes, so what the hell are you barking about now?!? Again, he gets caught up with the wrong details. With McNabb, Garcia, Bulger, and Leinart being behind Rivers, Rivers is a quality selection as long as you adhere to value. Naturally, you're not going to take him in the first 3 rounds, but if you pick RBs and WRs ahead of a starting QB, it does make sense. That's just one example.
Rule 13
Rule No. 13 to draft by is to look at all stats, not just the obvious ones. Like Red Zone targets. How about looking at RBs 3rd down and short percentages? Sometimes if you analyze too much you can lose sight of the important details. This is why artists periodically step back to get a better look during the process. Hypothetically speaking, say WR A last season had 1400 yds/15tds. WR B had 900 yds/8tds. If WR B had 7 tds in the red zone and WR A had 5, WHAT THE HELL DOES THAT MATTER. These are the kind of things that might come in to question when deciding on which WR to take in the 13th round, after your starters are set. Again, these are the kind of players who may never start, if you draft correctly.
Rule 14
The 14th rule to draft by is when it comes to quarterback this year, there's the top 6 and everyone else. Hopefully, you manage to grab one of Peyton Manning, Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Marc Bulger or Donovan McNabb. Ranks: Peyton Manning (3rd), Carson Palmer (9th), Tom Brady (1st), Drew Brees (4th), Marc Bulger (22nd), and Donovon McNabb (12th). With a range of 1st-22nd, there are 16 other guys to consider. Although I do not disagree that these are quality players, one cannot discount Romo, Roethlisberger, Favre, Hasselbeck, Eli Manning, Rivers and a group of others. It all comes back to value. Where are you picking your starting QB? If its in the first 3 or 4 rounds, then maybe. But if you go into a draft with the plan of picking a RB in the first and second, a QB in the third, a WR in the fourth and fifth, a TE in the sixth, and so on...you will lose every time.
Rule 15
Rule No. 15 is to concentrate more on the skills of players than actual roles. People get hung up on the terms starter, No. 3 wide receiver and change-of-pace back. Rightfully so. The highest ranked "change of pace back" was Najeh Davenport with 499 yds and 5 tds. He seriously believes we are all stupid, that or he doesn't actually do his own research. Maurice Jones-Drew is not a change of pace back, he is the future starter and almost a 50% share of the carries. Clinton Portis was the 5th best RB with 1262 yds and 11 tds, Ladell Betts (his handcuff) was ranked 57th with 335 yds and 1 td and should not have been drafted or at least dropped at some point early on. And if anyone doesn't think Reggie Wayne is worthy of the 5th-8th best WR, then they need a different hobby.
All in all, the point is very simple. You cannot have absolute rules to draft by. The draft moves like a living thing. Just like in the real NFL, NBA, MLB, or NHL drafts a GM (fantasy owner) must be willing to roll with the changes as they unfold. Trends toward many players being taken at a position in close succession, commonly referred to as runs, must be adjusted to if you are to be successful. If you are picking 9th and running backs have gone 1-8, it makes more sense to take the #1 WR or #1 QB and address RB later. In the previous post I showed how you can do just that and still build a team that would destroy someone who follows Berry's Rules. According to Berry, you should draft Deuce McAllister (1057/10-2006 stats) over Peyton Manning (4397/31-2006 stats) or Chad Johnson (1369/7-2006 stats). Is it any wonder this guy drives me nuts. Bottom line, don't listen to "The Talentless Hack" Matthew Berry. Do yourself a favor and think for yourself. If you don't have the time, do some initial research on various fantasy websites. When you are done with that, I guarantee you, it will be in your best interest to get all advice, draft boards, and analysis from
www.fantasydrafthelp.com
In the previous post, I mentioned the idiocy of Matthew Berry. If need be, refer to said previous post to relate the following rules. Rules by Mr. Berry should not be adhered to, ever.
Rule 1
Your first fantasy rule to draft by is you must go running back/running back in the first two rounds. I disregarded that rule completely and it rendered, 2645 yds and 24 tds by running backs taken in the 5th and 8th rounds respectively.
Rule 2
Your second fantasy rule to draft by is to not get dazzled by rookie hype anywhere except running back. I believe he qualified this statement by adding "running backs" merely to save his azz. If you asked him ahead of the first regular season game, he would tell you that even Peterson did not merit a pick.
Rule 3
Your third fantasy rule to draft by is you must handcuff your stud running back. By "handcuff" we mean take the backup to that player. By insinuating that every team has a Portis/Betts combo, he comes off sounding almost intelligent. The only problem is that very few teams have a decent backup worth drafting. Generally, those teams are splitting carries and the result is two players stats might add up to one on another team.
Rule 4
Your fourth fantasy rule to draft by is to wait on wide receivers, because statistically speaking, they're a dime a dozen. "A dime a dozen", huh? 20 WR's had over 1,000 yds, that's almost 2 1,000 yard WR's per fantasy team. Check the previously mentioned team...2,933 yds and 31 tds between only 2 WR's.
Rule 5
Your fifth fantasy rule to draft by is to remember that we play with numbers, not names. No S#$T!!! Too bad you don't take your own advice on this one. Too often people refer to name recognition. Check the record, Berry is as bad at this one as anyone.
Rule 6
Your sixth rule to draft by is to not draft a kicker until the last round. This one not many people would argue with, but look at it closer. The difference between the best kicker and the 12th best kicker is almost 40 points. Its not about it being the last pick. If you are serious about winning a championship, you have to consider bye weeks. Is he claiming you should only take one kicker and punt the bye week? If not then you have to take a kicker before the final round. Besides, if you draft correctly in a 15 round draft, there are bench players who will never see the light of day. Clearly, it would make sense to draft a starting kicker ahead of a 5th WR or 4th RB.
Rule 7
Your seventh fantasy rule to draft by is that you can't win your league in the first few rounds, but you can lose it. Wow! Did you think that one up all on your own? This is where value is excessively important. That is about as obvious as saying, "You can't win with a team full of bench players"
Rule 8
Your eighth fantasy rule to draft by is not to be scared by the running back by committee. BULLS#$T!!!! Julius Jones, 588 yds 2 tds/Marion Barber III, 975 yds 10 tds = 1593/12. J.Lewis and A.Peterson = 2845/24. Running back by committee should be avoided if at all possible. Two starters getting the bulk of the carries will always beat a committee system. That's just basic math, I cannot believe he is this stupid.
Rule 9
Your ninth rule to draft by is to identify a sleeper is by seeing how they ended the previous season. Too many people already look at last season's stats only. The best example of this is Randy Moss. In OAK, he only put up 533 yds and 3 tds. Based on that idea, Moss is a sleeper; for the top third of the draft. It is so much more important to evenly analyze a players previous stats + outside circumstances. Any idiot would have thought Moss would have to put up drastically better numbers in NE over OAK. As for true sleepers, circumstances are absolutely more important than previous stats.
Rule 10
Your tenth rule to draft by is concentrate on facts and ignore the myths. People love to talk about contract years... Ok, maybe, but instead of worrying about the smaller details, how about just picking solid players with value and solid surrounding circumstances? Again, it seems Berry enjoys talking down the readers/listeners. At FantasyDraftHelp, we don't waste your time with the information you already know.
Rule 11
Your 11th rule to draft by is to look closely at the schedule. I'm not really worried about bye weeks. It's one week, if you have to take it on the chin, so what? But if fantasy football is all about matchups... I am so happy he put this one down. The biggest strike against Berry came when he strongly advised that anyone who owns Adrian Peterson MUST SIT HIM AGAINST THE CHARGERS. The Chargers had defended the run reasonably well. Berry puts way too much stock in matchups. The fact of the matter is, if a player is good/great, it shouldn't matter who he plays against. Earlier, Peterson put up 200 on Chicago, and at that point they still were considered an elite defense. The Giants have one of the worst cornerback units in the league, but they still did well against Randy Moss in Week 17. Matchups mean squat; for the most part. A matchup is not enough reason to sit your stud players. Matthew Berry, I dare you to respond!
Rule 12
Rule No. 12 to draft by is to know the tendencies of a head coach. Lots of people are high on Philip Rivers this year, but while I like his skills, Norv Turner has never had a top-10 fantasy quarterback. Is your foot in your mouth yet, numb nuts? Phillip Rivers was the 15th best fantasy QB (and considering he did not rank Derek Anderson, Ben Roesthlisberger, Kurt Warner, Jay Cutler, Jon Kitna, or Eli Manning in the top 15), that puts Rivers in the top 10. Rivers was also the 12th highest ranked QB in TD passes, so what the hell are you barking about now?!? Again, he gets caught up with the wrong details. With McNabb, Garcia, Bulger, and Leinart being behind Rivers, Rivers is a quality selection as long as you adhere to value. Naturally, you're not going to take him in the first 3 rounds, but if you pick RBs and WRs ahead of a starting QB, it does make sense. That's just one example.
Rule 13
Rule No. 13 to draft by is to look at all stats, not just the obvious ones. Like Red Zone targets. How about looking at RBs 3rd down and short percentages? Sometimes if you analyze too much you can lose sight of the important details. This is why artists periodically step back to get a better look during the process. Hypothetically speaking, say WR A last season had 1400 yds/15tds. WR B had 900 yds/8tds. If WR B had 7 tds in the red zone and WR A had 5, WHAT THE HELL DOES THAT MATTER. These are the kind of things that might come in to question when deciding on which WR to take in the 13th round, after your starters are set. Again, these are the kind of players who may never start, if you draft correctly.
Rule 14
The 14th rule to draft by is when it comes to quarterback this year, there's the top 6 and everyone else. Hopefully, you manage to grab one of Peyton Manning, Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Marc Bulger or Donovan McNabb. Ranks: Peyton Manning (3rd), Carson Palmer (9th), Tom Brady (1st), Drew Brees (4th), Marc Bulger (22nd), and Donovon McNabb (12th). With a range of 1st-22nd, there are 16 other guys to consider. Although I do not disagree that these are quality players, one cannot discount Romo, Roethlisberger, Favre, Hasselbeck, Eli Manning, Rivers and a group of others. It all comes back to value. Where are you picking your starting QB? If its in the first 3 or 4 rounds, then maybe. But if you go into a draft with the plan of picking a RB in the first and second, a QB in the third, a WR in the fourth and fifth, a TE in the sixth, and so on...you will lose every time.
Rule 15
Rule No. 15 is to concentrate more on the skills of players than actual roles. People get hung up on the terms starter, No. 3 wide receiver and change-of-pace back. Rightfully so. The highest ranked "change of pace back" was Najeh Davenport with 499 yds and 5 tds. He seriously believes we are all stupid, that or he doesn't actually do his own research. Maurice Jones-Drew is not a change of pace back, he is the future starter and almost a 50% share of the carries. Clinton Portis was the 5th best RB with 1262 yds and 11 tds, Ladell Betts (his handcuff) was ranked 57th with 335 yds and 1 td and should not have been drafted or at least dropped at some point early on. And if anyone doesn't think Reggie Wayne is worthy of the 5th-8th best WR, then they need a different hobby.
All in all, the point is very simple. You cannot have absolute rules to draft by. The draft moves like a living thing. Just like in the real NFL, NBA, MLB, or NHL drafts a GM (fantasy owner) must be willing to roll with the changes as they unfold. Trends toward many players being taken at a position in close succession, commonly referred to as runs, must be adjusted to if you are to be successful. If you are picking 9th and running backs have gone 1-8, it makes more sense to take the #1 WR or #1 QB and address RB later. In the previous post I showed how you can do just that and still build a team that would destroy someone who follows Berry's Rules. According to Berry, you should draft Deuce McAllister (1057/10-2006 stats) over Peyton Manning (4397/31-2006 stats) or Chad Johnson (1369/7-2006 stats). Is it any wonder this guy drives me nuts. Bottom line, don't listen to "The Talentless Hack" Matthew Berry. Do yourself a favor and think for yourself. If you don't have the time, do some initial research on various fantasy websites. When you are done with that, I guarantee you, it will be in your best interest to get all advice, draft boards, and analysis from
www.fantasydrafthelp.com
...On the Matthew Berry Front...
by Jason Jones
We have been hammering home this idea that the #1 perceived sports network's (ESPN) lead fantasy sports expert is a sham or a mockery, in Matthew Berry's case; a SHAMOCKERY. I have no doubt that anyone who is serious about fantasy sports could easily do as well if not better than Berry without trying very hard. When the guy is not giving safe advice (LaDainian Tomlinson is worth a top 5 pick), he is giving bad advice (bench Adrian Peterson against San Diego, which by the way was the game he broke the single-game rushing record). The guy has a list of players to never draft under any circumstances. Anyone who knows fantasy sports knows, the beauty of the game is how each circumstance is different and each fantasy owner must adjust accordingly. Before the '07 season, he said never draft Terrell Owens. Maybe if you believe T.O. is not worth taking in the first or second round, that's fine. What if everyone in your league is thinking the same thing, you mean to tell me that you wouldn't take T.O. in the 4th or 5th when the value dictates that you HAVE TO take him. The guy lead all receivers in TDs in '06. The guy is an idiot. As if I am the only one who feels this way, here are some points made on a non-FDH affiliated message board.
-He is that dude that came on ESPN last night and said people are drafting Ryan Howard too early. He is the same guy that had his own fantasy football show on ESPN this year, and b/c of him, I drafted Chris Chambers real early, and he sucked this year. He is a smug, cocky, idiot, and I am 100% positive all of us here could run circles around him at his job. Ya feel me!!!
-Agreed...him being on TV really has annoyed me. I used to read his website, but since he aired on ESPN I have realized his information is useless. I think I saw some website who compared and analyzed his rankings (for basketball) against other sites and his picks were by far the worst overall.
-He is definitely too cocky for me, too bad ESPN partnered with him.he keeps saying Igawa will have DiceK like numbers. i dunno about that.The following is a fantasy team of mine that I did just for fun, winning a title.
QB-Tom Brady
RB-Jamal Lewis
RB-Adrian Peterson
WR-Randy Moss
WR-Chad Johnson
WR-Calvin Johnson
TE-Kellen Winslow
K-Jason Hanson
DEF-Jacksonville
All due to VALUE, VALUE, VALUE
According to Berry,
^ Tom Brady is in the top 4-6 QB fantasy wise (League MVP, and finished 4800 yds/50tds)
^ Jamal Lewis is over the hill and done (1300 yds/11 combined tds)
^ Adrian Peterson, never draft rookies (1341 yds/13 combined tds-oh, and rushing champ)
^ Randy Moss, he will never be the Moss of old, (1493 yds/23 F#$@ing tds!)
^ Chad Johnson, he's good but not worth taking too high (1440 yds/8tds in a very down year)
^ Calvin Johnson, he's a rookie so don't bother (756 yds/5 tds-not great but a decent 3rd WR)
^ Kellen Winslow, hasn't proven himself enough to worry about (1106 yds/5tds-4th best fantasy TE)
^ Jason Hanson, who cares about kickers anyway? (139 fantasy points-5th best K points wise)
^ Jacksonville, don't worry about defenses, i.e. Punt the position (14th best and taken late)
Here's the point. It's all about value. In hindsight it would make sense if the draft went-Brady (1st), A. Peterson (2nd), and Moss (3rd). That is clearly not how it went down. The following is the order in which players were selected. Again remember value is everything. If I listened to Berry there is no way I could have drafted this team.
1st round (pick 8) Chad Johnson
2nd round (pick 13) Randy Moss
3rd round (pick 28) Tom Brady
4th round (pick 33) Calvin Johnson
5th round (pick 48) Jamal Lewis
6th round (pick 53) Cadillac Williams
7th round (pick 68) Matt Hasselbeck
8th round (pick 73) Adrian Peterson
9th round (pick 88) Kellen Winslow
10th round (pick 93) Jay Cutler
11th round (pick 108) Joe Horn
12th round (pick 113) Devin Hester
13th round (pick 128) Greg Olsen
14th round (pick 133) Jacksonville
15th round (pick 148) Jason Hanson
Note: 6th round pick C.Williams never played. If you draft correctly a third of your picks will never play outside of bye weeks (Hasselbeck, Cutler, Horn, Hester, Olsen).
The value displayed here is unreal. As impossible as it may seem, this is the kind of analysis and success you can come to expect from www.fantasydrafthelp.com, not Matthew Berry.
I would put up my best team from '07 (I love to draft so I have upwards of 14 teams) against any of Berry's and would smoke him by Week 8.
We have been hammering home this idea that the #1 perceived sports network's (ESPN) lead fantasy sports expert is a sham or a mockery, in Matthew Berry's case; a SHAMOCKERY. I have no doubt that anyone who is serious about fantasy sports could easily do as well if not better than Berry without trying very hard. When the guy is not giving safe advice (LaDainian Tomlinson is worth a top 5 pick), he is giving bad advice (bench Adrian Peterson against San Diego, which by the way was the game he broke the single-game rushing record). The guy has a list of players to never draft under any circumstances. Anyone who knows fantasy sports knows, the beauty of the game is how each circumstance is different and each fantasy owner must adjust accordingly. Before the '07 season, he said never draft Terrell Owens. Maybe if you believe T.O. is not worth taking in the first or second round, that's fine. What if everyone in your league is thinking the same thing, you mean to tell me that you wouldn't take T.O. in the 4th or 5th when the value dictates that you HAVE TO take him. The guy lead all receivers in TDs in '06. The guy is an idiot. As if I am the only one who feels this way, here are some points made on a non-FDH affiliated message board.
-He is that dude that came on ESPN last night and said people are drafting Ryan Howard too early. He is the same guy that had his own fantasy football show on ESPN this year, and b/c of him, I drafted Chris Chambers real early, and he sucked this year. He is a smug, cocky, idiot, and I am 100% positive all of us here could run circles around him at his job. Ya feel me!!!
-Agreed...him being on TV really has annoyed me. I used to read his website, but since he aired on ESPN I have realized his information is useless. I think I saw some website who compared and analyzed his rankings (for basketball) against other sites and his picks were by far the worst overall.
-He is definitely too cocky for me, too bad ESPN partnered with him.he keeps saying Igawa will have DiceK like numbers. i dunno about that.The following is a fantasy team of mine that I did just for fun, winning a title.
QB-Tom Brady
RB-Jamal Lewis
RB-Adrian Peterson
WR-Randy Moss
WR-Chad Johnson
WR-Calvin Johnson
TE-Kellen Winslow
K-Jason Hanson
DEF-Jacksonville
All due to VALUE, VALUE, VALUE
According to Berry,
^ Tom Brady is in the top 4-6 QB fantasy wise (League MVP, and finished 4800 yds/50tds)
^ Jamal Lewis is over the hill and done (1300 yds/11 combined tds)
^ Adrian Peterson, never draft rookies (1341 yds/13 combined tds-oh, and rushing champ)
^ Randy Moss, he will never be the Moss of old, (1493 yds/23 F#$@ing tds!)
^ Chad Johnson, he's good but not worth taking too high (1440 yds/8tds in a very down year)
^ Calvin Johnson, he's a rookie so don't bother (756 yds/5 tds-not great but a decent 3rd WR)
^ Kellen Winslow, hasn't proven himself enough to worry about (1106 yds/5tds-4th best fantasy TE)
^ Jason Hanson, who cares about kickers anyway? (139 fantasy points-5th best K points wise)
^ Jacksonville, don't worry about defenses, i.e. Punt the position (14th best and taken late)
Here's the point. It's all about value. In hindsight it would make sense if the draft went-Brady (1st), A. Peterson (2nd), and Moss (3rd). That is clearly not how it went down. The following is the order in which players were selected. Again remember value is everything. If I listened to Berry there is no way I could have drafted this team.
1st round (pick 8) Chad Johnson
2nd round (pick 13) Randy Moss
3rd round (pick 28) Tom Brady
4th round (pick 33) Calvin Johnson
5th round (pick 48) Jamal Lewis
6th round (pick 53) Cadillac Williams
7th round (pick 68) Matt Hasselbeck
8th round (pick 73) Adrian Peterson
9th round (pick 88) Kellen Winslow
10th round (pick 93) Jay Cutler
11th round (pick 108) Joe Horn
12th round (pick 113) Devin Hester
13th round (pick 128) Greg Olsen
14th round (pick 133) Jacksonville
15th round (pick 148) Jason Hanson
Note: 6th round pick C.Williams never played. If you draft correctly a third of your picks will never play outside of bye weeks (Hasselbeck, Cutler, Horn, Hester, Olsen).
The value displayed here is unreal. As impossible as it may seem, this is the kind of analysis and success you can come to expect from www.fantasydrafthelp.com, not Matthew Berry.
I would put up my best team from '07 (I love to draft so I have upwards of 14 teams) against any of Berry's and would smoke him by Week 8.
The Newest Internet Craze by People with Too Much Time
by Jason Jones
The newest internet craze to be filed under the sub folder of "Some People Have Too Much Time on Their Hands" is something called Misheard Lyrics. This is a favorite pastime for my wife, who loves spending a great deal of time at night searching for tedious funny stuff on the internet. Things like videos of cats dancing to music, people getting hurt doing stupid stuff, etc. The newest adventure is Misheard Lyrics, which is exactly what it sounds like. A great example of this, and almost everyone knows someone who has made a fool of themselves doing this, is the Cingular commercial that aired last year.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOLPrdd8JvU
Well, what these kids have done, (I can only assume they are young people considering how much time it must take to construct one of these), is taken actual songs and comprised a video slide show animating the lyrics INCORRECTLY. Some of them are actually very funny.
This particular video is of Fall Out Boy's "This Ain't a Scene, Arms Race" song, which is hard enough to know the words to. Those are funniest ones. If you are unsure of the lyrical content, you can bet it will be funny.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmwAu0j5ipU
So, if you're REALLY bored or need a laugh, just go into Youtube and search:
MISHEARD LYRICS
The newest internet craze to be filed under the sub folder of "Some People Have Too Much Time on Their Hands" is something called Misheard Lyrics. This is a favorite pastime for my wife, who loves spending a great deal of time at night searching for tedious funny stuff on the internet. Things like videos of cats dancing to music, people getting hurt doing stupid stuff, etc. The newest adventure is Misheard Lyrics, which is exactly what it sounds like. A great example of this, and almost everyone knows someone who has made a fool of themselves doing this, is the Cingular commercial that aired last year.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOLPrdd8JvU
Well, what these kids have done, (I can only assume they are young people considering how much time it must take to construct one of these), is taken actual songs and comprised a video slide show animating the lyrics INCORRECTLY. Some of them are actually very funny.
This particular video is of Fall Out Boy's "This Ain't a Scene, Arms Race" song, which is hard enough to know the words to. Those are funniest ones. If you are unsure of the lyrical content, you can bet it will be funny.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmwAu0j5ipU
So, if you're REALLY bored or need a laugh, just go into Youtube and search:
MISHEARD LYRICS
Thursday, January 24, 2008
2008 Undeclared Underclassmen...Right, Wrong, or Indifferent
by Jason Jones
ALL of the Ohio State
Undeclared Underclassmen
- Darren McFadden-RB
- Kenny Phillips-FS
- James Laurinaitus-ILB
- Ryan Clady-OT
- Jonathan Stewart-RB
- Malcolm Jenkins-CB
- Malcolm Kelly-WR
- Kevin Smith-RB
- DeSean Jackson-WR
- Aqib Talib-CB
- Felix Jones-RB
- Rashard Mendenhall-RB
- Pat Sims-DT
- Derrick Harvey-DE
- Jerod Mayo-ILB
- Jamaal Charles-RB
- James Hardy-WR
- Geno Hayes-OLB
- Ray Rice-RB
- Mario Manningham-WR
- Steve Slaton-RB
- James Davis-RB
- Adrian Arrington-WR
- Justin King-CB
- Brian Robiskie-WR
- Mario Urrita-WR
- Jack Ikegwuonu-CB
- Erin Henderson-OLB
- Brandon Flowers-CB
- Earl Bennett-WR
- Martellius Bennett-TE
- Devin Thomas-WR
- Chilo Rachal-OLB
- Phillip Merling-DE
- Jermichael Finley-TE
- Anthony Collins-OT
- Joe Burnett-OT
- Branden Albert-G
- DaJuan Morgan-FS
- Taj Smith-WR
- Johnny Dingle-DE
- Ryan Grice-Mullen-WR
- Darius Reynaud-WR
- Victor Harris-CB
- Franklin Dunbar-OT
- Davone Bess-WR
- James Banks-WR
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
It's America's loss, not Fred's
By Rick Morris
Fair warning: Bitterness Alert!
Every four years, you always hear people whining about the choice for president. "I can't believe it's Bush and Kerry. Can't we do better than that?" Four years before that, people were appalled by the choice between Bush and Gore. And on and on it goes.
Almost invariably, though, this country generally has at least a decent chance to do better, but rejects it in favor of a flashier or better-funded empty suit. The USA blew it again today when Fred Thompson dropped out of the race. Hence, history will repeat itself later this year when people are crying about the pathetic choice foisted upon this nation by the Democrats and Republicans.
Fred had it all: he possessed common-sense ideas that have been validated over the decades, he took on volatile issues like entitlement reform, he was a solid communicator and he treated the American public with decency and respect and had the courage to ask the same in return. This country, and in particular the Republican Party and the conservative movement, chose instead to their everlasting shame to continue their pattern (broken only by Reagan) of foisting crappy mediocrities on this land of ours.
Some of my friends who are Republican insiders, including some members of The FDH Lounge family, believe in the "Jim Rome Scoreboard Theory of Politics." That is, if you're the last man standing, that you're the best man because you proved your worth by going through the gauntlet. Scoreboard!
I couldn't disagree more.
Fred Thompson was the best man and it is only a broken system that kept him from being able to break through the glass ceiling put on him by the jerks in the media and the political class. His failure is an INDICTMENT of our political system. This is one reason that, although I don't like it, I'm not as consumed with hatred for McCain-Feingold as my aforementioned friends. Granted, the law is unconstitutional and was a bad idea. But unlike my friends, I refuse to glorify the present system and pretend there's nothing wrong with it. Winning a nomination by being the best at conspiring in smoke-filled rooms with party puppet-masters is the proven way to get ahead -- as the nominations of both political parties have shown over the past few decades. But it is nothing for our country to be proud of, as it is evidence that our democracy is broken. Now before any of my friends get the urge to go more-conservative-than-thou on me for appropriating the language of The Nation magazine for my critique, let me remind them that our Founding Fathers, whom we on the right respect greatly, did not intend for the pursuit of our nation's highest office to be just another game of casino capitalism.
Political pundits are now wondering where the Thompson support will end up now. As for me, I am disregarding early indications that Thompson will not make an endorsement and I anticipate that he will endorse John McCain -- and, given the prominent right-wingers (i.e. Gramm/Kemp/Coburn) who have recently surrounded McCain and figure to serve as his braintrust if elected president, I will probably give McCain my reluctant support as well.
I do want to beg any of my fellow Fred supporters, who have by definition been smart enough not to get hoodwinked by Say-Anything Mittens (rumor has it he's going around saying he's the only person who can get Axl Rose to release the Chinese Democracy album!) not to give into this vile fraud of a campaign at this late hour. Not only are Romney's convictions demonstrably only an inch deep, the rotten Romney campaign should pay a price for the whisper campaign waged about Fred's viability from Day One -- with the low point being the cancer-mongering put forth by one of their chief mouthpieces. This nation today suffered the loss of its best candidate for president -- let's not compound the error by awarding the GOP nomination to a denizen of the political gutter.
Fair warning: Bitterness Alert!
Every four years, you always hear people whining about the choice for president. "I can't believe it's Bush and Kerry. Can't we do better than that?" Four years before that, people were appalled by the choice between Bush and Gore. And on and on it goes.
Almost invariably, though, this country generally has at least a decent chance to do better, but rejects it in favor of a flashier or better-funded empty suit. The USA blew it again today when Fred Thompson dropped out of the race. Hence, history will repeat itself later this year when people are crying about the pathetic choice foisted upon this nation by the Democrats and Republicans.
Fred had it all: he possessed common-sense ideas that have been validated over the decades, he took on volatile issues like entitlement reform, he was a solid communicator and he treated the American public with decency and respect and had the courage to ask the same in return. This country, and in particular the Republican Party and the conservative movement, chose instead to their everlasting shame to continue their pattern (broken only by Reagan) of foisting crappy mediocrities on this land of ours.
Some of my friends who are Republican insiders, including some members of The FDH Lounge family, believe in the "Jim Rome Scoreboard Theory of Politics." That is, if you're the last man standing, that you're the best man because you proved your worth by going through the gauntlet. Scoreboard!
I couldn't disagree more.
Fred Thompson was the best man and it is only a broken system that kept him from being able to break through the glass ceiling put on him by the jerks in the media and the political class. His failure is an INDICTMENT of our political system. This is one reason that, although I don't like it, I'm not as consumed with hatred for McCain-Feingold as my aforementioned friends. Granted, the law is unconstitutional and was a bad idea. But unlike my friends, I refuse to glorify the present system and pretend there's nothing wrong with it. Winning a nomination by being the best at conspiring in smoke-filled rooms with party puppet-masters is the proven way to get ahead -- as the nominations of both political parties have shown over the past few decades. But it is nothing for our country to be proud of, as it is evidence that our democracy is broken. Now before any of my friends get the urge to go more-conservative-than-thou on me for appropriating the language of The Nation magazine for my critique, let me remind them that our Founding Fathers, whom we on the right respect greatly, did not intend for the pursuit of our nation's highest office to be just another game of casino capitalism.
Political pundits are now wondering where the Thompson support will end up now. As for me, I am disregarding early indications that Thompson will not make an endorsement and I anticipate that he will endorse John McCain -- and, given the prominent right-wingers (i.e. Gramm/Kemp/Coburn) who have recently surrounded McCain and figure to serve as his braintrust if elected president, I will probably give McCain my reluctant support as well.
I do want to beg any of my fellow Fred supporters, who have by definition been smart enough not to get hoodwinked by Say-Anything Mittens (rumor has it he's going around saying he's the only person who can get Axl Rose to release the Chinese Democracy album!) not to give into this vile fraud of a campaign at this late hour. Not only are Romney's convictions demonstrably only an inch deep, the rotten Romney campaign should pay a price for the whisper campaign waged about Fred's viability from Day One -- with the low point being the cancer-mongering put forth by one of their chief mouthpieces. This nation today suffered the loss of its best candidate for president -- let's not compound the error by awarding the GOP nomination to a denizen of the political gutter.
Monday, January 21, 2008
The greatest page on the Internet (revisited)
By Rick Morris
We at FDH often speak of the "greatest page on the Internet," but that's because we are rightfully proud that it can be found on our mothership, FantasyDrafthelp.com. It's our "Depth Charts and Ultimate Links" page, and if it's not your home page or at least on your list of key bookmarks, shame on you. No, really, shame on you. We've provided it for almost a year now and we've written about it repeatedly, what's your excuse?
We started it as a page to be the ultimate portal for sports fans, but have expanded it well beyond that. Recently, we cracked the "500 barrier" and are now up to a grand total of 533 links. If you do not read this post almost immediately, that number may well be obsolete; we are expanding all the time as we come across new sources that we know people will want to have handy.
Every link fits into a given category. Here, we will lay out for you each of the categories on the page, the number of links in each category and what you can expect to find there.
EXPLICITLY SPORTS-ORIENTED LINKS (319)
BASEBALL DEPTH CHARTS (30): Depth charts for each MLB team from each team's official website.
FOOTBALL DEPTH CHARTS (32): Depth charts for each NFL team from each team's official website.
HOOPS DEPTH CHARTS (30): Depth charts for each NBA team from each team's official website.
BASEBALL MEDIA (17): Various forms of media dealing with baseball.
BASEBALL BLOGS (9): Blogs and other new media entities dealing with baseball.
FOOTBALL MEDIA (7): Various forms of media dealing with football.
FOOTBALL BLOGS (8): Blogs and other new media entities dealing with football.
HOOPS MEDIA (8): Various forms of media dealing with basketball.
HOOPS BLOGS (7): Blogs and other new media entities dealing with basketball.
HOCKEY MEDIA (7): Various forms of media dealing with hockey.
HOCKEY BLOGS (11): Blogs and other new media entities dealing with hockey.
RACING MEDIA (4): Various forms of media dealing with all types of motorsports.
NICHE SPORTS MEDIA (12): Various forms of media dealing with many types of niche sports.
MAJOR LEAGUES (5): Websites for the major sports leagues in North America.
OTHER LEAGUES (30): Websites for various other sports leagues all over the world.
HALL OF FAME (6): Websites for hall of fame institutions in major North American sports.
MAJOR SPORTS MEDIA (15): Entities comprising the sports wing of "mainstream media," including websites for wire services, newspapers, magazines and major sports networks.
NEW SPORTS MEDIA (32): Blogs and other new media entities dealing with a variety of sports.
CBS SPORTS HOME PAGES & SCORES BY SPORT (25): The home page for every sports category and every scoreboard in each sport on the CBS Sports website (i.e. NFL home page, MLB scores page, etc.).
SPORTS MULTIMEDIA (6): Various audio and video sources dealing with a variety of sports content.
MESSAGE BOARDS (6): Various forums dealing with a variety of sports.
SPORTSTALKNETWORK (11): Links to every resource for partaking of SportsTalkNetwork.com content.
THE FDH LOUNGE: NOTHING IS OFF-TOPIC (214): Inspired by THE FDH LOUNGE webcasts, these links direct you to stimulating websites in and beyond the world of sports.
MISCELLANEOUS SPORTS/SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT (19): Sports or sports-related websites important enough to be listed on our links page that do not fit into any other categories.
BLOG/SEARCH/VIDEO TOOLS (30): Websites that can direct you to whatever you want to find on the Internet.
COMPLETELY RANDOM (14): Non-sports websites important enough to be listed on our links page that do not fit into any other categories.
FINANCIAL/MARKETS (5): Websites related to finance and the markets.
FUN TIMEWASTERS (10): Video game and other fun websites.
GENERAL NEWS/MEDIA (29): Various types of news outlets.
GEOPOLITICS (8): Various web entities dealing with international relations and realities.
HEALTH/WELLNESS (3): Websites devoted to health issues.
HUMOR (6): Websites explicitly devoted to comedy.
POLITICS/PUBLIC POLICY (19): Web entities dealing with various political and public policy issues.
POP CULTURE GOODIES (5): Web entities dealing with various pop culture elements.
TV/MUSIC/FILM/GENERAL ENTERTAINMENT (23): Web entities dealing with a variety of general entertainment issues.
WEBCASTING (8): Websites providing access to various types of webcast programming.
WEB COMMERCE (7): Websites selling various services.
WEB TOOLS (20): Various websites providing miscellaneous services.
WORTHWHILE CAUSES (8): Various charitable and awareness-raising websites.
We at FDH often speak of the "greatest page on the Internet," but that's because we are rightfully proud that it can be found on our mothership, FantasyDrafthelp.com. It's our "Depth Charts and Ultimate Links" page, and if it's not your home page or at least on your list of key bookmarks, shame on you. No, really, shame on you. We've provided it for almost a year now and we've written about it repeatedly, what's your excuse?
We started it as a page to be the ultimate portal for sports fans, but have expanded it well beyond that. Recently, we cracked the "500 barrier" and are now up to a grand total of 533 links. If you do not read this post almost immediately, that number may well be obsolete; we are expanding all the time as we come across new sources that we know people will want to have handy.
Every link fits into a given category. Here, we will lay out for you each of the categories on the page, the number of links in each category and what you can expect to find there.
EXPLICITLY SPORTS-ORIENTED LINKS (319)
BASEBALL DEPTH CHARTS (30): Depth charts for each MLB team from each team's official website.
FOOTBALL DEPTH CHARTS (32): Depth charts for each NFL team from each team's official website.
HOOPS DEPTH CHARTS (30): Depth charts for each NBA team from each team's official website.
BASEBALL MEDIA (17): Various forms of media dealing with baseball.
BASEBALL BLOGS (9): Blogs and other new media entities dealing with baseball.
FOOTBALL MEDIA (7): Various forms of media dealing with football.
FOOTBALL BLOGS (8): Blogs and other new media entities dealing with football.
HOOPS MEDIA (8): Various forms of media dealing with basketball.
HOOPS BLOGS (7): Blogs and other new media entities dealing with basketball.
HOCKEY MEDIA (7): Various forms of media dealing with hockey.
HOCKEY BLOGS (11): Blogs and other new media entities dealing with hockey.
RACING MEDIA (4): Various forms of media dealing with all types of motorsports.
NICHE SPORTS MEDIA (12): Various forms of media dealing with many types of niche sports.
MAJOR LEAGUES (5): Websites for the major sports leagues in North America.
OTHER LEAGUES (30): Websites for various other sports leagues all over the world.
HALL OF FAME (6): Websites for hall of fame institutions in major North American sports.
MAJOR SPORTS MEDIA (15): Entities comprising the sports wing of "mainstream media," including websites for wire services, newspapers, magazines and major sports networks.
NEW SPORTS MEDIA (32): Blogs and other new media entities dealing with a variety of sports.
CBS SPORTS HOME PAGES & SCORES BY SPORT (25): The home page for every sports category and every scoreboard in each sport on the CBS Sports website (i.e. NFL home page, MLB scores page, etc.).
SPORTS MULTIMEDIA (6): Various audio and video sources dealing with a variety of sports content.
MESSAGE BOARDS (6): Various forums dealing with a variety of sports.
SPORTSTALKNETWORK (11): Links to every resource for partaking of SportsTalkNetwork.com content.
THE FDH LOUNGE: NOTHING IS OFF-TOPIC (214): Inspired by THE FDH LOUNGE webcasts, these links direct you to stimulating websites in and beyond the world of sports.
MISCELLANEOUS SPORTS/SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT (19): Sports or sports-related websites important enough to be listed on our links page that do not fit into any other categories.
BLOG/SEARCH/VIDEO TOOLS (30): Websites that can direct you to whatever you want to find on the Internet.
COMPLETELY RANDOM (14): Non-sports websites important enough to be listed on our links page that do not fit into any other categories.
FINANCIAL/MARKETS (5): Websites related to finance and the markets.
FUN TIMEWASTERS (10): Video game and other fun websites.
GENERAL NEWS/MEDIA (29): Various types of news outlets.
GEOPOLITICS (8): Various web entities dealing with international relations and realities.
HEALTH/WELLNESS (3): Websites devoted to health issues.
HUMOR (6): Websites explicitly devoted to comedy.
POLITICS/PUBLIC POLICY (19): Web entities dealing with various political and public policy issues.
POP CULTURE GOODIES (5): Web entities dealing with various pop culture elements.
TV/MUSIC/FILM/GENERAL ENTERTAINMENT (23): Web entities dealing with a variety of general entertainment issues.
WEBCASTING (8): Websites providing access to various types of webcast programming.
WEB COMMERCE (7): Websites selling various services.
WEB TOOLS (20): Various websites providing miscellaneous services.
WORTHWHILE CAUSES (8): Various charitable and awareness-raising websites.
Bill Clinton trashes the presidency -- again
By Rick Morris
I am anything but a Barack Obama partisan. But I agree with one point that he and other leading Democrats are making loud and clear today: that Bill Clinton continues to trash the dignity of the presidency in ways utterly unprecedented in the long history of our republic.
Former presidents, in exchange for the immense respect granted to them by dint of the fact that they occupied our country's highest office, are supposed to conduct themselves in a manner that will not embarrass us. But Clinton has always reeked of the kind of person who'd go on QVC to hock autographed pairs of his used underwear if he thought it would work to his advantage. What's a little base attack dog politicking among friends?
Granted, Slick Willie is in some uncharted waters here, what with trying to get a former First Lady elected as President of These United States. But notwithstanding the effort to make Hillary the Lurleen Wallace of the new millennium, the trade-off in terms of regaining power versus retaining respect that Bill Clinton is trying to make is completely wrong. For it is not respect for him personally that he is squandering, it is the respect our nation has placed in him as a holder of our most revered office.
It is a tad funny to see many Obama supporters exercising outrage about Clinton's descent into anything-goes politics at their expense. I wonder how many of them were similarly chagrined when he debased the Oval Office with his sexcapades, or discussed his choice in underwear on national television or brought down the dignity of the office in a host of other unprecedented ways? Darn few, I bet; in politics it's always a matter of whose ox is being gored.
Here's hoping that the next time the Democratic Party succeeds in electing a president that it care ALL of the time about the character and dignity of the person as opposed to merely when it suits the need of the moment.
I am anything but a Barack Obama partisan. But I agree with one point that he and other leading Democrats are making loud and clear today: that Bill Clinton continues to trash the dignity of the presidency in ways utterly unprecedented in the long history of our republic.
Former presidents, in exchange for the immense respect granted to them by dint of the fact that they occupied our country's highest office, are supposed to conduct themselves in a manner that will not embarrass us. But Clinton has always reeked of the kind of person who'd go on QVC to hock autographed pairs of his used underwear if he thought it would work to his advantage. What's a little base attack dog politicking among friends?
Granted, Slick Willie is in some uncharted waters here, what with trying to get a former First Lady elected as President of These United States. But notwithstanding the effort to make Hillary the Lurleen Wallace of the new millennium, the trade-off in terms of regaining power versus retaining respect that Bill Clinton is trying to make is completely wrong. For it is not respect for him personally that he is squandering, it is the respect our nation has placed in him as a holder of our most revered office.
It is a tad funny to see many Obama supporters exercising outrage about Clinton's descent into anything-goes politics at their expense. I wonder how many of them were similarly chagrined when he debased the Oval Office with his sexcapades, or discussed his choice in underwear on national television or brought down the dignity of the office in a host of other unprecedented ways? Darn few, I bet; in politics it's always a matter of whose ox is being gored.
Here's hoping that the next time the Democratic Party succeeds in electing a president that it care ALL of the time about the character and dignity of the person as opposed to merely when it suits the need of the moment.
Evaluating coaches fairly
By Rick Morris
The contract extension given to Mike Brown and the proposed extension on the table for Romeo Crennel have caused a great deal of heartburn among Cleveland sports fans. My amusement at the reaction of the general public led me to reexamine how fans tend to evaluate coaches purely on the surface.
To me, Cleveland is unique on the sports landscape right now in that it has three coach/manager figures who are so much alike. Brown, Crennel and Eric Wedge all have very low-key public personas. All are in their first go-round in leadership positions at the highest level and all are very interesting in having one common element: their weaknesses are much more evident than their strengths.
Spend five minutes listening to any Cleveland terrestrial radio show (often a painful experience on the ears) and you'll hear a multitude of complaints: "Wedge's teams don't bunt enough -- and don't grasp the fundamentals!" "What poor excuse for a rotation is Brown using these days -- and why doesn't he have a semblance of an offensive system?" "Crennel can't manage a replay situation or clock management to save his life!"
All are valid points.
But all have had a nice measure of success in town, much more than any of their immediate predecessors. All are clearly doing a great amount right.
But, as much as I watch all of their teams, even I can't point to much that is evident.
None are flashy X's and O's tacticians like Tony LaRussa or Mike Martz. None are wild disciplinarians like Tom Coughlin or Larry Bowa. When things are going well with each of the Cleveland franchises, you rarely if ever hear about what the manager or coach is doing.
Does that mean that we should discount the positive side of the ledger for these men? Hardly.
All have the respect of their teams and have demonstrated the ability to manage conflicts and keep the difficulties that all franchises face in-house. All of them must manage rosters that are not as talented top-to-bottom as the rosy-glass fanbase wants to believe. They excel in the quiet areas of their jobs, which do not come close in the public mind (which values only the obvious and surface-level traits) to balancing out their deficiencies.
I do not mind criticism of these men and have been known on SportsTalkNetwork.com programs to make specific points to that effect. But I am always mindful of the big picture and the respect that these men deserve on balance for leading these teams out of the muck and the mire that they were bogged down in just a few years ago. There is absolutely nothing wrong with informed criticism of sports figures, but let's try to keep it a bit more fair and balanced as Rupert Murdoch might say.
The contract extension given to Mike Brown and the proposed extension on the table for Romeo Crennel have caused a great deal of heartburn among Cleveland sports fans. My amusement at the reaction of the general public led me to reexamine how fans tend to evaluate coaches purely on the surface.
To me, Cleveland is unique on the sports landscape right now in that it has three coach/manager figures who are so much alike. Brown, Crennel and Eric Wedge all have very low-key public personas. All are in their first go-round in leadership positions at the highest level and all are very interesting in having one common element: their weaknesses are much more evident than their strengths.
Spend five minutes listening to any Cleveland terrestrial radio show (often a painful experience on the ears) and you'll hear a multitude of complaints: "Wedge's teams don't bunt enough -- and don't grasp the fundamentals!" "What poor excuse for a rotation is Brown using these days -- and why doesn't he have a semblance of an offensive system?" "Crennel can't manage a replay situation or clock management to save his life!"
All are valid points.
But all have had a nice measure of success in town, much more than any of their immediate predecessors. All are clearly doing a great amount right.
But, as much as I watch all of their teams, even I can't point to much that is evident.
None are flashy X's and O's tacticians like Tony LaRussa or Mike Martz. None are wild disciplinarians like Tom Coughlin or Larry Bowa. When things are going well with each of the Cleveland franchises, you rarely if ever hear about what the manager or coach is doing.
Does that mean that we should discount the positive side of the ledger for these men? Hardly.
All have the respect of their teams and have demonstrated the ability to manage conflicts and keep the difficulties that all franchises face in-house. All of them must manage rosters that are not as talented top-to-bottom as the rosy-glass fanbase wants to believe. They excel in the quiet areas of their jobs, which do not come close in the public mind (which values only the obvious and surface-level traits) to balancing out their deficiencies.
I do not mind criticism of these men and have been known on SportsTalkNetwork.com programs to make specific points to that effect. But I am always mindful of the big picture and the respect that these men deserve on balance for leading these teams out of the muck and the mire that they were bogged down in just a few years ago. There is absolutely nothing wrong with informed criticism of sports figures, but let's try to keep it a bit more fair and balanced as Rupert Murdoch might say.
Championship Sunday thoughts
By Rick Morris
^ Norv Turner and Philip Rivers are the biggest goats of the day without any doubt whatsoever. Unlike LaDainian Tomlinson, Rivers did not have the good sense to pull himself from the game and Turner did not have the stones to step in and do the job that leaders are paid to execute. How was yesterday's scene any different than Grady Little failing to take the ball out of Pedro Martinez's hands in the 2003 ALCS when his pitcher clearly was gassed? Forget the 2004 baseball postseason, there's your cosmic payback for Boston-area fans yesterday as the shoe was on the other foot. Rivers was in pathetic physical condition, unable to push off at all on his passes. There was so much air underneath his throws that I was half-waiting for the Patriots to signal for a fair catch before making an interception. It is utterly shameful to hold the Pats, the best offense of at least the modern era, to 21 points on their home field and not win the game. Spare me the gaga about Rivers inspiring his team by going out there one leg and not wanting to put the game in the hands of a backup. Phil Simms was just being a homer for the quarterback position when he argued otherwise with no evidence to back up his moronic position. While imperfect, Billy Volek is far better than the average backup and proved his mettle at Indy last week -- and the team wouldn't have folded pathetically in the red zone every time with a quarterback that was physically able to play. I actually like Rivers as a quarterback, but make no mistake that his John Wayne Complex and the gutless non-response of his head coach were primarily responsible for the team's failure to win a game that it should have.
^ Why wasn't the CBS pregame crew on the scene yesterday? Since when is the studio utilized for a Championship Sunday game? CBS doesn't even have the Super Bowl this year -- this was the biggest day of their football season! Fox Sports sent their crew to Lambeau yesterday as they will for the Super Bowl in two weeks. Shame on CBS.
^ Contrary to the final score, the Giants actually dominated the later stages of the game yesterday. How else could Lawrence Tynes miss a game-winning field goal every ninety seconds? Mike McCarthy will have to answer for the fact that he so easily abandoned the ground game. Much like the previous week, you have to give credit to the Giants, but the Cowboys and Packers both made a ton of self-inflicted mistakes. Speaking of which, and my friends watching with me concurred, the game had much more the feel of a routine Week 9 game than a conference title clash. The mistakes, the up-and-down play of so many key performers on both sides -- it just seemed to drain some of the air of urgency out of the contest.
^ Yesterday's game reinforces the notion that even if Brett Favre had pulled off the improbable second Super Bowl win of his career, he still would be no better than a Top Ten quarterback all-time looking in enviously at the Top Five. Few other elite quarterbacks have been great for as long as he has, and few of them have the records that he does -- but few of them have the brutal tendencies that he does to this day of forcing the football and trying too hard to make things happen. You live by being a gunslinger, you die by it also and the flip side of the reality that makes him a folk hero and a legend also makes him somebody that you have to be just a bit conflicted about having at the helm of your team in the clutch.
^ In trying to anticipate the oppressive media crush of manufactured Super Bowl storylines, a few come to mind. Tom Brady will now be carrying on his famous battle with the Manning family against the other brother. Given the fact that New York tends to break down (in large part) with so many fans rooting for the Mets and Jets (the newer franchises in town) and so many fans rooting for the Yankees and Giants (the old-line teams in town), the Super Bowl is going to pit a great many Yankee and Red Sox fans against each other (can we root for Mutually Assured Destruction?). I'm hard-pressed to conjure up a scenario that gives the Giants a serious chance for victory, but I will address the Super Bowl matchup in more detail at a later date.
^ Norv Turner and Philip Rivers are the biggest goats of the day without any doubt whatsoever. Unlike LaDainian Tomlinson, Rivers did not have the good sense to pull himself from the game and Turner did not have the stones to step in and do the job that leaders are paid to execute. How was yesterday's scene any different than Grady Little failing to take the ball out of Pedro Martinez's hands in the 2003 ALCS when his pitcher clearly was gassed? Forget the 2004 baseball postseason, there's your cosmic payback for Boston-area fans yesterday as the shoe was on the other foot. Rivers was in pathetic physical condition, unable to push off at all on his passes. There was so much air underneath his throws that I was half-waiting for the Patriots to signal for a fair catch before making an interception. It is utterly shameful to hold the Pats, the best offense of at least the modern era, to 21 points on their home field and not win the game. Spare me the gaga about Rivers inspiring his team by going out there one leg and not wanting to put the game in the hands of a backup. Phil Simms was just being a homer for the quarterback position when he argued otherwise with no evidence to back up his moronic position. While imperfect, Billy Volek is far better than the average backup and proved his mettle at Indy last week -- and the team wouldn't have folded pathetically in the red zone every time with a quarterback that was physically able to play. I actually like Rivers as a quarterback, but make no mistake that his John Wayne Complex and the gutless non-response of his head coach were primarily responsible for the team's failure to win a game that it should have.
^ Why wasn't the CBS pregame crew on the scene yesterday? Since when is the studio utilized for a Championship Sunday game? CBS doesn't even have the Super Bowl this year -- this was the biggest day of their football season! Fox Sports sent their crew to Lambeau yesterday as they will for the Super Bowl in two weeks. Shame on CBS.
^ Contrary to the final score, the Giants actually dominated the later stages of the game yesterday. How else could Lawrence Tynes miss a game-winning field goal every ninety seconds? Mike McCarthy will have to answer for the fact that he so easily abandoned the ground game. Much like the previous week, you have to give credit to the Giants, but the Cowboys and Packers both made a ton of self-inflicted mistakes. Speaking of which, and my friends watching with me concurred, the game had much more the feel of a routine Week 9 game than a conference title clash. The mistakes, the up-and-down play of so many key performers on both sides -- it just seemed to drain some of the air of urgency out of the contest.
^ Yesterday's game reinforces the notion that even if Brett Favre had pulled off the improbable second Super Bowl win of his career, he still would be no better than a Top Ten quarterback all-time looking in enviously at the Top Five. Few other elite quarterbacks have been great for as long as he has, and few of them have the records that he does -- but few of them have the brutal tendencies that he does to this day of forcing the football and trying too hard to make things happen. You live by being a gunslinger, you die by it also and the flip side of the reality that makes him a folk hero and a legend also makes him somebody that you have to be just a bit conflicted about having at the helm of your team in the clutch.
^ In trying to anticipate the oppressive media crush of manufactured Super Bowl storylines, a few come to mind. Tom Brady will now be carrying on his famous battle with the Manning family against the other brother. Given the fact that New York tends to break down (in large part) with so many fans rooting for the Mets and Jets (the newer franchises in town) and so many fans rooting for the Yankees and Giants (the old-line teams in town), the Super Bowl is going to pit a great many Yankee and Red Sox fans against each other (can we root for Mutually Assured Destruction?). I'm hard-pressed to conjure up a scenario that gives the Giants a serious chance for victory, but I will address the Super Bowl matchup in more detail at a later date.
Perspectives on MLK Day
By Rick Morris
America's most-scrutinized legal holiday is upon us. Every year, as Martin Luther King Day approaches, pundits everywhere ponder the meaning of the day, King's message, and what both would have meant going forward had the tragic circumstances in April of 1968 in Memphis not occurred.
This column, from the always-interesting Paul Greenberg, is entitled "Martin Luther King: The Radical as Conservative." In it, he argues somewhat persuasively that contrary to the image many now have as King the would-be changer of everything that America stood for, King actually was calling for America to reaffirm and live up to its stated values and for individuals to take the responsibility to better their own lives and those of their loved ones and countrymen. I agree, that does sound like a conservative message. As someone on the right, I can attest that true colorblindness is a conservative principle. What ended up muddying the waters on civil rights, to the long-term detriment of the conservative movement, was the fact that many powerful racist whites were able to tap into the legitimate language of "states' rights" and the resentment that flowed from the federal government asserting complete power over the states ever since FDH tried to unilaterally write the 10th Amendment out of the Constitution.
But ultimately, Greenberg does not account for the economic and foreign policy elements that were creeping into King's message in his final years. He was adopting many stances that were very, very liberal on redistribution of wealth and the rightful role of the United States and its military around the world. Given the fact that America was locked in an existential struggle with the Soviet Union and its satellites at the time and that the statist economic policies of the Great Society were creating incentives that further preyed upon poor communities, it's impossible for me or any other intellectually honest conservative to get behind that part of the message.
Personally, I've never been a huge fan of how exactly the holiday was implemented. Given that King was not so egocentric as to have wanted a personal celebration of himself every year and given that I think something that celebrates America is more appropriate, I'd rather that we have an annual "Equality Day" instead. Celebrate King, but also Nat Turner, Booker T. Washington and a host of others who worked to push America in the right direction. While we castigate ourselves endlessly for the sins of slavery, as we probably should, we also need to remember that no other nation fought a violent tug-of-war for its soul on that subject and came out the right way. Granted, the shameful Jim Crow era is impossible to put any kind of a gloss on, but again, America did respond to pressure to get rid of it. That's the beauty of this country; we screw up just as much as anyone else, but we're uniquely positioned to atone for our errors.
But it seems that we keep coming back to the same place, one that we are fated to repeat every year as a consensus about Martin Luther King fails to gel. His ultimate legacy and this holiday are like a national Rorschach Test as those of us from different points of view perceive what we are likely to see from our own perspectives.
America's most-scrutinized legal holiday is upon us. Every year, as Martin Luther King Day approaches, pundits everywhere ponder the meaning of the day, King's message, and what both would have meant going forward had the tragic circumstances in April of 1968 in Memphis not occurred.
This column, from the always-interesting Paul Greenberg, is entitled "Martin Luther King: The Radical as Conservative." In it, he argues somewhat persuasively that contrary to the image many now have as King the would-be changer of everything that America stood for, King actually was calling for America to reaffirm and live up to its stated values and for individuals to take the responsibility to better their own lives and those of their loved ones and countrymen. I agree, that does sound like a conservative message. As someone on the right, I can attest that true colorblindness is a conservative principle. What ended up muddying the waters on civil rights, to the long-term detriment of the conservative movement, was the fact that many powerful racist whites were able to tap into the legitimate language of "states' rights" and the resentment that flowed from the federal government asserting complete power over the states ever since FDH tried to unilaterally write the 10th Amendment out of the Constitution.
But ultimately, Greenberg does not account for the economic and foreign policy elements that were creeping into King's message in his final years. He was adopting many stances that were very, very liberal on redistribution of wealth and the rightful role of the United States and its military around the world. Given the fact that America was locked in an existential struggle with the Soviet Union and its satellites at the time and that the statist economic policies of the Great Society were creating incentives that further preyed upon poor communities, it's impossible for me or any other intellectually honest conservative to get behind that part of the message.
Personally, I've never been a huge fan of how exactly the holiday was implemented. Given that King was not so egocentric as to have wanted a personal celebration of himself every year and given that I think something that celebrates America is more appropriate, I'd rather that we have an annual "Equality Day" instead. Celebrate King, but also Nat Turner, Booker T. Washington and a host of others who worked to push America in the right direction. While we castigate ourselves endlessly for the sins of slavery, as we probably should, we also need to remember that no other nation fought a violent tug-of-war for its soul on that subject and came out the right way. Granted, the shameful Jim Crow era is impossible to put any kind of a gloss on, but again, America did respond to pressure to get rid of it. That's the beauty of this country; we screw up just as much as anyone else, but we're uniquely positioned to atone for our errors.
But it seems that we keep coming back to the same place, one that we are fated to repeat every year as a consensus about Martin Luther King fails to gel. His ultimate legacy and this holiday are like a national Rorschach Test as those of us from different points of view perceive what we are likely to see from our own perspectives.
Sunday, January 20, 2008
Movie review: Juno
By Rick Morris
Reviews for the new Jason Reitman movie JUNO have been outstanding; it presently rates an astounding 93 on Rotten Tomatoes. These great recommendations are entirely appropriate. JUNO is an excellent movie and could well go down as one of the year’s best.
When describing it to a friend, I described it as a darker NAPOLEON DYNAMITE. While imperfect, that’s the best succinct description I can give for this film. It has the quirky indy-ish feel of DYNAMITE and some of the same weird-but-funny dialogue, but the subject matter of teen pregnancy is infinitely more serious than anything in the earlier film. Speaking of the dialogue, a minority of reviewers have found it off-putting because of the quirky nature of it – I found it amusing rather than distracting, as do most audiences apparently.
The plot is built around the sudden and unplanned pregnancy of sharp-witted young Juno (played by Ellen Page in a star-making performance), which resulted from one encounter with her best friend, the somewhat shy-and-awkward Paulie Bleeker (played by the always-outstanding Michael Cera). Bleeker is somewhat in the background of the movie, but his character shines in the scenes where he does appear. Given that he is so different in personality from Juno, the attraction to him that she displays fleetingly earlier on and then again later in the movie does not seem very easy to understand, but apparently the notion of “opposites attract” is supposed to apply here. Then again, although she is an interesting and appealing character, she is not in any of the “cool cliques” at school, so she would probably not be quick to see herself as much better than Bleeker.
Juno’s initial instinct was to go to the local abortion clinic, but after being approached outside by a classmate picketing the abortuary, she reconsiders inside. While this opinion has nothing to do with a cinematic review, I admit as a pro-life individual to being very happy with the message of an intellectually honest mother-to-be admitting to herself that what she is carrying around is more than a mere clump of cells.
Once she charts her course, she must deal with several people, most of whom are fortunately nice to her. Her father Mac is played in a good-humored manner by J.K. Simmons, which kept me on the edge of my seat – I kept flashing back to his scary role on OZ and kept waiting for him to snap violently on Juno! Her stepmom Bren (played by Allison Janney) is friendly and supportive. In a slightly amusing element to the film, Janney is not shot in a manner that reveals her true height so as not to tower over any other actors.
The adoptive couple she selects from a classified ad have some very interesting issues going on under the surface. Stepford wife Vanessa Loring (played by Jennifer Garner in fascinating fashion) and subtly uneasy hubby Mark Loring (portrayed by the great-as-always Jason Bateman) have the idyllic yuppie existence working according to the naked eye, but they get more interesting as the layers get peeled back. As Mark’s nostalgia for his older life continues to manifest itself, some interesting and disturbing directions get hinted at and viewers are kept off-balance as the movie advances.
Juno’s interactions with everyone around her are constantly entertaining, especially those with her scene-stealing friend Leah (played by Olivia Thirlby). An awesome cameo by THE OFFICE star Rainn Wilson will have you in stitches also.
The twists and turns in the story keep you guessing but do not in any way feel contrived. Regardless of what your preconceived notion of what a happy ending for the story might look like, I don’t think I’m spoiling the ending by saying that the direction the writers chose was satisfactory to me and I think it would be to most people. On a note that will be very funny to those of us in the FDH family, the Juno character has a lot of resemblance to our own Samantha Jones – she and her husband saw the movie and agreed strongly with my perception of this. Listeners of THE FDH LOUNGE program may notice this the next time she delivers a music review!
But the bottom line is that this movie does justify the strong buzz and approving reviews it is receiving. I recommend it strongly.
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Championship Sunday preview
By Rick Morris
The inescapable conclusion after last Sunday is that the stunning upsets we witnessed are preventing us from witnessing what could have been a much better Championship Sunday (the thought of this saddens me greatly – it’s one of my favorite days of the year and I love to have my friends over for a daylong feast of gridiron). Indy and
AFC Championship Game: The Patriots delivered a huge 38-14 beatdown back in September, at least momentarily taking the air out of the sails of a Charger franchise itching for a legitimate rivalry with the Team of the Decade after last year’s crushing playoff loss. In fairness, the Chargers were still adjusting to a new system after massive coaching changes coming into 2007 and were not ready to be pronounced as brutal failures under Norv Turner, as I and so many others did. Nevertheless, they still don’t stack up as well against the Pats as the Colts, who probably also would have lost but probably would have kept it closer.
NFC Championship Game: Call it heresy given the copious amounts of respect coming their way, but I’m still not very impressed with the Giants. The alpha and omega of their defense is a pass rush; that’s it. Giant discard Ryan Grant is the real deal, a legitimate superstar who had his first career-defining game last week in the massacre of
WWE lost opportunities of 2007
By Rick Morris
In a previous column here, I explored the phenomenon of WWE transitional periods, when the company has been in an obvious flux between one era and another. Subsequent events have made me think about how many times the company just flat out blew it in 2007 as they are lurching into their newest redefining stage.
Company defenders will be quick to speak of the injury epidemic, with a great many wrestlers going down including HHH, John Cena, Undertaker and Edge. I'll grant that there's nothing that the company could have done to avoid those performers going on the shelf. And also for the purposes of this discussion, I'll leave aside anything having to do with the Benoit tragedy because I want to stick to the crystal-clear issues that the company could have dealt with but did not.
1. Getting the belt off of John Cena before the October PPV. The company was left in a position it hates to be in, having a title change result from something other than events inside the squared circle. Ever since Cena came to RAW in June of '05, he has been fighting an uphill battle to stay popular among key elements of the fanbase because of the watering-down of his once-edgy character and the invulnerability he portrays since he almost ALWAYS wins every title match. As mentioned earlier, there's nothing the company could have done about Cena's injury. But they could have helped his character stay fresher along the way by programming him to drop the belt earlier in the year (sometime after WrestleMania, as I'll admit that as the cornerstone of the company he needed to win there) and get into a chase to regain it. That is clearly where they were going with Randy Orton this autumn, but it would have been much later than it should have happened. As it is now, the large portion of young males in the audience reacts poorly to him because he comes off to them as a horrible amalgam of Ricky Morton (appealing to the kids and teeny-boppers), Bob Backland (with his super-wholesome Middle America persona) and Hulk Hogan (Chain Gang = Hulkamanics 2K8). Notwithstanding the fact that his matches do have incredible heat because of the mixed emotions he stirs in the crowd, the company is not going to be in the position they want to be in of having him pick them up and carry them on their back ala Hogan or Austin unless he gets greater acceptance from the fanbase.
2. Not properly giving Lashley the rub from Donald Trump. What an incredible opportunity the WWE had with Lashley at WrestleMania -- and how they blew it. Has it ever -- ever? -- been established exactly why Lashley and Trump teamed up to stick it to Vince McMahon at WrestleMania 23? We know that Trump was somewhat impressed with this young physical specimen and thought he could get the job done, but that's about it. I'm still waiting to hear Lashley's motivation. How did we not see a series of videos with these men, ala Hogan and Mr. T at the first WrestleMania? Not that we would have seen them training together, that's not the point, but something, anything to establish a bond between them and a tangible sense of what each man could do for the other. How sad that the company put Lashley in this position to get him the benefit of association with Donald Trump and their connection was pretty much forgotten by the next week.
3. Hot-shotting Chris Jericho's return. Internet rumors speak of HHH's dissatisfaction with the perception of Jericho as a savior returning to bail out the company from hard times. If so, given the disproportionate influence he has that we smart marks bemoan so much, that does an awful lot to explain how Jericho went from the eagerly anticipated breath of fresh air (one that many thought erroneously at the time had been dragged out too long in teasing, ala the Fred Thompson presidential launch) to just another wrestler in less than six weeks. Remember, when Jericho made his company debut in August of '99, the one that the WWE tried so hard to replicate, his first promo was against The Rock. Did he face him right away? No, they wouldn't lock up on pay-per-view for a long time. So Jericho's promo against Randy Orton, while absolutely the right thing to do, did NOT mean that he had to be rushed into the main event match the next month. Given that the company is completely in the annual mode of getting the present champion to WrestleMania in a few months, there was no way that he was going to topple Orton in December and he would lose his heat right off the bat in failing, no matter what lame attempts the company would conjure up to "keep him strong." They should have dragged out the title chase to WrestleMania with Orton (and perhaps the "authority figures") throwing obstacles in his way to build to a truly epic main event at the Citrus Bowl. Instead, Orton will end up in a situation that is guaranteed to be much less anticipated than the payoff to a long Jericho return tour.
4. Giving Mr. McMahon a full-size son. I will admit that the payoff to the illegitimate son storyline is working better than I would have thought, with Hornswoggle massively over and Finlay getting the chance I have long been calling for for him to become a tough, popular, fighting face. But the in-ring payoff, where the true money can be made, would have been much greater had the (initially reported) plan of Mr. Kennedy or another wrestler on the main event brink getting that association been adopted. There are rumors that the angle might be changed at some point to reflect the test results being altered and an actual full-sized wrestler being put in that spot. After the Hornswoggle storyline peaks, probably at WrestleMania, I would urge them to do exactly that.
5. Booking CM Punk as a midcarder when he holds the ECW title. We have long seen how internal politics dictate how brands are presented, whether it be the WCW and ECW brands getting buried early on in the 2001 invasion angle or the way that all vestiges of the "old ECW" were long ago blotted out with virtual bleach. But the booking of Punk, one of the most promising wrestlers in the entire company and a future main eventer on a brand the company actually respects, is beyond befuddling. This is not a standard example of a face champion needing to show some vulnerability in order to keep some sympathy heat. Punk has been laid out time and time again by the company superheavyweights, and when he teams up with Kane to face them, he is routinely presented as the least capable man in the ring. Many observers have long called for the company to stop damaging Smackdown by treating it as a distant second banana to the RAW brand. The company's evident "solution" is to let the Smackdown brand bully the ECW brand in terms of public perception so that Smackdown at least looks superior to something. Left unsaid is why anyone at all should care anything about what happens in ECW when the champion and most of its wrestlers are presented as midcarders relative to the "Smackdown superstars."
In a previous column here, I explored the phenomenon of WWE transitional periods, when the company has been in an obvious flux between one era and another. Subsequent events have made me think about how many times the company just flat out blew it in 2007 as they are lurching into their newest redefining stage.
Company defenders will be quick to speak of the injury epidemic, with a great many wrestlers going down including HHH, John Cena, Undertaker and Edge. I'll grant that there's nothing that the company could have done to avoid those performers going on the shelf. And also for the purposes of this discussion, I'll leave aside anything having to do with the Benoit tragedy because I want to stick to the crystal-clear issues that the company could have dealt with but did not.
1. Getting the belt off of John Cena before the October PPV. The company was left in a position it hates to be in, having a title change result from something other than events inside the squared circle. Ever since Cena came to RAW in June of '05, he has been fighting an uphill battle to stay popular among key elements of the fanbase because of the watering-down of his once-edgy character and the invulnerability he portrays since he almost ALWAYS wins every title match. As mentioned earlier, there's nothing the company could have done about Cena's injury. But they could have helped his character stay fresher along the way by programming him to drop the belt earlier in the year (sometime after WrestleMania, as I'll admit that as the cornerstone of the company he needed to win there) and get into a chase to regain it. That is clearly where they were going with Randy Orton this autumn, but it would have been much later than it should have happened. As it is now, the large portion of young males in the audience reacts poorly to him because he comes off to them as a horrible amalgam of Ricky Morton (appealing to the kids and teeny-boppers), Bob Backland (with his super-wholesome Middle America persona) and Hulk Hogan (Chain Gang = Hulkamanics 2K8). Notwithstanding the fact that his matches do have incredible heat because of the mixed emotions he stirs in the crowd, the company is not going to be in the position they want to be in of having him pick them up and carry them on their back ala Hogan or Austin unless he gets greater acceptance from the fanbase.
2. Not properly giving Lashley the rub from Donald Trump. What an incredible opportunity the WWE had with Lashley at WrestleMania -- and how they blew it. Has it ever -- ever? -- been established exactly why Lashley and Trump teamed up to stick it to Vince McMahon at WrestleMania 23? We know that Trump was somewhat impressed with this young physical specimen and thought he could get the job done, but that's about it. I'm still waiting to hear Lashley's motivation. How did we not see a series of videos with these men, ala Hogan and Mr. T at the first WrestleMania? Not that we would have seen them training together, that's not the point, but something, anything to establish a bond between them and a tangible sense of what each man could do for the other. How sad that the company put Lashley in this position to get him the benefit of association with Donald Trump and their connection was pretty much forgotten by the next week.
3. Hot-shotting Chris Jericho's return. Internet rumors speak of HHH's dissatisfaction with the perception of Jericho as a savior returning to bail out the company from hard times. If so, given the disproportionate influence he has that we smart marks bemoan so much, that does an awful lot to explain how Jericho went from the eagerly anticipated breath of fresh air (one that many thought erroneously at the time had been dragged out too long in teasing, ala the Fred Thompson presidential launch) to just another wrestler in less than six weeks. Remember, when Jericho made his company debut in August of '99, the one that the WWE tried so hard to replicate, his first promo was against The Rock. Did he face him right away? No, they wouldn't lock up on pay-per-view for a long time. So Jericho's promo against Randy Orton, while absolutely the right thing to do, did NOT mean that he had to be rushed into the main event match the next month. Given that the company is completely in the annual mode of getting the present champion to WrestleMania in a few months, there was no way that he was going to topple Orton in December and he would lose his heat right off the bat in failing, no matter what lame attempts the company would conjure up to "keep him strong." They should have dragged out the title chase to WrestleMania with Orton (and perhaps the "authority figures") throwing obstacles in his way to build to a truly epic main event at the Citrus Bowl. Instead, Orton will end up in a situation that is guaranteed to be much less anticipated than the payoff to a long Jericho return tour.
4. Giving Mr. McMahon a full-size son. I will admit that the payoff to the illegitimate son storyline is working better than I would have thought, with Hornswoggle massively over and Finlay getting the chance I have long been calling for for him to become a tough, popular, fighting face. But the in-ring payoff, where the true money can be made, would have been much greater had the (initially reported) plan of Mr. Kennedy or another wrestler on the main event brink getting that association been adopted. There are rumors that the angle might be changed at some point to reflect the test results being altered and an actual full-sized wrestler being put in that spot. After the Hornswoggle storyline peaks, probably at WrestleMania, I would urge them to do exactly that.
5. Booking CM Punk as a midcarder when he holds the ECW title. We have long seen how internal politics dictate how brands are presented, whether it be the WCW and ECW brands getting buried early on in the 2001 invasion angle or the way that all vestiges of the "old ECW" were long ago blotted out with virtual bleach. But the booking of Punk, one of the most promising wrestlers in the entire company and a future main eventer on a brand the company actually respects, is beyond befuddling. This is not a standard example of a face champion needing to show some vulnerability in order to keep some sympathy heat. Punk has been laid out time and time again by the company superheavyweights, and when he teams up with Kane to face them, he is routinely presented as the least capable man in the ring. Many observers have long called for the company to stop damaging Smackdown by treating it as a distant second banana to the RAW brand. The company's evident "solution" is to let the Smackdown brand bully the ECW brand in terms of public perception so that Smackdown at least looks superior to something. Left unsaid is why anyone at all should care anything about what happens in ECW when the champion and most of its wrestlers are presented as midcarders relative to the "Smackdown superstars."
South Carolina/Nevada results preview
By Rick Morris
In a result that barely merits mention, the Romney campaign will rack up a sizable win by default in
Over in
The Nevada Democrats appear poised to throw another curveball into what has already been a chaotic election process this year. Hillary is leading Obama in most of the major polls, and appears able to survive the endorsement momentum the
Geopolitics roundup from Jane's
By Rick Morris
Jane's Information Group has some of the best intelligence in the world at its fingertips. On matters ranging from military to security to weaponry and beyond, the staff at Jane's provides top-notch information to its subscribers and probably runs rings around our frequently inept CIA much of the time.
The site includes free excerpts of its material in many different categories. From time to time here at The FDH Lounge Blog, we will link directly to their outstanding material on many subjects and allow those of you who are very much concerned with geopolitics and the world around us to keep up on important matters.
SECURITY
Tribal turmoil - Kenyan election exposes ethnic fissures
Kenya: Teetering on the brink?
Kenya's urban battlefield
US terrorist watch list remains fundamentally troubled
Indian arms sales to Myanmar remain under scrutiny
Russian evolution
The $100 question - Security implications of rising oil prices
Can airlines live with $100 oil?
Farewell to arms
Power plays - Creation of the West African Gas Pipeline
Political fallout - The threat to Pakistan's nuclear stability
Bomb blast kills senior Lebanese army commander
US-led operation kills senior Taliban commander
Iraq insurgency unity collapses
Southeast Asia's tri-border black spot
JTIC briefing: LNG tanker terrorism
UN launches ISU to reduce WMD threat
US still hopes Musharraf-Bhutto deal can be saved
The Pakistan People's Party after Benazir Bhutto
DEFENSE
UK considers alternatives to Nimrod R.1 upgrade
UK RAF Nimrod inquiry says leaking fuel was likely cause
The Afghan National Army: nothing without NATO
Iran set to acquire S-300PTs from Belarus
Iran may have lined up S-300 SAM systems
Bush administration backs JDAM sales to Saudi Arabia
Russia tests cruise missile for Iskander TEL
Europe focuses on better co-ordinated maritime security
UGVs herald skip change in urban ops
UK moves on Challenger 2 upgrades
UK looks to arm expanded Reaper force
Australia's DSTO unveils weaponised robot
China marches forward
US budget request for increased defense spending masks squeeze on procurement and R&D
Mission fatigue - the future of military interventionism
Overstretched UK forces will hinder operational capability, says report
On the cusp: Georgia country briefing
Training programs signal deepening US ties with West Africa
India's AAD-02 intercepts target missile during first trial
Russian industry hits high-tech low
Norway and Russia eye Arctic energy
Eyeing up the new Arctic - competition in the Arctic Circle
Japan broadens horizons
Japan requests development funds for Mobile Combat Vehicle
US Navy cancels LCS 4
Better by design? Navies focus on adaptable vessel concepts
PUBLIC SAFETY
New EU treaty worries US intel services
Security chiefs outline perimeter protection challenge
'Fusing' US terrorism information
Inside job: US seeks solutions for its security jigsaw puzzle
Landmines and armed non-state actors
Opinion: Let sleeping mines lie?
Policing Latin America
Infiltrating Colombia's intelligence agencies
Future generation: US alternative energy development
Parched land - Attempting to ease Australia's drought
Under Western eyes - Cocaine trafficking into the Iberian peninsula
European cocaine seizures on the increase
JTIC Briefing: Al-qaeda and the 9/11 anniversary
LAW ENFORCEMENT
Intelligence - Teutonic triumph
Technology moves modern battlefield into cyberspace
Gulf war - Pressure mounts on Mexico's Gulf Cartel
Fighting back - Mexico declares war on drug cartels
US plans to widen access to intelligence satellite data
Security agencies fall out in Russia
TRANSPORT
Beirut airport awaits post-war recovery
Domestic leasing signals take-off for Chinese carriers
Airlines refuse to cover A380-related infrastructure bill
Jane's Information Group has some of the best intelligence in the world at its fingertips. On matters ranging from military to security to weaponry and beyond, the staff at Jane's provides top-notch information to its subscribers and probably runs rings around our frequently inept CIA much of the time.
The site includes free excerpts of its material in many different categories. From time to time here at The FDH Lounge Blog, we will link directly to their outstanding material on many subjects and allow those of you who are very much concerned with geopolitics and the world around us to keep up on important matters.
SECURITY
Tribal turmoil - Kenyan election exposes ethnic fissures
Kenya: Teetering on the brink?
Kenya's urban battlefield
US terrorist watch list remains fundamentally troubled
Indian arms sales to Myanmar remain under scrutiny
Russian evolution
The $100 question - Security implications of rising oil prices
Can airlines live with $100 oil?
Farewell to arms
Power plays - Creation of the West African Gas Pipeline
Political fallout - The threat to Pakistan's nuclear stability
Bomb blast kills senior Lebanese army commander
US-led operation kills senior Taliban commander
Iraq insurgency unity collapses
Southeast Asia's tri-border black spot
JTIC briefing: LNG tanker terrorism
UN launches ISU to reduce WMD threat
US still hopes Musharraf-Bhutto deal can be saved
The Pakistan People's Party after Benazir Bhutto
DEFENSE
UK considers alternatives to Nimrod R.1 upgrade
UK RAF Nimrod inquiry says leaking fuel was likely cause
The Afghan National Army: nothing without NATO
Iran set to acquire S-300PTs from Belarus
Iran may have lined up S-300 SAM systems
Bush administration backs JDAM sales to Saudi Arabia
Russia tests cruise missile for Iskander TEL
Europe focuses on better co-ordinated maritime security
UGVs herald skip change in urban ops
UK moves on Challenger 2 upgrades
UK looks to arm expanded Reaper force
Australia's DSTO unveils weaponised robot
China marches forward
US budget request for increased defense spending masks squeeze on procurement and R&D
Mission fatigue - the future of military interventionism
Overstretched UK forces will hinder operational capability, says report
On the cusp: Georgia country briefing
Training programs signal deepening US ties with West Africa
India's AAD-02 intercepts target missile during first trial
Russian industry hits high-tech low
Norway and Russia eye Arctic energy
Eyeing up the new Arctic - competition in the Arctic Circle
Japan broadens horizons
Japan requests development funds for Mobile Combat Vehicle
US Navy cancels LCS 4
Better by design? Navies focus on adaptable vessel concepts
PUBLIC SAFETY
New EU treaty worries US intel services
Security chiefs outline perimeter protection challenge
'Fusing' US terrorism information
Inside job: US seeks solutions for its security jigsaw puzzle
Landmines and armed non-state actors
Opinion: Let sleeping mines lie?
Policing Latin America
Infiltrating Colombia's intelligence agencies
Future generation: US alternative energy development
Parched land - Attempting to ease Australia's drought
Under Western eyes - Cocaine trafficking into the Iberian peninsula
European cocaine seizures on the increase
JTIC Briefing: Al-qaeda and the 9/11 anniversary
LAW ENFORCEMENT
Intelligence - Teutonic triumph
Technology moves modern battlefield into cyberspace
Gulf war - Pressure mounts on Mexico's Gulf Cartel
Fighting back - Mexico declares war on drug cartels
US plans to widen access to intelligence satellite data
Security agencies fall out in Russia
TRANSPORT
Beirut airport awaits post-war recovery
Domestic leasing signals take-off for Chinese carriers
Airlines refuse to cover A380-related infrastructure bill
Do you have bad sports takes?
By Rick Morris
EDIT: The poster from the SportsTalkNetwork.com referred to in this post for poor sports takes has withdrawn from the message board and has requested that the critique of his takes come down. That's only fair, since nobody's being subjected to said takes anymore. Never let it be said I don't have a heart of gold.
EDIT: The poster from the SportsTalkNetwork.com referred to in this post for poor sports takes has withdrawn from the message board and has requested that the critique of his takes come down. That's only fair, since nobody's being subjected to said takes anymore. Never let it be said I don't have a heart of gold.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Mittens' Say-Anything Campaign
By Rick Morris
Answer the question honestly. With the amount of mud already slung by the Mitt Romney campaign, aren't you expecting to hear any minute that his operatives have been push-polling asking South Carolina voters if they're comfortable knowing that John McCain fathered an illegitimate black baby?
Team Mittens can deny all they want that they've been behind the vicious smears attacking McCain in South Carolina this time around, many of which echo directly those working "on behalf of" George W. Bush eight years ago. Those fevered-pitch denials would carry a lot more weight if not for the millions of dollars of distorting negative ads out of Daddy's Fortune that the Flip-Flopper-in-Chief hadn't dumped on his opponents in the first few presidential contests of this election cycle. And yet the Trust Fund Baby is crying in his creme brulee about a McCain mailer that accurately represents the Reprehensible Romney Record in Massachusetts.
Don't buy the distractions, the claims of the high moral road or anything else that Willard Mitt's crew of Establishment Puppetmasters are putting out at the eleventh hour. When it comes to sleazy, morally bankrupt attacks being run from the shadows in this campaign, the Romney record suggests that he should be considered guilty until proven innocent.
Answer the question honestly. With the amount of mud already slung by the Mitt Romney campaign, aren't you expecting to hear any minute that his operatives have been push-polling asking South Carolina voters if they're comfortable knowing that John McCain fathered an illegitimate black baby?
Team Mittens can deny all they want that they've been behind the vicious smears attacking McCain in South Carolina this time around, many of which echo directly those working "on behalf of" George W. Bush eight years ago. Those fevered-pitch denials would carry a lot more weight if not for the millions of dollars of distorting negative ads out of Daddy's Fortune that the Flip-Flopper-in-Chief hadn't dumped on his opponents in the first few presidential contests of this election cycle. And yet the Trust Fund Baby is crying in his creme brulee about a McCain mailer that accurately represents the Reprehensible Romney Record in Massachusetts.
Don't buy the distractions, the claims of the high moral road or anything else that Willard Mitt's crew of Establishment Puppetmasters are putting out at the eleventh hour. When it comes to sleazy, morally bankrupt attacks being run from the shadows in this campaign, the Romney record suggests that he should be considered guilty until proven innocent.
I'm flattered, but really ...
By Rick Morris
What a surreal experience -- logging on to the blog of my friends and SportsTalkNetwork.com associates and finding this headline.
My good friend Tony Mazur apparently credits me for getting him to see the light on just what a fraud Mitt Romney really is and he praised me in extravagant, albeit tongue-in-cheek fashion. But, no I am not actually God, thank you very much! My detractors, and I think I've picked up a few more this week, are probably doing a spit-take at their computers at the very thought of it. The Real God is actually doing a great job, although you'd never know it to hear some of my ingratitude from time to time. I hope He sees fit to spare our country a Romney administration, but He knows what He is doing much better than I do and if that's our country's cross to bear, so to speak, we'll bear it. The one thing I do know about God is that He does not care much for false prophets and cults, if you're picking up what I'm putting down. But I'm not making that comment in relation to the presidential race. Nope. That was apropos of nothing. Just a random observation ...
What a surreal experience -- logging on to the blog of my friends and SportsTalkNetwork.com associates and finding this headline.
My good friend Tony Mazur apparently credits me for getting him to see the light on just what a fraud Mitt Romney really is and he praised me in extravagant, albeit tongue-in-cheek fashion. But, no I am not actually God, thank you very much! My detractors, and I think I've picked up a few more this week, are probably doing a spit-take at their computers at the very thought of it. The Real God is actually doing a great job, although you'd never know it to hear some of my ingratitude from time to time. I hope He sees fit to spare our country a Romney administration, but He knows what He is doing much better than I do and if that's our country's cross to bear, so to speak, we'll bear it. The one thing I do know about God is that He does not care much for false prophets and cults, if you're picking up what I'm putting down. But I'm not making that comment in relation to the presidential race. Nope. That was apropos of nothing. Just a random observation ...
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Michigan primary predictions
By Rick Morris
Mitt Romney, having provided a nauseating microcosm of his larger campaign by pandering and telling Michigan voters exactly what they want to hear about how he will be able to restore their economic greatness by executive fiat, should be able to buy his first real win (no, we're not including you, Wyoming, nobody cares) with his inherited wealth (just what this country hasn't had enough of over the decades, huh, a president from the "Lucky Sperm Club") during this election cycle. I'll go out on a limb and predict he'll finish ahead of John McCain by as many as four points. Mike Huckabee will trail Romney by at least a dozen points.
Thus far, my predictions about the winners have been two for four. I was right about Obama, wrong about Romney (yay!) in Iowa, and right about McCain, wrong about Obama in New Hampshire (but so was the rest of the world, so give me a break on that!).
Keep one fact in mind if my prediction is right and Romney does eke this one out: when Hugh Hewitt and the rest of the "Mittens is Our Messiah" crew of sellouts in the Republican party and conservative movement crow about how McCain can't win even when independents can come in and vote for him and that Romney is the choice of true Republicans: the ONLY organized attempt to corral votes outside the Republican party for any candidate was organized on behalf of Willard Mitt Romney himself by the jerks over at Daily Kos. If I were a betting man, I'd wager heavily on Hughey leaving that tidbit out of his victory lap (speaking of which, how fast can you run when you're wearing kneepads, anyway?).
And for anyone needing one more recommendation on what a vile fraud the Romney candidacy really is, I'm happy to point you to this excellent roundup at Bizzyblog. Just the mere fact that I'm directing traffic to the Biz points out what strange bedfellows politics can make -- I don't like him, because he repeatedly slimed my good friend and our FDH Lounge Dignitary Nate Noy on behalf of Congresswoman Jean Schmidt, for whom the Biz is in the tank. But Nate is actually the person who has done the most to educate me on the dangers of Mittens and his band of Kool-Aid drinkers, so I'm sure he'd approve of me directing readers to the anti-Romney roundup on that site. I guess the FDH credo is that the enemy of our enemy is a slightly lesser enemy!
Mitt Romney, having provided a nauseating microcosm of his larger campaign by pandering and telling Michigan voters exactly what they want to hear about how he will be able to restore their economic greatness by executive fiat, should be able to buy his first real win (no, we're not including you, Wyoming, nobody cares) with his inherited wealth (just what this country hasn't had enough of over the decades, huh, a president from the "Lucky Sperm Club") during this election cycle. I'll go out on a limb and predict he'll finish ahead of John McCain by as many as four points. Mike Huckabee will trail Romney by at least a dozen points.
Thus far, my predictions about the winners have been two for four. I was right about Obama, wrong about Romney (yay!) in Iowa, and right about McCain, wrong about Obama in New Hampshire (but so was the rest of the world, so give me a break on that!).
Keep one fact in mind if my prediction is right and Romney does eke this one out: when Hugh Hewitt and the rest of the "Mittens is Our Messiah" crew of sellouts in the Republican party and conservative movement crow about how McCain can't win even when independents can come in and vote for him and that Romney is the choice of true Republicans: the ONLY organized attempt to corral votes outside the Republican party for any candidate was organized on behalf of Willard Mitt Romney himself by the jerks over at Daily Kos. If I were a betting man, I'd wager heavily on Hughey leaving that tidbit out of his victory lap (speaking of which, how fast can you run when you're wearing kneepads, anyway?).
And for anyone needing one more recommendation on what a vile fraud the Romney candidacy really is, I'm happy to point you to this excellent roundup at Bizzyblog. Just the mere fact that I'm directing traffic to the Biz points out what strange bedfellows politics can make -- I don't like him, because he repeatedly slimed my good friend and our FDH Lounge Dignitary Nate Noy on behalf of Congresswoman Jean Schmidt, for whom the Biz is in the tank. But Nate is actually the person who has done the most to educate me on the dangers of Mittens and his band of Kool-Aid drinkers, so I'm sure he'd approve of me directing readers to the anti-Romney roundup on that site. I guess the FDH credo is that the enemy of our enemy is a slightly lesser enemy!
Human Events: keeping integrity with Fred
By Rick Morris
Previously in this space, we've bemoaned the Who's Who of Republican politics and the right-wing intelligentsia who have either overtly or covertly gone in the tank for Willard Mitt Romney, the say-anything slick CEO running for president. The mad stampede to sell out to the deep-pockets trust fund tool has been infuriating and demoralizing, as these influential instruments of opinion have cited the need to back Romney to preserve the Reagan coalition all while marginalizing the true Reaganite candidate in the race in Fred Thompson.
Well, one publication has bucked the trend and I am not surprised that their integrity was not for sale.
Human Events, an important right-wing news and opinion outlet that has served this country well for decades, came to the only conclusion that any fair-minded and intellectually honest conservative could: Fred Thompson should be the next president of These United States.
I am prouder than ever that I have subscribed to this fine magazine and that I interviewed for it once when I was briefly considering relocating to Washington, D.C. Their endorsement article is outstanding and I urge everyone reading these words to click on it and review their many persuasive points.
If you still need to be convinced, please review Fred's comprehensive final address to the voters of Iowa just prior to the caucuses. While the references to the Hawkeye State are somewhat dated, they are few and far between and do not overshadow the many components of the plan he communicates to the American people.
Voters from across the political spectrum are united this year in the belief that these are urgent times for our country calling for steadfast leadership anchored to priceless principles. Only one man can provide that to us and lead us back towards greatness and his name is Fred Dalton Thompson.
Previously in this space, we've bemoaned the Who's Who of Republican politics and the right-wing intelligentsia who have either overtly or covertly gone in the tank for Willard Mitt Romney, the say-anything slick CEO running for president. The mad stampede to sell out to the deep-pockets trust fund tool has been infuriating and demoralizing, as these influential instruments of opinion have cited the need to back Romney to preserve the Reagan coalition all while marginalizing the true Reaganite candidate in the race in Fred Thompson.
Well, one publication has bucked the trend and I am not surprised that their integrity was not for sale.
Human Events, an important right-wing news and opinion outlet that has served this country well for decades, came to the only conclusion that any fair-minded and intellectually honest conservative could: Fred Thompson should be the next president of These United States.
I am prouder than ever that I have subscribed to this fine magazine and that I interviewed for it once when I was briefly considering relocating to Washington, D.C. Their endorsement article is outstanding and I urge everyone reading these words to click on it and review their many persuasive points.
If you still need to be convinced, please review Fred's comprehensive final address to the voters of Iowa just prior to the caucuses. While the references to the Hawkeye State are somewhat dated, they are few and far between and do not overshadow the many components of the plan he communicates to the American people.
Voters from across the political spectrum are united this year in the belief that these are urgent times for our country calling for steadfast leadership anchored to priceless principles. Only one man can provide that to us and lead us back towards greatness and his name is Fred Dalton Thompson.
Monday, January 14, 2008
NFL divisional round closing thoughts
By Rick Morris
^ It was a strange Sunday in terms of the conventional wisdom regarding quarterbacks and coaches. Philip Rivers and Eli Manning have been routinely castigated as chokers during their short careers, but both are still alive going into Championship Sunday (although I am waiting for FDH Lounge Dignitary Nate Noy to call or email me claiming that Billy Volek's appearance in the game was actually the real reason the Chargers advanced). In terms of retread coaches who are not highly thought of by the media and most fans, Norv Turner pulled off a very surprising win and Wade Phillips will have to suffer through a difficult offseason as his Cowboys looked flat on balance and underachieved big-time.
^ Granted, general manager A.J. Smith is looking a lot smarter in San Diego than he did in September. A word to the wise, however for Mr. Smith: you might not want to strut around puffing out your chest saying, "How you like me now???" until the Chargers prove they can stay within three touchdowns of the Pats on Sunday.
^ The Seahawks were exposed as a fraud that took advantage of a weak, injury-riddled division. They need to retool offensively, starting with the run game, in order to make any kind of legitimate Super Bowl run next year.
^ T.O. is right; the Cowboys did lose as a team. But given the scrutiny that he was under for last year's playoff choke and his fade down the stretch this year, Tony Romo had to know that his Mexico junket with Yoko Romo was going to put him in an unacceptable position and he did it anyway. I have no sympathy for him.
^ What shapes up as the most fascinating and possibly consequential coaching decision of the offseason looms in Dallas, as Jerry Jones will have to turn over the ship right now to heir apparent Jason Garrett in order to avoid losing him. Did Bum's Son lose enough luster down the stretch and in this shameful loss to make a change even remotely feasible?
^ Peyton Manning seemed to have gotten the big-game monkey off his back once and for all last year when he won the Super Bowl. But Sunday's name, notwithstanding the gaudy statistics, was a losing effort in a game the team never should have blown, and is actually more typical of his career than what we saw last year (as past shockers to Pittsburgh and Tennessee at home in the divisional round can also attest). For all the talk in recent years about Peyton and Tom Brady being the "Marino and Montana" of this generation (meaning that one was a stat freak and another was a consummate winner), we had already seen a lot of cross-pollination this year what with Manning winning a Super Bowl and Brady having one of the all-time great statistical years and a league-record 50 touchdowns. But this game, combined with a possible fourth Brady Super Bowl ring in a few weeks, could serve to separate the two once and for all in the public mind with Brady universally considered better as a whole.
^ Jacksonville did everything they could defensively against the Patriots Saturday night, but frankly they were limited by only having 11 defenders. When a team establishes the run and pass to perfection as New England so often does, the other team is just on its heels throughout. The Jags were kept honest defensively for 60 minutes and with the historic array of weapons at Brady's disposal, Jacksonville couldn't get one or two additional stops to have a plausible chance at success.
^ This is a very controversial opinion, but the Pats game proved definitively who the league MVP is and it isn't Tom Brady, even in his moment of greatest one-game statistical glory. David Garrard, with a collection of wide receivers that an Arena League team would be ashamed to field, had another excellent game and got a chance to display his playmaking skills on a national scale. If the Jacksonville front office stops bumbling in its attempts to acquire legitimate wideouts, the Jags could make a run at the Super Bowl next year.
^ I love Championship Sunday. Along with Super Bowl Sunday, it ranks very high on my list of favorite secular holidays annually. But I am less enthusiastic for this year's offerings after Sunday's surprises. I believe Indy would have still lost to New England, but given a much better accounting for itself and I remain very unimpressed by a Giant team with an up-and-down offense and a pathetic secondary. While a Sunday night game in the snow at the Frozen Tundra will admittedly be cool, a Packer/Cowboy rematch now that Green Bay has a legit running game would have been awesome. Some of the storylines (aside from the tired Patriot Perfection one) will be OK, though: the bad blood between San Diego and New England dating back to last year, Ryan Grant going up against his old team for a shot at the Super Bowl, young guns Eli Manning and Philip Rivers (who were traded for one another on Draft Day in '04) having a chance to meet in the Super Bowl if they can pull big upsets. Still, though, the anticipated matchups would likely have been far better than what the NFL is going to dish out to us.
^ It was a strange Sunday in terms of the conventional wisdom regarding quarterbacks and coaches. Philip Rivers and Eli Manning have been routinely castigated as chokers during their short careers, but both are still alive going into Championship Sunday (although I am waiting for FDH Lounge Dignitary Nate Noy to call or email me claiming that Billy Volek's appearance in the game was actually the real reason the Chargers advanced). In terms of retread coaches who are not highly thought of by the media and most fans, Norv Turner pulled off a very surprising win and Wade Phillips will have to suffer through a difficult offseason as his Cowboys looked flat on balance and underachieved big-time.
^ Granted, general manager A.J. Smith is looking a lot smarter in San Diego than he did in September. A word to the wise, however for Mr. Smith: you might not want to strut around puffing out your chest saying, "How you like me now???" until the Chargers prove they can stay within three touchdowns of the Pats on Sunday.
^ The Seahawks were exposed as a fraud that took advantage of a weak, injury-riddled division. They need to retool offensively, starting with the run game, in order to make any kind of legitimate Super Bowl run next year.
^ T.O. is right; the Cowboys did lose as a team. But given the scrutiny that he was under for last year's playoff choke and his fade down the stretch this year, Tony Romo had to know that his Mexico junket with Yoko Romo was going to put him in an unacceptable position and he did it anyway. I have no sympathy for him.
^ What shapes up as the most fascinating and possibly consequential coaching decision of the offseason looms in Dallas, as Jerry Jones will have to turn over the ship right now to heir apparent Jason Garrett in order to avoid losing him. Did Bum's Son lose enough luster down the stretch and in this shameful loss to make a change even remotely feasible?
^ Peyton Manning seemed to have gotten the big-game monkey off his back once and for all last year when he won the Super Bowl. But Sunday's name, notwithstanding the gaudy statistics, was a losing effort in a game the team never should have blown, and is actually more typical of his career than what we saw last year (as past shockers to Pittsburgh and Tennessee at home in the divisional round can also attest). For all the talk in recent years about Peyton and Tom Brady being the "Marino and Montana" of this generation (meaning that one was a stat freak and another was a consummate winner), we had already seen a lot of cross-pollination this year what with Manning winning a Super Bowl and Brady having one of the all-time great statistical years and a league-record 50 touchdowns. But this game, combined with a possible fourth Brady Super Bowl ring in a few weeks, could serve to separate the two once and for all in the public mind with Brady universally considered better as a whole.
^ Jacksonville did everything they could defensively against the Patriots Saturday night, but frankly they were limited by only having 11 defenders. When a team establishes the run and pass to perfection as New England so often does, the other team is just on its heels throughout. The Jags were kept honest defensively for 60 minutes and with the historic array of weapons at Brady's disposal, Jacksonville couldn't get one or two additional stops to have a plausible chance at success.
^ This is a very controversial opinion, but the Pats game proved definitively who the league MVP is and it isn't Tom Brady, even in his moment of greatest one-game statistical glory. David Garrard, with a collection of wide receivers that an Arena League team would be ashamed to field, had another excellent game and got a chance to display his playmaking skills on a national scale. If the Jacksonville front office stops bumbling in its attempts to acquire legitimate wideouts, the Jags could make a run at the Super Bowl next year.
^ I love Championship Sunday. Along with Super Bowl Sunday, it ranks very high on my list of favorite secular holidays annually. But I am less enthusiastic for this year's offerings after Sunday's surprises. I believe Indy would have still lost to New England, but given a much better accounting for itself and I remain very unimpressed by a Giant team with an up-and-down offense and a pathetic secondary. While a Sunday night game in the snow at the Frozen Tundra will admittedly be cool, a Packer/Cowboy rematch now that Green Bay has a legit running game would have been awesome. Some of the storylines (aside from the tired Patriot Perfection one) will be OK, though: the bad blood between San Diego and New England dating back to last year, Ryan Grant going up against his old team for a shot at the Super Bowl, young guns Eli Manning and Philip Rivers (who were traded for one another on Draft Day in '04) having a chance to meet in the Super Bowl if they can pull big upsets. Still, though, the anticipated matchups would likely have been far better than what the NFL is going to dish out to us.
Revisiting the Clintons and race
By Rick Morris
As I previously indicated here, I have been feeling some glee at seeing the Clintons suffer accusations of racism during the presidential campaign, since they have been poisoning the political discourse of our country for decades by lightly accusing political opponents of the same sin. But after discussing this matter on last night's FDH Lounge program, I found myself examining more angles still regarding this controversy.
One of The FDH Lounge Dignitaries, Chris Galloway, pointed out that there is a chance that the Clintons are asking to be thrown into the proverbial briar patch here -- that is, the Clintons know that the racial angle is a short-term loser with the South Carolina primary looming, but it will be a long-term winner in the events to follow. Ultimately, no matter how many black voters turn out, a black vs. white dynamic is a loser for a black candidate even in a Democratic primary. Interesting thought, and you certainly can't disbelieve it on the grounds that the Clintons aren't sufficiently cynical to perpetuate it.
Also, we got a call during the program from Andy from Toledo, one of the most faithful callers to our show during our first year. As a black man who supports Barack Obama and is significantly to the left of the Clintons, Andy had an interesting point to make. Since Bill Clinton was the greatest president ever in the morally dubious category of "Speaking In Words That Must Be Constantly Parsed," he knew exactly what he was saying when he branded Obama's campaign and life story a "fairy tale" -- moreover, black voters know this. With the coordinated points of attack emanating from the good old Clinton War Room (the "fairy tale," Obama and MLK being phony speech-givers, Bob Johnson's not-so-subtle about Obama's past weed and coke habits), black voters see the Clintons turning their "By All Means Necessary" mode of attack on one of their own -- and they don't like it.
There are signs now that the Clintons may be seeking a racial cease-fire with the Obama campaign, and while I would have previously thought it would have been because they were dealing from a position of weakness, I'm now rethinking that. Perhaps Chris is right and they want to move on because they've already accomplished their purpose: planting in the minds of white voters on Super Tuesday that angry black voters are out to take over the party and the country.
All that we can tell for certain right now is that events are going to get much more divisive and interesting before they settle down -- and as an emphatic non-Democrat, I am gleefully enjoying the show.
As I previously indicated here, I have been feeling some glee at seeing the Clintons suffer accusations of racism during the presidential campaign, since they have been poisoning the political discourse of our country for decades by lightly accusing political opponents of the same sin. But after discussing this matter on last night's FDH Lounge program, I found myself examining more angles still regarding this controversy.
One of The FDH Lounge Dignitaries, Chris Galloway, pointed out that there is a chance that the Clintons are asking to be thrown into the proverbial briar patch here -- that is, the Clintons know that the racial angle is a short-term loser with the South Carolina primary looming, but it will be a long-term winner in the events to follow. Ultimately, no matter how many black voters turn out, a black vs. white dynamic is a loser for a black candidate even in a Democratic primary. Interesting thought, and you certainly can't disbelieve it on the grounds that the Clintons aren't sufficiently cynical to perpetuate it.
Also, we got a call during the program from Andy from Toledo, one of the most faithful callers to our show during our first year. As a black man who supports Barack Obama and is significantly to the left of the Clintons, Andy had an interesting point to make. Since Bill Clinton was the greatest president ever in the morally dubious category of "Speaking In Words That Must Be Constantly Parsed," he knew exactly what he was saying when he branded Obama's campaign and life story a "fairy tale" -- moreover, black voters know this. With the coordinated points of attack emanating from the good old Clinton War Room (the "fairy tale," Obama and MLK being phony speech-givers, Bob Johnson's not-so-subtle about Obama's past weed and coke habits), black voters see the Clintons turning their "By All Means Necessary" mode of attack on one of their own -- and they don't like it.
There are signs now that the Clintons may be seeking a racial cease-fire with the Obama campaign, and while I would have previously thought it would have been because they were dealing from a position of weakness, I'm now rethinking that. Perhaps Chris is right and they want to move on because they've already accomplished their purpose: planting in the minds of white voters on Super Tuesday that angry black voters are out to take over the party and the country.
All that we can tell for certain right now is that events are going to get much more divisive and interesting before they settle down -- and as an emphatic non-Democrat, I am gleefully enjoying the show.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
FDH rankings of minor league baseball systems
By Rick Morris
We at FDH recently formulated a beta version list of The Top 100 Minor League Baseball Keeper League Prospects. It's up on our fantasy sports blog, FantasyDrafthelp.blogspot.com.
We will be featuring the final version of this list in our 2008 Fantasy Baseball Draft Guide, which will be available shortly. While this list was compiled to illustrate the most valuable baseball prospects for people in fantasy keeper leagues (with emphasis given to upside and the chance of each player reaching their upside), we did see a non-fantasy use for the remainder of our research -- and this blog is our home for anything we do outside of our initial core of fantasy sports content. In rating each organization by how many top prospects they have (and just how good these prospects are), we can at least determine which organizations are rich in terms of projected future superstars.
We need to emphasize that these rankings are a bit different than those you will see from Baseball America or other sources not completely devoted to fantasy or rotisserie pursuits. Those publications and websites give more credence than we do (as well they should, by the way) to players with amazing defensive upside but less potential at the plate. So the hitters on our list are awarded their placement purely on the basis of all-around offensive upside. As you might imagine, pitchers are ranked by pretty much the same criteria as Baseball America or other sources.
Our methodology for our organizational rankings was pretty simple: 100 points for the top player in the Top 100, 99 points for #2, 98 points for #3 and all the way down to one point for #100. We have listed below each organization with the total number of points they accrued as well and in parentheses the point totals of the various players that added up to the final score). Again, this is not a means of determining total organizational depth like you might find from a Baseball America or USA Today Sports Weekly, because they attempt to grade each system's top prospects, next-level prospects and dark horse candidates for success. Our list grades on purely the studs: the quantity and quality of potential future All-Stars that each organization presently possesses.
1. Tampa Bay: 396 (83, 81, 80, 78, 74).
2. Los Angeles Dodgers: 377 (98, 85, 55, 52, 46, 30, 11).
3. Cincinnati: 374 (100, 94, 93, 87).
4. Seattle: 270 (77, 69, 64, 40, 20).
5. Colorado: 265 (71, 68, 66, 51, 9).
6T. Oakland: 228 (75, 70, 34, 27, 22).
6T. San Diego: 228 (89, 82, 50, 7).
8. Atlanta: 225 (86, 72, 48, 16, 3).
9. Texas: 222 (65, 57, 44, 41, 13, 2).
10. Los Angeles Angels: 199 (63, 61, 58, 17).
11. New York Yankees: 194 (88, 53, 45, 8).
12. Pittsburgh: 192 (92, 90).
13. San Francisco: 147 (54, 49, 39, 5).
14. Washington: 144 (76, 43, 25).
15T. Chicago Cubs: 133 (60, 38, 35).
15T. Florida: 133 (97, 24, 12).
17. Philadelphia: 132 (62, 37, 33).
18. Arizona: 130 (99, 21, 10).
19. St. Louis: 127 (96, 31).
20. New York Mets: 122 (67, 29, 26).
21. Boston: 114 (95, 15, 4).
22T. Cleveland: 112 (84, 28).
22T. Milwaukee: 112 (79, 32, 1).
24. Toronto: 105 (91, 14).
25. Detroit: 92 (56, 36).
26. Minnesota: 83 (42, 23, 18).
27. Houston: 73 (73).
28. Baltimore: 66 (47, 19).
29. Kansas City: 59 (59).
30. Chicago White Sox: 6 (6).
A cursory glance of the individual player rankings themselves seemed to indicate that the National League might be poised to regain some badly-needed ground on the Senior Circuit in terms of franchise players, since 14 of the top 20 on our list are NL prospects. But only five of the top ten teams on our organizational rankings are NL squads, proving that the road back to parity cannot be traced purely through strength of top prospects.
We at FDH recently formulated a beta version list of The Top 100 Minor League Baseball Keeper League Prospects. It's up on our fantasy sports blog, FantasyDrafthelp.blogspot.com.
We will be featuring the final version of this list in our 2008 Fantasy Baseball Draft Guide, which will be available shortly. While this list was compiled to illustrate the most valuable baseball prospects for people in fantasy keeper leagues (with emphasis given to upside and the chance of each player reaching their upside), we did see a non-fantasy use for the remainder of our research -- and this blog is our home for anything we do outside of our initial core of fantasy sports content. In rating each organization by how many top prospects they have (and just how good these prospects are), we can at least determine which organizations are rich in terms of projected future superstars.
We need to emphasize that these rankings are a bit different than those you will see from Baseball America or other sources not completely devoted to fantasy or rotisserie pursuits. Those publications and websites give more credence than we do (as well they should, by the way) to players with amazing defensive upside but less potential at the plate. So the hitters on our list are awarded their placement purely on the basis of all-around offensive upside. As you might imagine, pitchers are ranked by pretty much the same criteria as Baseball America or other sources.
Our methodology for our organizational rankings was pretty simple: 100 points for the top player in the Top 100, 99 points for #2, 98 points for #3 and all the way down to one point for #100. We have listed below each organization with the total number of points they accrued as well and in parentheses the point totals of the various players that added up to the final score). Again, this is not a means of determining total organizational depth like you might find from a Baseball America or USA Today Sports Weekly, because they attempt to grade each system's top prospects, next-level prospects and dark horse candidates for success. Our list grades on purely the studs: the quantity and quality of potential future All-Stars that each organization presently possesses.
1. Tampa Bay: 396 (83, 81, 80, 78, 74).
2. Los Angeles Dodgers: 377 (98, 85, 55, 52, 46, 30, 11).
3. Cincinnati: 374 (100, 94, 93, 87).
4. Seattle: 270 (77, 69, 64, 40, 20).
5. Colorado: 265 (71, 68, 66, 51, 9).
6T. Oakland: 228 (75, 70, 34, 27, 22).
6T. San Diego: 228 (89, 82, 50, 7).
8. Atlanta: 225 (86, 72, 48, 16, 3).
9. Texas: 222 (65, 57, 44, 41, 13, 2).
10. Los Angeles Angels: 199 (63, 61, 58, 17).
11. New York Yankees: 194 (88, 53, 45, 8).
12. Pittsburgh: 192 (92, 90).
13. San Francisco: 147 (54, 49, 39, 5).
14. Washington: 144 (76, 43, 25).
15T. Chicago Cubs: 133 (60, 38, 35).
15T. Florida: 133 (97, 24, 12).
17. Philadelphia: 132 (62, 37, 33).
18. Arizona: 130 (99, 21, 10).
19. St. Louis: 127 (96, 31).
20. New York Mets: 122 (67, 29, 26).
21. Boston: 114 (95, 15, 4).
22T. Cleveland: 112 (84, 28).
22T. Milwaukee: 112 (79, 32, 1).
24. Toronto: 105 (91, 14).
25. Detroit: 92 (56, 36).
26. Minnesota: 83 (42, 23, 18).
27. Houston: 73 (73).
28. Baltimore: 66 (47, 19).
29. Kansas City: 59 (59).
30. Chicago White Sox: 6 (6).
A cursory glance of the individual player rankings themselves seemed to indicate that the National League might be poised to regain some badly-needed ground on the Senior Circuit in terms of franchise players, since 14 of the top 20 on our list are NL prospects. But only five of the top ten teams on our organizational rankings are NL squads, proving that the road back to parity cannot be traced purely through strength of top prospects.
Feeding Clintons their own medicine on race
By Rick Morris
The Clinton campaign is presently suffering a great deal of scrutiny on matters of racial sensitivity as they attempt to engage Barack Obama. The Obama campaign, presently trying to get back on track after their shocking loss in New Hampshire, is clearly fanning the flames and putting the Clintons on the defensive with perhaps their most faithful constituency.
I love it. What goes around, comes around.
Now I don't have a dog in this race (notwithstanding the fact that I previously said I thought Obama was a good guy even if I didn't agree with him on just about anything -- I might need to readdress whether I think he's any better a person than Hillary in light of the fact that both are pretty bloodthirsty on the issue of unborn life and the fact that he acted to block Illinois implementation of an act to protect babies who are "accidentally" born alive during an abortion procedure), but it's always good to see bad people get punched in the nose even if other dubious folks are the ones delivering the blow.
For the entirety of their career on the national political stage, the Clintons have sought to divide this country along racial lines. Bill Clinton takes any chance he gets to proclaim that the GOP has had an institutional advantage in presidential elections since 1968 purely because of appeals to racism among southern whites -- leaving aside the fact that the Democratic party was taking a radical left turn at that time on matters of abortion, national security, homosexuality, taxation and countless other issues of concern to conservative whites everywhere. But the Clintons have always chosen to hone in on race as a matter of proclaiming their own moral superiority, as a means of saying, "We are pure at heart. Anyone who disagrees with us is a dirty racist."
Folks like myself who agree wholeheartedly with the original spirit of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which stood for equal opportunity but certainly not quotas, have long been vilified by black civil rights leaders and their allies in the White Liberal Guilt Community. Now, two of the most prominent pillars of that community are getting the same presumption of racism pushed on them that they tarred others with for decades.
Truly, my heart bleeds for them.
The Clinton campaign is presently suffering a great deal of scrutiny on matters of racial sensitivity as they attempt to engage Barack Obama. The Obama campaign, presently trying to get back on track after their shocking loss in New Hampshire, is clearly fanning the flames and putting the Clintons on the defensive with perhaps their most faithful constituency.
I love it. What goes around, comes around.
Now I don't have a dog in this race (notwithstanding the fact that I previously said I thought Obama was a good guy even if I didn't agree with him on just about anything -- I might need to readdress whether I think he's any better a person than Hillary in light of the fact that both are pretty bloodthirsty on the issue of unborn life and the fact that he acted to block Illinois implementation of an act to protect babies who are "accidentally" born alive during an abortion procedure), but it's always good to see bad people get punched in the nose even if other dubious folks are the ones delivering the blow.
For the entirety of their career on the national political stage, the Clintons have sought to divide this country along racial lines. Bill Clinton takes any chance he gets to proclaim that the GOP has had an institutional advantage in presidential elections since 1968 purely because of appeals to racism among southern whites -- leaving aside the fact that the Democratic party was taking a radical left turn at that time on matters of abortion, national security, homosexuality, taxation and countless other issues of concern to conservative whites everywhere. But the Clintons have always chosen to hone in on race as a matter of proclaiming their own moral superiority, as a means of saying, "We are pure at heart. Anyone who disagrees with us is a dirty racist."
Folks like myself who agree wholeheartedly with the original spirit of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which stood for equal opportunity but certainly not quotas, have long been vilified by black civil rights leaders and their allies in the White Liberal Guilt Community. Now, two of the most prominent pillars of that community are getting the same presumption of racism pushed on them that they tarred others with for decades.
Truly, my heart bleeds for them.
WrestleMania booking Version 2.0
By Rick Morris
As I did back in October, I’m going to post an updated assessment of what would constitute a good WrestleMania 24 card. Additionally, I’ve got some thoughts on some directions the company should take beyond then. As always, I assume that the majority of these ideas will never be used by the company and an inferior collection of booking plans will probably be implemented.
^ WWE Championship Match: Randy Orton vs. HHH. I’d have rather seen a slow burn with the Orton/Jericho feud to WrestleMania, but that got hot-shotted right out of the gate – and predictably did nothing to improve business. This match clearly is the one the company is planning, and I don’t have a big problem with that. Since ‘Mania traditionally (with very few exceptions) ends with a big babyface win, this one should go on last. Where my plan likely diverges from WWE’s: I would not keep the belt on HHH for long, instead putting it back on Orton before John Cena’s return. A great three-way feud between face Cena, heel Orton and tweener HHH could well result and take the company all the way up to WrestleMania 25.
^ World Title Match: Edge vs. Undertaker. This match could not only be billed as “Streak vs. Title,” it could also be promoted as “Streak vs. Streak” – because Edge has not lost a singles or tag team match at ‘Mania, just last year’s “Money In the Bank.” A cocky heel like Edge would be expected to make the outlandish claim that his streak was as impressive as Undertaker’s, so I hope that this element becomes a part of the storyline when this match goes down as expected. I would like to see Undertaker “pass the torch” in this match and do (at least a relatively clean) job to Edge, who would benefit immensely from the accomplishment. With the great year that ‘Taker had in 2007, a loss here wouldn’t have to lead to his fade from the main event scene, and intriguing storylines could result in terms of ambitious heels trying to block him from getting back into the title picture.
^ ECW Title Match: CM Punk vs. JBL. Since the company has established that JBL can get involved with another brand’s matches during a pay-per-view, I’d like to see him somehow weasel his way into the #1 contendership during the February No Way Out event. The storyline explanation could be simple and effective: JBL, as a longtime ECW hater, doesn’t like Punk, who is an ECW Original at least in spirit. Backstage vignettes with Tommy Dreamer and Balls Mahoney praising Punk as a worthy torch carrier for ECW would give Punk even more of a rub and would enrage General Manager Estrada, JBL and everyone else looking to see a “new ECW” completely replace the old. Since JBL needs a WrestleMania match befitting his return from retirement and Punk needs a victory over an established name (and one who can give him a good match to boot), this match fills several needs. I would keep JBL on the Raw roster all the way through the feud, however, making this match one of the cross-brand matches we have seen at ‘Mania since the brand split. JBL and Punk can cross back and forth between the two shows to advance the feud.
^ Flair Must Retire If He Loses: Ric Flair vs. Batista. With Batista apparently out of the Smackdown main event picture for the big show and needing a substantive program, I’d like to see Edge and Vickie Guerrero conspire to pit these two longtime friends against each other. What could make the match more interesting is if their efforts have an effect on Batista and make him bloodthirsty at the thought of attaining such a precious achievement: retiring the ultimate legend. Having Batista heel on Flair heading into the encounter would add all the necessary heat and then some. Additionally, it would set up an Orton/Batista vs. HHH/Flair “Evolution Reunion Match” on Saturday Night’s Main Event heading into
^
^ Money In the Bank Match: Shawn Michaels vs. Chris Jericho vs. Jeff Hardy vs. Rey Mysterio vs. John Morrison vs.
^ Women’s Title Match, Lumberjill Rules: Beth Phoenix vs. Candice Michelle. This bout sets up nicely as a revenge match, as Candice should be fully recovered by WrestleMania. The “Glamazon” should win to solidify her strong title reign, but the feud should continue with Candice still possibly being the diva to knock
^ Brand Rules Battle Royal. This would be a good use of all undercard wrestlers not participating in other matches: a “team battle royal” with 10 wrestlers from each brand all wearing matching T-shirts and trying to ensure that one or more wrestlers from their show will be in the ring at the very end. This is a good showcase opportunity for some of the “monster” wrestlers like Kane, Great Khali and Umaga. At the end, I’d have Santino Marella as the sole survivor, dumping out Carlito gratuitously along with another wrestler Carlito is about to eliminate – so that Santino can be the sole RAW wrestler to bask in the glory and foreshadowing eventual dissention with the cool one.
^ Finlay & Hornswaggle vs. Vince & Shane McMahon. The travails of “Mr. McMahon’s illegitimate son” seem to be building to a WrestleMania resolution, and there’s no better way to pull this off than to make a tag match involving his friend, the very over new face Finlay. This match could bring plenty of comedy moments, highspots from Shane O’Mac and great wrestling execution from Finlay. In the end, Finlay and Hornswaggle would come out on top, hopefully with a very memorable ending worthy of fitting into the lineage of “Mr. McMahon comeuppance moments.”
^ Kennedy vs. Lashley. This match would fit as a pure revenge affair. The storyline of Kennedy injuring Lashley last summer as a steppingstone is ready-made for a ‘Mania blowoff once Lashley has reestablished himself on the scene. Lashley would need to win, but not in a squash, as Kennedy appears to be a valued part of the future roster as well.
As for future developments, the first move I’d make would be to return the “WWE Draft” to the RAW that airs eight days after WrestleMania. That would allow the company to use all of their programs immediately after the big show to promote the draft show. Rather than engage in the wholesale and pointless shuffling of past years, I’d limit the event to two acquisitions per roster:
^ To RAW: Batista/Flair and The Edgeheads. Batista’s return to RAW with Flair as his manager would come at an interesting time, with HHH fending off Orton for the WWE Title and the entire former Evolution stable in the title picture for the first time ever. The Edgeheads should be separated from the champ, as I am very pessimistic that they will get over in their present role and all they will end up doing is leeching heat from the holder of the World Title. I’m not opposed to Edge having associates, but they should not be wrestlers who were previously just a step up from being glorified jobbers. JBL never gained anything by having wrestlers previously treated as non-entities as his “Cabinet.” The Edgeheads weren’t ready to be put into their role, and should move to RAW to join the tag team picture for the interim.
^ To Smackdown: Chris Jericho and Jeff Hardy. Both of these stars would make excellent foils for Edge and each would add interesting personality and great workrate to a World Title picture that already has both in the current beltholder. For once, Smackdown should emerge from the draft with a boost instead of gigantic holes that have been inflicted.
^ To ECW: Umaga and The Highlanders. Umaga is being stripped of his air of invincibility now that he has settled in as a “next-level heel” for top faces out of the WWE Title picture. A move to ECW, a feud with CM Punk and a reunion of sorts with General Manager Estrada would freshen him up greatly. The Highlanders are at the point of serving no purpose whatsoever on RAW and should be shuttled to ECW, where they can be part of the WWE Tag Team Title picture thanks to the talent sharing between ECW and Smackdown. The team might never be over enough to merit a title run, but they should get one last chance on a new show to prove or disprove that notion.
Clinton character assassin busted for DWI
By Rick Morris
The night before the New Hampshire primary, when everything looked bleak for the Clinton presidential campaign, apparently somebody gave into the despair and went drinky-drinky.
Sidney Blumenthal, nicknamed "Sid Vicious" for his long history of sliming opponents of the Clinton family, was picked up for DWI in Nashua on the eve of the primary.
Would you like some mayo on that big fat karma sandwich, Sid?
The night before the New Hampshire primary, when everything looked bleak for the Clinton presidential campaign, apparently somebody gave into the despair and went drinky-drinky.
Sidney Blumenthal, nicknamed "Sid Vicious" for his long history of sliming opponents of the Clinton family, was picked up for DWI in Nashua on the eve of the primary.
Would you like some mayo on that big fat karma sandwich, Sid?
Saturday, January 12, 2008
FDH Lounge Show #23: January 13, 2008
By Rick Morris
It's THE ONE-YEAR ANNIVERSARY EDITION of THE FDH LOUNGE on SportsTalkNetwork.com this Sunday night from 8-11 PM EST! As you would expect from the program where "nothing is off-topic," we have a multiplicity of topics that The Dignitaries of The FDH Lounge will be addressing.
In Hour One, after the Opening Statements, we'll be hearing from our good friend Jake Digman, the right-hand man over at the North American Allied Fight Series and Pro Karate Weekly. He'll be discussing several matters with us, including the new NAAFS program coming to STN this Tuesday at 9 PM EST, the rise of MMA as a whole into a huge force in the sports business and what it is like to work with a promotion showcasing some of the hottest up-and-coming amateur and pro fighters. Next, we'll revisit the shocking ups and downs in presidential politics since our last program on December 30 and that will take us well into the second hour.
Then it's time to look back at a year of great FDH Lounge programming. Nobody's ever tried to put on a show as ambitious in scope as this one and we'll revisit topics we covered, as well as overall events between January 14, 2007 and now. This should be another one of our now-legendary free-for-all segments that could verge anywhere and everywhere.
Once we move past that, shortly into Hour Three, we'll be joined by one of our regular guests in The Lounge, dare we say someone verging on Honorary Dignitary status in Russ Cohen. He's the proprietor of Sportsology, a great website dedicated to the vast sports landscape, and he was in Buffalo for the great Winter Classic NHL outdoor game on New Year's Day. He'll tell us exactly what it was like to be there, how it compared to the first NHL outdoor game in Edmonton (which he also attended) a few years ago, what he hears about the future of such events, and much, much more.
We'll wrap up our three hours with The FDH Lounge Pigskin Report, as we take a final look back at the college bowl season, an early glance ahead to the NFL Draft and an examination of the ongoing NFL playoffs and the first Championship Sunday preview you'll find anywhere.
It's been an outstanding first year on The FDH Lounge as we established an ambitious mandate for ourselves creatively and took large steps towards fulfilling it. With this program, we'll celebrate what we've done and continue to demonstrate to you that we're your ultimate source for discussion on anything and everything going on today.
It's THE ONE-YEAR ANNIVERSARY EDITION of THE FDH LOUNGE on SportsTalkNetwork.com this Sunday night from 8-11 PM EST! As you would expect from the program where "nothing is off-topic," we have a multiplicity of topics that The Dignitaries of The FDH Lounge will be addressing.
In Hour One, after the Opening Statements, we'll be hearing from our good friend Jake Digman, the right-hand man over at the North American Allied Fight Series and Pro Karate Weekly. He'll be discussing several matters with us, including the new NAAFS program coming to STN this Tuesday at 9 PM EST, the rise of MMA as a whole into a huge force in the sports business and what it is like to work with a promotion showcasing some of the hottest up-and-coming amateur and pro fighters. Next, we'll revisit the shocking ups and downs in presidential politics since our last program on December 30 and that will take us well into the second hour.
Then it's time to look back at a year of great FDH Lounge programming. Nobody's ever tried to put on a show as ambitious in scope as this one and we'll revisit topics we covered, as well as overall events between January 14, 2007 and now. This should be another one of our now-legendary free-for-all segments that could verge anywhere and everywhere.
Once we move past that, shortly into Hour Three, we'll be joined by one of our regular guests in The Lounge, dare we say someone verging on Honorary Dignitary status in Russ Cohen. He's the proprietor of Sportsology, a great website dedicated to the vast sports landscape, and he was in Buffalo for the great Winter Classic NHL outdoor game on New Year's Day. He'll tell us exactly what it was like to be there, how it compared to the first NHL outdoor game in Edmonton (which he also attended) a few years ago, what he hears about the future of such events, and much, much more.
We'll wrap up our three hours with The FDH Lounge Pigskin Report, as we take a final look back at the college bowl season, an early glance ahead to the NFL Draft and an examination of the ongoing NFL playoffs and the first Championship Sunday preview you'll find anywhere.
It's been an outstanding first year on The FDH Lounge as we established an ambitious mandate for ourselves creatively and took large steps towards fulfilling it. With this program, we'll celebrate what we've done and continue to demonstrate to you that we're your ultimate source for discussion on anything and everything going on today.
'08 NFL Draft Profile...Kenny Phillips
by Jason Jones
Kenny Phillips – FS –Univ. of Miami 
Kenny Phillips – FS –
2008 NFL DRAFT PROJECITONS: First Round – Top 10 Pick
Friday, January 11, 2008
'08 NFL Draft Profile...Jake Long
by Jason Jones
Jake Long – OT –
Jake Long is clearly the best OT in this year’s draft. Jake Long would’ve been in the top 5 last year as well. He has the perfect build. He is tall enough and long enough to handle big edge rushers. He is heavy enough to not get pushed around by bull rushers. And the most important measurable in this era of football is his agility and speed for his size. Most big, tall and slower OT’s have difficulty measuring up against the elite pass rushers. They have a tendency to over pursue and not have the physical ability to make up lost ground. There is a new breed of OT, and Jake Long possesses all of the attributes to succeed as one of them. Take last years first OT taken, Joe Thomas. They are very similar in almost every way, except one. Thomas is extremely skilled and yet very reserve and even. He’s the guy that goes to a bar and gets hit with a bottle and says, “C’mon man, we’re trying to have a good time”. Jake Long in the same situation is more likely to beat the guy within an inch of his life, breaking him in half and throwing the pieces through a window from a seated position. If Thomas is even and balanced, Long is even with the potential to get excessively physical. Just ask Bobby Carpenter. Carpenter beat him twice in the last regular season game. On the 3rd attempt, Jake Long broke his leg. He doesn’t take to losing well, which can be good if controlled. The other nice factor that Long has, that most do not, is the ability to get up field. If he only blocking one man or two lesser players, he will get up field and block like a receiver on a running play. It is not outside the realm of possibility to see Jake Long 10-20 yards down field continuing to block. Not all OT’s have that ability. Sometimes it is the difference between a top 10 pick and a second or third round OT. If you played Frankenstein, Jake Long is the monster you would create. Regardless of who selects Jake Long, he could be compared to Jonathan Ogden if he had “Roid-Rage”
2008 NFL DRAFT PROJECTION: First Round – Top 5 Pick
I Really Hope These Focus Groups Are Not Representative of the Rest of Us
Shortly after wrapping up the Fantasy Draft Help Insider show, I decided to jump over to Fox News and see what the reactions to tonight’s debate were. It is not my place to tell you or anyone else what’s going to happen or what should happen, however I had to chime in on the responses and point out how stupid
Q: A word or phrase that stood out to you regarding Fred Thompson’s performance?
A1: Nice awakening, but too little too late.
I don’t want to hear “too late.”
A2: The “Big Bear” in Fred Thompson awoke.
He was always here, you just weren’t listening.
A3: Entertaining but not convincing (that woman is really STUPID).
Again, not listening…you’ve already decided and are a drain on the process.
A4: Very prepared and it showed.
He’s been very prepared since the day he got in.
A5: His charisma finally surfaced.
Again, since Day One. Where have you been?
A6: Showed his intelligence, he was organized and prepared.
…Day one…
A7: Sarcastic and curt with no substance.
You are probably one of the Jackasses who has been waiting for a sound bite.
A8: Surprising, a little too late.
You’re an idiot, there’s not one thing surprising about anything he said.
A9: Began to contrast himself.
The answers are the same, he just had to turn up the volume for those of you that ride the short bus.
A10: Believed he was very strong and passionate, he was ready to go.
Since when does “sounds passionate” mean squat? Is he the right man for the job?
A11: Very dynamic and great, but late.
What’s with this late crap? We haven’t even gotten to the S.Carolina primary yet?
A12: Very strong on conservative issues, very strong on immigration.
Again, no change. He’s been here since the beginning.
A13: Presidential and very convincing.
Now there’s one I cannot disagree with.
Don’t tell me he’s too late. That is complete bull@#$%. Sure every candidate and the voters who vote for him/her would love to start fast and end fast. In politics, it's rare like in NFL football that one is the ’72 Dolphins. Remember when McCain was getting his ass kicked routinely in the fall? How about when Mitt Romney was afraid to really mix it up, then he began the attack on Hillary? Where was Huckabee 2 months ago? I also think I remember everyone thinking for a large chunk of time leading up to now that this was a 2-pony race between Romney and Guiliani. Where’s Guiliani now? Holding every one else’s jock strap. And Ron Paul. For about 3 and a half weeks, people believed that Ron Paul was for real. No one is now where they started at the beginning. No one. That is clearly a cop-out for those who have put up a mental block on Fred Thompson. Those people who said, shades of Doc Brown in Back to the Future, …The actor!?!?! Get over yourselves. If you just open your minds to what’s really going on, you’ll see that tonight proves that Fred Thompson deserves to be in this race just as much as anyone else. Seriously, if you quit waiting for soundbites and personal attacks you’d see that Thompson should have
Q: How many of you switched your vote to Fred Thompson (show of hands-less than ½)?
Q: I want to know specifically, why?
A1: He’s shown us a turnaround. He has shown us his voice. He has shown us a seriousness on a lot of the issues that were wavering.
First off, I don’t want to scare anyone who’s now jumping on the bandwagon. He’s always been here. His voice hasn’t changed. He is the Tom Landry of this race. He should not be discredited because he is stoic and steadfast on everything, he should be rewarded for it. Since when has he wavered on anything? He just had to speak loud enough so that the Springer-Minded People could hear what he was saying. I really don’t think a man should have to call out another and get personal before you start listening.
A2: I believe he was sincere and showed real wisdom and candor.
That’s what he is. Sincere, no nonsense, stoic, educated, and everything we should be looking for in a candidate.
A3: I finally found out where he really stands.
THAT’S BECAUSE YOU WEREN’T LISTENING BEFORE, YOU IDIOT!!!
Q: So what was it? Why do you think he waited this long? You complained he was too late, what was going on?
A1: He chose the perfect state to do this in,
Need I say “Rope-A-Dope?”
A2:
…Yeah, I got nothing.
A3: (the stupid woman) I simply think he had a good day, and it actually concerns me that he has not been this consistent throughout the campaign. (You know what concerns me? Why you deliver your stupid comments with that lame-ass Jodie Foster “I need to spit it out” manner of speaking).
The only thing he has not been consistent on is the stuff that doesn’t matter. Since you’re not listening, you don’t see that. The only thing that has changed is the volume and inflection of his voice, him singling out particular candidates to tear apart, and providing some soundbites so that you could remember tomorrow what happened tonight. This is why people should have to pass an aptitude and political current events test in order to vote. (that’s a little harsh, but am I the only one listening to the answers?). Short of saying, I don’t care if the candidate looks like a he’s high on Quaaludes, if he has the right answers, Volume and Passion should have no relevance. Some of these people are acting like, Fred thought he’d take up a hobby for a couple of months. Like some colorblind kid trying his hand a putting together a puzzle. C’mon
A4: I mean, he made it clear when he brought everyone from his campaign down here to
A5: He came to
A6: Nice candor and wit but I don’t think he has the dynamism to be the long-term leader of this country. (you’re ignorant and clearly haven’t been paying attention).
DYNAMISM????? Wow, you shouldn’t talk…As is in having a dynamic characteristic, within the context of this race…He has exactly the DYNAMISM that we are all looking for.
A7: Fred Thompson is smarter than anyone thinks, earlier in the beginning of this whole talk said, “no one who’s ever become president has lost
Even the stoner in the back gets it. How come the woman and the uninformed men in this focus group cannot see their head for their ass. I’m not generalized with gender, it's just an observation from this particular focus group.
A8: (some elderly woman making some comment on sacrificing his
Anyone who brings up the “sacrifice
A9: That’s funny, I never thought he was passionate at all. It seems to me, that up until tonight, when he was forceful, he was only in it because other people forced him in to it.
WHAT THE F@#% DOES PASSION HAVE TO DO WITH IT?My chiropractor is not passionate about his job, but I know there is no one else I'd rather have doing the job. And forced him into it? You couldn’t force me to spend $1 on anything if I didn’t want to do it. You really think Fred Thompson is going to waste time and money on this because someone else told him to do it, while he opposed running? You, ma’am, are dumb as paint.
A10: I agree, I don’t think he had enough passion, he came off tonight wonderfully, I think he was very aggressive, but he is just too little too late. We also have to think of who’s electable. Who is going to put up a fight against the Democrats?
Listen stupid, as unbiased as I can be, Fred Thompson, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Rudy Guiliani are all electable. The only one who isn’t is Ron Paul. On top of that, I think that Thompson, McCain, and Huckabee could defeat Hillary without over extending themselves too much. Same could be said for Obama, unless minorities and the youth vote come out in ridiculous numbers.
Q: Does electability matter?
A: (in unison) YES!
Q: More of you think the Democratic candidate will be Barack Obama, so should be the republican candidate?
A: (jumbled mess of all the candidates)
Q: (Colmes) I am fascinated by what is going on there, specifically with Fred Thompson, and his showing here, but for those that thought he won the debate, but then would be reluctant to vote for him. Why if you thought he was so strong would you be reluctant to vote for him?
A1: Let’s start here in
Q: (interjected followup) Why?
A1: Let’s show the rest of the country that we are not afraid to elect the best candidate.
This may be the best sentence uttered all night. Forget the frills. Forget the sound bites and the inflection in each candidate’s voice. Can we just listen to the questions, then listen to the answers and formulate a solid opinion on what was said and not how it was said. I could say, “the chicken ate poopie-cahcah for brunch with the
A2: I don’t think that any of the previous campaign’s (primaries/caucuses) matter. We are an independent state and we’ve shown that before.
Then secede from the nation, hillbilly boy.
Q: You said too little too late, I want to know why?
A1: Too little experience, he’s just been in the government in the legislature.
Go off yourself. Or at least Google him. Lack of experience my tookus. Lack of experience, we have a governor and a mayor running. A first lady who’s only been a senator for a short while, and what seems to be a freshman who’s only held his office for 2 years. I should slap you in the face with your own experience comment.
A2: (stupid Jodie Foster woman again) He’s an entertaining man, by all means. The consistency has not been there and that makes me nervous. I don’t know that he will handle things consistently in a forthright manner.
The consistency has been there, you are too naïve and dumb to see. Its like people have a Jerry Springer filter on. If it isn’t loud, personal, or abusive, then it's not worth listening to.
A3: I want the candidate to start strong and end strong, and he hasn’t had a strong start.
When was the last time the person who was elected President held the pole position throughout the duration of the entire process, beginning to end? It’s a lot like a basketball game. One team can win convincingly or even dominate, but it is foolish to think the other team didn’t at least go on a run from time to time. Look, I hope Fred Thompson is the San Antonio Spurs of this process. No flash, no glamour, but when the dust clears, whether you like him or not, you will recognize that he is the most complete well-rounded candidate from top to bottom and in 360 degrees. Even if his performance doesn’t come with the high-flying sparkle you’d wished it had.
A4: And I also think that with all of these situations around the world we need someone who is used to thinking about it before just jumping in and reacting to it. (you should not procreate, it might bring down the national average).
Q5: (by a show of hands) Was it right to include Ron Paul in this debate?
A: (5 to 1 in unison) YES
NNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ron Paul should go away. At least go as a tertiary party member. Ron Paul is not a Republican. It may be too harsh to call him a Democrat. When your answer to
SOUNDBITES:
Fred Thompson-Mike Huckabee would be a Christian leader. But he would also bring about liberal economic policies, liberal foreign policies. He believes we have an arrogant foreign policy, and in the tradition of “Blame America First." He believes that Guantanamo should be shut down and those enemy combatants should be brought here.
Mike Huckabee-The Air Force has a saying, “If you’re not catching flack, then your not over the target," well I’m catching the flack so I must be over the target. Fred, I appreciate the analysis of my record.
Mike Huckabee-If you think you are going to engage the United States military, be prepared not simply to have a battle, be prepared first to put your sites on the American vessel…and then be prepared for the next thing you see will be the gates of HELL, for that is exactly what you will see.
Fred Thompson-You know how you can tell the news is good coming out of
Fred Thompson-You cannot take the judgment out of the hands of the forces on the ground, I think one more step and they would have been introduced to those virgins they are looking forward to seeing…Iran was clearly testing us, they took British hostages under similar circumstances. They are testing our resolve, they know they are dealing with a nation that will not put up with that sort of thing.
Let’s talk about the word change. Change to me is just a buzz word. Change is the transitional word that becomes a catalyst for a candidate to say “hey, look at me over here, if you don’t like the current situation, vote for me because I will change things." Change is just a word. This is an election process. Despite popular, and yet naïve, belief, you will never see change. You won’t see it because this is AN ELECTION PROCESS. All we have to go on is words. If you are a more stringent follower of political news and events maybe you can rely on voting record. It's an election, you will not see change, see change proven, feel change, visualize change. And the reason is, words are pretty much all we have to go on. Once we’ve listened to all of the words and we as a nation have made our decision, then maybe you will see some change. That’s how our political system works. Obama or McCain, Clinton or Huckabee cannot
THEY
Here is another comment from the dumb Jodie Foster woman:
“I don’t even pay attention to the word change. Because I can sit here all the live long day, guess what? If you elect me I am going to change Global Warming. It won’t happen anymore. PROVE IT. No one does”.
I wish I could have 2 minutes with this woman. Have her feeling like an infant who just slammed its head into the corner of a coffee table…Lost and confused in a pool of her own disillusioned tears. I wonder if she would feel better if the candidates would close their responses with “Q.E.D.” This is not a mathematical equation or the proof of a scientific theory. These are candidates trying to say what they need to within there own belief structure (unless we’re talking about Mittens, he says whatever he has to regardless of the integrity of his true beliefs. No one should take anything he says seriously.) to convince you WITH THEIR WORDS that they are the right candidate for the job.
Some other major thoughts on tonight’s debate.
-Fred Thompson finally showed up.
-Mitt Romney was somewhere between unimpressive and detrimental to himself.
-McCain, Huckabee did not hurt themselves and held their own.
-Ron Paul officially has no shot to win.
-If these results translate to
Keep in mind, Ron Paul not only looked like a senile old fish out of water, but also registered the worst singular response to a question since the campaigns began for 2008. Ron Paul is as I said he was, he is a Democrat in Republican clothing trying to hide his true tendencies. In a time when Republican voters want their candidate to stop apologizing for being conservative and take back the party to the ideals that drew each individual to that side, you have Ron Paul. Party affiliation aside, issues aside, personality and appearance aside, Ron Paul is the Ross Perot of this election process except Ron Paul doesn’t have the money to buy his way into the nomination of this party just so he can stick his head into the camera and say, “Look I matter," because Ron, you don’t.
With all that was said about the debate. All of the opinions uttered both by experts and random voters, here are the results of the Hannity and Colmes Text Message Poll…
Tonight Winner? (of the debate)
1 Ron Paul 32%
2 Fred Thompson 22%
3 Mike Huckabee 18%
4 Mitt Romney 13%
5 John McCain 6%
6 Rudy Guiliani 5%
This proves either, Ron Paul supporters are hackers and rigged the poll or
Another Reason To NEVER Listen To Mr. ROTO
by Jason Jones
It is no surprise that, we at FantasyDraftHelp.com do not think Roto is as talented as he thinks he is. Deep down, the guy is an idiot. This is the same guy that said after T.O. lead the league in touchdowns receptions, that you should NEVER draft T.O. What if T.O. is available in the 8th round? Should we still never draft him? The same nimrod who said always play and/or consider the matchups. Specifically, BENCH ADRIAN PETERSON AGAINST THE CHARGERS, if you don't remember Peterson broke the single game rushing record that day. So, here are even more examples of why ESPN should never not associate their name with his. The following was published, which blows my mind, in the December issue of ESPN the Magazine...
It is no surprise that, we at FantasyDraftHelp.com do not think Roto is as talented as he thinks he is. Deep down, the guy is an idiot. This is the same guy that said after T.O. lead the league in touchdowns receptions, that you should NEVER draft T.O. What if T.O. is available in the 8th round? Should we still never draft him? The same nimrod who said always play and/or consider the matchups. Specifically, BENCH ADRIAN PETERSON AGAINST THE CHARGERS, if you don't remember Peterson broke the single game rushing record that day. So, here are even more examples of why ESPN should never not associate their name with his. The following was published, which blows my mind, in the December issue of ESPN the Magazine...
WOW!!! What a D-Bag. This is the guy that who ESPN goes to when fantasy football questions arise. Millions of fantasy football managers are going to his site and watching his pieces on ESPN television in the hopes of getting solid advice. And this is the guy who each and every year is downsizing the number of players those people will draft. Along with his “umbrella rules” and other rigid ways of thinking are dooming fantasy owners everywhere. Never draft rookie RB’s (Adrian Peterson), never draft rookie WR’s (Dwayne Bowe, 995 yds and 5 td’s with 7 games with more than 4 receptions), always draft RB/RB back to back-you won’t survive if you don’t (my ’07 roster would disagree…T.Brady, R.Moss, C.Johnson, R.Wayne, J.Lewis, A.Peterosn, K.Winslow)… I could go on all day with the ways that ROTO is WRONG, but I’ll let you see what I mean.
- Fred Taylor-Never draft Fred Taylor because he was injured most of 2001. I go one further, Fred Taylor was hurt most of his career, but depending on the value as the draft continues Fred Taylor may become very tantalizing. If Fred Taylor is available to be your 3rd RB, by all means it makes sense to draft him. If you want to say that you don’t think it’s wise to draft
- Shaun Alexander-He claims that this decision was made solely on his performance (or lack there of) against
- Laurence Maroney-The Patriots scored 355 points in the first 9 games and Maroney didn’t get in the endzone once.
- Cedric Benson-Look, Benson has been a huge disappointment. I can’t really look down on someone who doesn’t feel confident that Benson can carry a team. But to say you write him off for good, is just asinine. Maybe some day Benson gets his head out of his conceited ass. Maybe some day he will realize that getting picked in the top 5 doesn’t extend to you anything. Never is a very close minded approach, especially in Fantasy Football
- Norv Turner-HOLY S@#$. “It’s any player he’s touched as a head coach or coordinator”. This basically says that JaMarcus Russell, and more importantly Tomlinson, Rivers, and Gates are no longer worthy of being drafted in any Fantays league. He must not have thought this one out, ROTO, you can’t be this stupid.
- Santana Moss-I think at this point he is just trying to fill the space left on the page. Does anyone believe that Santana Moss is a legit #1 WR? You better not. This is more about ROTO not properly evaluating than it is hating on Santana Moss. Santana Moss may be the best shifty slot receiver in the game if they’d ever use him correctly. In
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Debating a College Football Playoff
by Jason Jones
After the 2007-08BCS Bowl season concluded, we were all left with a sense of loss. I personally felt violated. There were a few games that I enjoyed the final score of, but by no means were they enjoyable and competitive. The beautiful thing is, I could tivo the games and do something else. Then come back and watch the first quarter of the game, then watch the other 3 quarters in fast forward just hoping to see some semblance of something worth watching in real time.
After the 2007-08
In reverse order, games I had any interest in…
I used to work near FAU in
UCLA 16
BYU 17
This one actually was decent, considering who played…C’mon, it's BYU/UCLA
Arizona St 34
Two things OKAM and CHARLES, its all about scouting draft picks
UCF 3
Mississippi St 10
Scouting Kevin Smith. Period. I have a friend that went to UCF.
Florida St 28
It was amazing
I really wanted
This was fun, the two teams I loath the most in college football
Chris Long and Michael Crabtree, one is a top 5 pick and the other is the best WR
I wanted to know I was right about
“No non-big 6 conference teams deserve to be in the
Merely an NFL Draft scouting game
LSU 38
Ohio St 24
I am an
There were only 2 games that can be confused for competitive, and they were not any of the top 6 or 7 Bowl Games. That is unacceptable. I understand the reasons why there is not a playoff system. I do not agree with any of them. After this season, don’t we have to say, “I don’t care what the reasons are, it is just bad”. Its no longer a question of “I got screwed”, it now is “Everyone got screwed”. For those who say, “but we don’t want to lose the bowl games”. F@#K it! Keep the Bowl Games, just apply them to a playoff system. We can even continue to rotate the top 4 Bowl games, hay-ell, some people are calling for the return of the Cotton Bowl, that’s fine. And this way we can get back to real bowl games. No more San Diego County Credit Union Poinsettia Bowl or the Papa Johns.com Bowl or the Champs Sports Bowl. Now on to the largest CROCK OF S@#T in the entire discussion, “A playoff would take too long and would cut into classes”. We can very easily fix this. First off, I think most fans believe if there is a playoff, we can get rid of the Conference Championships altogether. The only reason to have them is to give a team a last ditch effort to squeeze into that 8 seed. Or maybe some of these old coaches still have an affection for “Conference Champs” plaque on their office wall. Eliminate them for the sake of the playoff system.
Once we've established the brackets we need to apply estimated dates, I will be using the 2008 calendar to provide said dates. Also note, the teams and their ranks are my own opinion after the National Championship game and are inconsequential to the integrity of this discussion. An 8 team playoff creates 7 games. As written above, in the first round…
Games to take place on Saturday December 6th (or 1st weekend in December)
The Insight Bowl in
The Cotton Bowl in
Games to take place on Saturday December 13th (or 2nd weekend in December)
The Sugar Bowl in
The Rose Bowl in
Games to take place on Saturday December 20th (or 3rd weekend in December)
The Fiesta Bowl in
The
National Championship Game to take place on December 27th (or 4th weekend in Dec.)
The
According to the path I have laid out I would have
The other major issue which has never been more prevalent than this season is matchups. There are no
Another issue that is often brought up is that people would not be as excited or that the regular season will not mean as much. First off, if you are one of those people who believe the concept that College Football is the best sport because every game counts…then you need to lay off the sauce or quit doing whatever drugs you’ve been doing. In the NFL every game counts. Seriously, how many times does Appalachian St vs.
Checkout OHIO ST’s schedule as it was vs. how I would have it (hypothetically speaking) if they applied the Big 6 vs Big 6 concept.
Actual
Vs. Youngstown St
Vs.
At
Vs. Northwestern
At
At Purdue
Vs.
Vs. Michigan St
At
Vs.
Vs.
At
Big 6 vs. Big 6 Ohio St schedule
Vs.
Vs.
At
Vs.
At
At Purdue
Vs.
Vs.
At
Vs. Michigan St
Vs.
At
Big 6 vs. Big 6 Virginia Tech
Vs. UCLA
At LSU
Vs.
Vs.
Vs
At Clemson
At Duke
Vs.
At Georgia Tech
Vs
Vs.
At
We can go all day, but you understand my point. Clearly the ACC, Big10, Big12, Big East, PAC10, and
Finally, as I see the most important issues halting a playoff system, is money. University Presidents and anyone else in line to make money off of bowl bids and/or bowl wins all believe if we go to a playoff system, they all will lose money. That is flat out not true. It is only another excuse to not change the system. In fact, and I’m no marketing wiz, I believe they would make more money, maybe even double or triple earnings. Imagine, before the season even started the people who are set to make money off of the Fiesta Bowl already know going in on the rotating basis that they are getting no worse than the #1 team vs. the #8 team in the country by season’s end. Which means, if we take this years teams, they’d be looking at LSU vs.
1. Sugar Bowl
2. Orange Bowl
3.
That’s big time Bowl money x’s 3. As you can clearly see, I do not understand for the life of me what factor the supporters of the current
The only hope I have as a College Football fan is that someday the people of my generation who strongly believe in a playoff will eventually become the decision makers in the high powered positions. One day we will wake up and watch a press conference to hear, “Our Grandfathers believed that College Football does not need a playoff, well we are here to express to the world that we disagree…and will changing the current system in the upcoming season”. For some of you, if I’m right, you will not live to see it. Unless someone steps in and forcefully makes the change, I am afraid it may take the evolution of 30 years before a playoff is a legitimate possibility.
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
'08 NFL Draft Profile...Chris Long
by Jason Jones
Chris Long – DE –University of Virginia
Chris Long – DE –
2008 NFL DRAFT PROJECTION: First Round – Top 3 Pick
The All-Star Debate Reconvened
by Jason Jones
Some of you are familiar with my call of change toward any and all All-Star game voting. It is my moderately sized dream that All-Star game roster be decided solely by statistical production as opposed to any other means. An All-Star game roster should not reflect a roster of “potential future hall of famers”, unless said roster also reflects players who have put up the best numbers THIS year not over the last few years. Recently, John Hollinger of ESPN.com had written a piece on a similar topic. His “East All-Stars: Slim Pickings When Selecting Subs” has mentioned some details I do not agree with, and I hope you agree with me.
Some of you are familiar with my call of change toward any and all All-Star game voting. It is my moderately sized dream that All-Star game roster be decided solely by statistical production as opposed to any other means. An All-Star game roster should not reflect a roster of “potential future hall of famers”, unless said roster also reflects players who have put up the best numbers THIS year not over the last few years. Recently, John Hollinger of ESPN.com had written a piece on a similar topic. His “East All-Stars: Slim Pickings When Selecting Subs” has mentioned some details I do not agree with, and I hope you agree with me.
"Best" in this case is hazily defined. I look at it in the big-picture kind of way -- not necessarily who is having the best season, although that's certainly important, but who are the best players, period. That, in turn produces a series of criteria for being on the team:-John Hollinger
Hollinger’s first point I do agree with, “Small Injuries Don’t Matter”
To summarize, if a player has better numbers than another but missed a small amount of time with an ankle injury (“say 12 games”) then the first player should not be penalized for a small injury. I can get behind that thought, because as he mentions, Elton Brand should not be considered (likewise, Gilbert Arenas). Signed, 1997 Anfernee Hardaway who played only 19 games in ’97 and was still voted an NBA All-Star.
The second point is what made me respond here. History Matters.
“If Player A and Player B are having comparable seasons, but Player A is playing way better than he ever has before while Player B has played at this level the past three seasons, I'm taking Player B every time.”
This should disqualify Hollinger from polluting sports fans minds forever. History should play zero part in the evaluation process.
-Al Jefferson PF (MIN) 20.6 PTS, 12.3 REB, 1.3
or
-Jermaine O’Neal (
If we left it up to Mr. Hollinger, according to his article, he would not hesitate to select Jermaine O’Neal. Jermaine is a quality player, but by saying what he’s saying, it sends the message that it does not matter what a guy does if he hasn’t been there before. I find it hard to believe any fan, much less most of them would agree Jermaine O’Neal should get the nod over
The third point deals with winning, “.500 is not a magical All-Star maker”.
I agree with this one as well. Remember, All-Star nods are not and should not be reflected in the team’s Win column. As much as I’ve hated it in previous years, it should effect MVP voting. You should not have a losing record and be heralded as the leagues best player. Just think, lets use a hypothetical player, we’ll call him John Johnson. If John Johnson is on the flat out worst team in the league, but he has a stats line that reads: 38 PTS, 18 REB, 12 AST, 3
Yet, and this one is beautiful, Hollinger continues this point with, “The Parliament Argument or The Electoral College Argument. Since
The Following Stats Reflect Only the Years They Were Pistons
Chauncey Billups
2006-17.0 Pts, 3.1 Reb, 7.2 Ast
2005-18.5 Pts, 3.1 Reb, 8.6 Ast
2004-16.5 Pts, 3.4 Reb, 5.8 Ast
2003-16.9 Pts, 3.5 Reb, 5.7 Ast
2002-16.2 Pts, 3.7 Reb, 3.9 Ast
Richard Hamilton
2006-19.8 Pts, 3.8 Reb, 3.8 Ast
2005-20.1 Pts, 3.2 Reb, 3.2 Ast
2004-18.7 Pts, 3.9 Reb, 4.9 Ast
2003-17.6 Pts, 3.6 Reb, 4.0 Ast
2002-19.7 Pts, 3.9 Reb, 2.5 Ast
Tayshawn Prince
2006-14.3 Pts, 5.2 Reb, 2.8 Ast
2005-14.1 Pts, 4.2 Reb, 2.3 Ast
2004-14.7 Pts, 5.3 Reb, 3.0 Ast
2003-10.3 Pts, 4.8 Reb, 2.3 Ast
2002-03.3 Pts, 1.1 Reb, 0.6 Ast
Rasheed Wallace
2006-12.3 Pts, 7.2 Reb, 1.7 Ast
2005-15.1 Pts, 6.8 Reb, 2.3 Ast
2004-14.5 Pts, 8.2 Reb, 1.8 Ast
Ben Wallace
2005-07.3 Pts, 11.3 Reb, 1.9 Ast
2004-09.7 Pts, 12.2 Reb, 1.7 Ast
2003-09.5 Pts, 12.4 Reb, 1.7 Ast
2002-06.9 Pts, 15.4 Reb, 1.6 Ast
2001-07.6 Pts, 13.0 Reb, 1.4 Ast
2000-06.4 Pts, 13.2 Reb, 1.5 Ast
The beauty of this is, the Pistons made the playoffs in;
2006-1st in the
2005-1st in the
2004-1st in the
2003-2nd in the
2002-1st in the
2001-1st in the
Best individual seasons:
Chauncey Billups: 2005, 18.5 / 3.1 / 8.6 (All-Star appearance: ’06, ‘07)
Richard Hamilton: 2006, 19.8 / 3.8 / 3.8 (All-Star appearance: ’06, ‘07)
Tayshawn Prince: 2004, 14.7 / 5.3 / 3.0 (All-Star appearance: 0)
Rasheed Wallace: 2004, 14.5 / 8.2 / 1.8 (All-Star appearance: ‘06)
Ben Wallace: 2002, 6.9 / 15.4 / 1.6 (All-Star appearance: ’03, ’04, ’05, ‘06)
You’ll notice that in all of the shuffle, Billups, Hamilton, R. Wallace, B. Wallace all put up quality numbers in 2006. It is a great achievement to have 4 players contribute the way the Pistons of 2006 did. It may be a by product, but as they say, “Those are the Breaks”. It may not be fair, but the math is just working against them. They were and still are a strong defensive minded team. Good defense sometimes means less possessions in a game. Then 61 of the 96 points scored on average per game came from Billups, Hamilton, Prince (not in All-Star contention), R. Wallace, B. Wallace (who only averaged 7.3 pts a game). Divide that out and each member averages 15.25 points a game. If the Pistons want more run as a team who produces All-Star players, maybe they should conduct themselves in a manner that would produce All-Star like statistics. The only drawback is not winning as much. I think they will take their division titles and playoff appearances over All-Star bids. As for the actual 2006 NBA All-Star Eastern Conference Roster, there were some votes extended due to popularity and other non statistical reasoning. When relating it to the 4 Detroit Pistons, I believe the voting populous put them in as a way to rationalize their success. It’s a lot like Fred Taylor making the Pro Bowl. His stats did not merit it, but because he put up solid numbers over time, it was treated like a Lifetime Achievement Award, not a Pro Bowl invite. I went through and pulled all of the major stats for every player in the Eastern Conference. Then took the top 25 at points, top 25 in rebounds, and top 25 in assists, then cross referenced all of it together to come up with a an Eastern Conference All-Star roster comprised completely by statistical analysis. The numbers is parenthesis are some of those stats crunched as reference points in the remainder of this discussion.
Actual East All-Star Roster_____________Roster Based on ONLY Stats
G Allen Iverson (
G Dwyane Wade (
G Gilbert Arenas (
G Richard Hamilton (
G Paul Pierce (
G Chauncey Billups (
F Lebron James (
F Jermaine O’Neal (
F Chris Bosh (
F Vince Carter (
F Rasheed Wallace (
C Shaquille O’Neal (
C Ben Wallace (
Bold = indicates starters
A few notes…Allen Iverson, Dwyane Wade, Gilbert Arenas (even though with almost 29 pts a game, he almost didn’t make it), Paul Pierce, Lebron James, Jermaine O’Neal, Chris Bosh, Vince Carter, and Shaquille O’Neal all were on both rosters. D. Wade, L. James, and S. O’Neal are the only consensus starters. They had voted Allen Iverson a starter over Gilbert Arenas. Allen Iverson had 24 pts a game while Gilbert Arenas had almost 29. Allen Iverson registered 7 assists while Arenas managed a close 6. In the not so guard friendly category Iverson had 3 rebounds to Arenas’ 5. Statistically, it was close but Arenas gets the nod going +4, -1, and +2…That’s a +5 in favor of Gilbert Arenas who went on to light up the playoff stage with Lebron not A.I. The other major disparage was at the starting power forward position. They had Jermaine O’Neal while I contest it should have been Chris Bosh. Jermaine O’Neal put up 19 points and Chris Bosh had 23. J. O’Neal grabbed 10 rebounds a game to Bosh’s 11. In the unselfish category, O’Neal had 2 assists to Bosh’s 3. That again goes in favor of my choice +4, +1, and +1 for a net gain of +6 in favor of Chris Bosh. Some of the other differences also make statistical sense.
Jason Kidd over Chauncey Billups, +3 in favor of Kidd
Joe Johnson over Richard Hamilton, +5 in favor of Johnson
Dwight Howard over Rasheed Wallace, +11 in favor Howard
Eddy Curry over Ben Wallace, +8 in favor of Curry
No fan is going to vote the biggest member of the worst trade in NBA history to the All-Star game over the Defensive Player of the year no matter what the stats, especially if that would be deemed a victory for Isaiah Thomas. Howard/R. Wallace fits Mr. Hollinger’s claim that if player A is having his best season and player B is on par within his own previous season’s, he takes player B. One problem with that theory. What if player A (Dwight Howard) is a #1 pick, is in his second season, and just so happens to be improving daily until the point that he is a no question starter in the All-Star game? And what if player B is an aging head case, who’s ceiling couldn’t sniff that of player A? Point is, Hollinger is wrong on this one, it is Dwight Howard by a mile…or, more like +11 statistically. Richard Hamilton may be the most consistent mid range jump shooter in the game. Fact of the matter is, he still is an equal offensive option on a team that splits 96 points almost equally by 5 players. Joe Johnson is the biggest name and biggest talent on a cellar dweller. Joe Johnson is the clear cut #1 scoring option on his team. Besides, +5 says Johnson belongs and Rip doesn’t. The closest margin of victory for my squad is that of Jason Kidd vs. Chauncey Billups. Kidd loses ground in points, as if there’s a lack of scoring in any All-Star game, but he makes it up in assists. This is a point I would like to think all NBA fans could get behind serious or casual. If Shaq comes down with the rebound and the other team clears out. Then Lebron, Wade, and Pierce are spread out in their running lanes, who do you want pushing the break? Billups or Kidd? Young Kidd or old Kidd, it doesn’t matter. For this era and this generation of basketball, there is no one you should want pushing the fast break more than Jason Kidd. Not to mention statistically he’s just better, even if it is somewhat close.
After all of that, it comes down to a simple concept that I have uttered many times over and it does not matter what sport we are discussing. It works for all sports alike. “Fans should not vote on All-Star rosters, because the will inevitably get it wrong”. There should be no voting. All-Star game participants should be determined the same way NFL playoff teams are determined. By cold hard statistics; after that there should be tiers of tie-breakers. This should not be done by the coaches, players, sports writers or anyone else. It could be done by a computer (one of the few sports details that should be left to a computer-
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
Don't weep for Hillary
By Rick Morris
Less than a week after Barack Obama stunned the world by drilling Hillary Clinton in Iowa and seizing the mantle of front-runner, the Clintons shockingly exceeded their 1992 moment of triumph in New Hampshire (keep in mind Bubba didn't actually win the state that year). Her late surge, forecast by none of the polls (and not by me as I picked her to lose by double digits) was truly amazing, and indicates that these two titans of the Democratic Party should be dueling later than any of us would have thought possible. Forty years after the legendary 1968 political season, we may yet be moving into a year with just as many earthquakes and shocks to the system.
And this isn't even taking into account the action on the Republican side. John McCain bested the expectations of many observers, including myself, by "beating the spread" against Mitt Romney. The expected late surge for Romney did not materialize. Never fear, however, as Romney Minister of Propaganda Hugh Hewitt attempts to enlighten all of us dummies who think that a winner has to actually win a contested election at some point. The message? Mittens will keep trying to purchase the nomination with his huge inheritance and the aid and comfort of the GOP and "Conservative Movement" elites. On to Michigan, where McCain and Huck can hopefully bury the Plastic Panderer for good.
As for my boy Fred Thompson, it's getting late pretty early, as Yogi Berra might say. Here's hoping he can edge ahead of Huck for a needed win in South Carolina so that the media can get off his back.
Less than a week after Barack Obama stunned the world by drilling Hillary Clinton in Iowa and seizing the mantle of front-runner, the Clintons shockingly exceeded their 1992 moment of triumph in New Hampshire (keep in mind Bubba didn't actually win the state that year). Her late surge, forecast by none of the polls (and not by me as I picked her to lose by double digits) was truly amazing, and indicates that these two titans of the Democratic Party should be dueling later than any of us would have thought possible. Forty years after the legendary 1968 political season, we may yet be moving into a year with just as many earthquakes and shocks to the system.
And this isn't even taking into account the action on the Republican side. John McCain bested the expectations of many observers, including myself, by "beating the spread" against Mitt Romney. The expected late surge for Romney did not materialize. Never fear, however, as Romney Minister of Propaganda Hugh Hewitt attempts to enlighten all of us dummies who think that a winner has to actually win a contested election at some point. The message? Mittens will keep trying to purchase the nomination with his huge inheritance and the aid and comfort of the GOP and "Conservative Movement" elites. On to Michigan, where McCain and Huck can hopefully bury the Plastic Panderer for good.
As for my boy Fred Thompson, it's getting late pretty early, as Yogi Berra might say. Here's hoping he can edge ahead of Huck for a needed win in South Carolina so that the media can get off his back.
New Hampshire primary predictions
By Rick Morris
On the Democratic side, Hillary's Monday tearfest is going to add to the snowball effect against her. Obama wins by about 12 points, with Edwards back of her by a decent margin.
For the Republicans, McCain will hold on, but has been hurt by Romney's momentum in recent days. Notwithstanding a mediocre debate performance on Sunday night, Mittens has received credit for appearing brilliant for some unknown reason. He'll close to within 2 points or so of McCain. Huck will be a distant third, with Rudy, Ron Paul and Fred Thompson trailing him in that order.
If these results come in as I anticipate, Edwards will be finished and Hillary gravely, although certainly not mortally, wounded. Romney will hang on in hopes of a win in Michigan as the GOP race becomes a full-fledged free-for-all. That should give an opportunity for my man Fred Thompson, but he'd need to win or finish at least a close second in South Carolina.
On the Democratic side, Hillary's Monday tearfest is going to add to the snowball effect against her. Obama wins by about 12 points, with Edwards back of her by a decent margin.
For the Republicans, McCain will hold on, but has been hurt by Romney's momentum in recent days. Notwithstanding a mediocre debate performance on Sunday night, Mittens has received credit for appearing brilliant for some unknown reason. He'll close to within 2 points or so of McCain. Huck will be a distant third, with Rudy, Ron Paul and Fred Thompson trailing him in that order.
If these results come in as I anticipate, Edwards will be finished and Hillary gravely, although certainly not mortally, wounded. Romney will hang on in hopes of a win in Michigan as the GOP race becomes a full-fledged free-for-all. That should give an opportunity for my man Fred Thompson, but he'd need to win or finish at least a close second in South Carolina.
Monday, January 7, 2008
BCS Title Game preview
By Rick Morris
EDITED TO ADD POST-GAME THOUGHT: Two years in a row, Ohio State has jumped out to an early lead in the National Title game only to end up getting smoked. If the Buckeyes make it to the championship game again next year, could we spot them another 14-21 points off the bat just to make it competitive?
The final game of college football's screwiest season ever matches two teams who arrived under fairly controversial circumstances. This has been the most difficult season ever to narrow a title game selection to two teams -- and when you look back over the last few decades, that's saying a mouthful.
Nevertheless, the BCS title will be decided tonight, and with Georgia and USC both rolling in their respective bowl games, LSU won't worry about having to share a disputed crown again as they did four years ago if they win tonight. Here are the major factors in the game:
^ Two quarterbacks who can make the plays they need to, but who are erratic -- and both could end up splitting time with backups tonight.
^ Like Florida a year ago, LSU does have superior speed, but injuries to some of their top players negate their advantage in athleticism to a certain extent.
^ Wanting to avoid the fate of Michigan, LSU will jam the box and try to take Beanie Wells out of the game. If Todd Boeckman can avoid mistakes (a big if!), the Two Brians could thrive in single coverage.
^ The wars in the trenches on both sides of the ball will be awesome, with the talent on both offensive and defensive lines.
^ Intangibles are fairly even: LSU has been getting rightfully disrespected for being underachievers this year and will have that motivation -- plus what remains of the Hurricane Katrina storyline -- at home no less. Ohio State came in doing the "Hollywood" routine a year ago and got humiliated in front of the world. Think they'll be amped up?
^ Ohio State has the edge in special teams, although a punt or kickoff return for a TD won't be followed by a group pile-on this year!
Ultimately, Ohio State has a ginormous edge in coaching. Les Miles has yet to prove that he is a big-game coach, and last year aside, Jim Tressel has a sizable resume in that regard. In the BCS era, a team with a significantly inferior coach has never won one of these games. Look for a game played mostly between the 20 yard lines, with a few intermittent big plays. Ohio State wins on a late field goal, 23-20.
EDITED TO ADD POST-GAME THOUGHT: Two years in a row, Ohio State has jumped out to an early lead in the National Title game only to end up getting smoked. If the Buckeyes make it to the championship game again next year, could we spot them another 14-21 points off the bat just to make it competitive?
The final game of college football's screwiest season ever matches two teams who arrived under fairly controversial circumstances. This has been the most difficult season ever to narrow a title game selection to two teams -- and when you look back over the last few decades, that's saying a mouthful.
Nevertheless, the BCS title will be decided tonight, and with Georgia and USC both rolling in their respective bowl games, LSU won't worry about having to share a disputed crown again as they did four years ago if they win tonight. Here are the major factors in the game:
^ Two quarterbacks who can make the plays they need to, but who are erratic -- and both could end up splitting time with backups tonight.
^ Like Florida a year ago, LSU does have superior speed, but injuries to some of their top players negate their advantage in athleticism to a certain extent.
^ Wanting to avoid the fate of Michigan, LSU will jam the box and try to take Beanie Wells out of the game. If Todd Boeckman can avoid mistakes (a big if!), the Two Brians could thrive in single coverage.
^ The wars in the trenches on both sides of the ball will be awesome, with the talent on both offensive and defensive lines.
^ Intangibles are fairly even: LSU has been getting rightfully disrespected for being underachievers this year and will have that motivation -- plus what remains of the Hurricane Katrina storyline -- at home no less. Ohio State came in doing the "Hollywood" routine a year ago and got humiliated in front of the world. Think they'll be amped up?
^ Ohio State has the edge in special teams, although a punt or kickoff return for a TD won't be followed by a group pile-on this year!
Ultimately, Ohio State has a ginormous edge in coaching. Les Miles has yet to prove that he is a big-game coach, and last year aside, Jim Tressel has a sizable resume in that regard. In the BCS era, a team with a significantly inferior coach has never won one of these games. Look for a game played mostly between the 20 yard lines, with a few intermittent big plays. Ohio State wins on a late field goal, 23-20.
Sunday, January 6, 2008
I Hope It Is Not Too Soon
by Jason Jones
WARNING: If you are easily offended by religious discussions or generalizing about the effects of the recently deceased, you might want to reconsider reading the following article.
I want to preface this by saying; it is never good when someone dies. I can empathize with what a person goes through when a close friend is lost. Now to imagine that emotion multiplied by 60 or 70 people. Then say the person that is lost is employed by a company that has millions of fans. That is a lot of people claiming to feel loss. I get that, to some degree, but when does it end. If you have not figured it out yet, I’m speaking of Sean Taylor and the Washington Redskins. Most people don’t know what goes through a person’s mind when you lose a friend who is also a teammate. I do. As much as it is difficult to deal with, you pay respects and maybe even dedicate the game or season to him, but it never lasts this long. I can guarantee you of one thing. The Redskins players may have known Sean longer than I knew Jay. However, they were not within 25 feet and 15 minutes prior to their teammate’s murder. I was. So when I say what I say on this issue I can empathize with what they must be feeling and in some ways feel worse. They were some number of states away; thousands of miles. I was within feet and minutes. I get the desire to dedicate the entire season to his memory. The decals on the helmet are more than understandable. And to some degree I can even understand the media’s propensity to want to revisit this great story.
Saturday, January 5, 2008
'08 NFL Draft Profile. . .Darren McFadden
by Jason Jones
Darren McFadden – RB –
One word comes to mind, COMPLETE. Let’s get this out of the way, last summer he got into a fist fight in a parking lot (
Darren McFadden is hard to compare to other players, but here we go: A thin Bo Jackson, young Eddie George, prime Marshall Faulk, with Earl Campbell tendencies.
2008 NFL DRAFT PROJECTIONS: High First Round (no worse than 3)
If it weren’t for need being outside the running back position he would be the no questioned #1. 80% of the NFL would take him #1 regardless of their RB situation. I personally believe that
'08 NFL Draft Profile. . .Glenn Dorsey
by Jason Jones
Glenn Dorsey – DT –
Glenn Dorsey is worth the hype. I am not a fan of taking any defensive lineman #1 overall, signed Courtney Brown. However, as much as I am not a fan of DL going #1 or LSU at all, he may just be deserving. Dorsey is a monster in a position where you don’t expect much monstrous characteristics. This may just be the kind of talent that could compete in statistics like sacks and tackles for loss with those of Defensive Ends. He is the most explosive DT we have seen since Warren Sapp. Although we don’t think much of Sapp now, no question he would have been worth the pick as early as 4 years pre-Buccaneers Super Bowl victory (2000). Explosiveness is the first word that comes to mind when describing Glenn Dorsey. He gets great penetration and can take on two blockers consistently without slowing down. Unlike most defensive lineman in this or any draft, Dorsey could and based on where he will get drafted should start yesterday for whoever drafts him. Most believe that will be
2008 NFL DRAFT PROJECTION: First Round - #1 Overall (no lower than 4 overall)
Thursday, January 3, 2008
Romney loses, so America wins!
By Rick Morris
It's a sad night for Mittens and his spinmeister-in-chief Hugh Hewitt, but their Establishment Hollow Man bit the dust in overwhelming fashion. Mike Huckabee beat the spread in terms of expectations by a wide, wide margin and notwithstanding Hewitt's hilarious rationalizing, the nomenklatura of the Republican Party and the hierarchy of the right-wing blogosphere had their attempts at mind control shoved right back into their bloated, plutocratic faces tonight in the Hawkeye State.
Again, Huck is not my first choice and maybe not even my second, but Romney cannot be allowed to steal this nomination in the smoke-filled back rooms of the GOP fixers and tonight's outcome makes his campaign's attempts to do so more unlikely. The "Al Davis Republicans" that Hewitt speaks of, those who want somebody who can "Just win, baby!" -- they've got to be
wondering about their boy the Plastic Panderer when he gets smoked by a country preacher from Arkansas with no money who made a ton of rookie mistakes down the stretch. The Android is not dead, however, and it will be up to John McCain to finish the job in New Hampshire by putting a wooden stake through his heart and sending him back to his gay-marriage haven in a pine box (figuratively -- I don't need a visit from the Secret Service!).
As for my candidate, Fred Thompson, at this writing it looks as though he has managed the third-place finish he needed. In a diffuse race that looks like it could be dominated at different points by different candidates, he can stay viable if he can replenish his coffers. In the event that Romney goes down for good, maybe enough influential sellout conservatives will take the chance to redeem themselves by getting behind the only Republican in this race worth any excitement.
Congratulations to Huck for proving me wrong and winning this race tonight. His ability to reach out to average working people is rare for a Republican, especially for one who is not liberal (and he is not). Other Republicans can learn from him.
On the Democratic side, congratulations to Barack Obama. I don't agree with him politically on almost any issue, but I appreciate the hope and optimism he portrays and the fact that he does not run as a racially divisive candidate as Jesse/Sharpton did. I do think he's a good guy, which I would rarely say about a national Democratic figure, and I would not vote for him, but his approach to politics is good for the country. I thought Hillary would finish just ahead of Edwards, and apparently I was wrong, so she's in big trouble. She needs to win New Hampshire to keep the snowball from running further downhill, although she will stay in this race very late regardless.
It's a sad night for Mittens and his spinmeister-in-chief Hugh Hewitt, but their Establishment Hollow Man bit the dust in overwhelming fashion. Mike Huckabee beat the spread in terms of expectations by a wide, wide margin and notwithstanding Hewitt's hilarious rationalizing, the nomenklatura of the Republican Party and the hierarchy of the right-wing blogosphere had their attempts at mind control shoved right back into their bloated, plutocratic faces tonight in the Hawkeye State.
Again, Huck is not my first choice and maybe not even my second, but Romney cannot be allowed to steal this nomination in the smoke-filled back rooms of the GOP fixers and tonight's outcome makes his campaign's attempts to do so more unlikely. The "Al Davis Republicans" that Hewitt speaks of, those who want somebody who can "Just win, baby!" -- they've got to be
wondering about their boy the Plastic Panderer when he gets smoked by a country preacher from Arkansas with no money who made a ton of rookie mistakes down the stretch. The Android is not dead, however, and it will be up to John McCain to finish the job in New Hampshire by putting a wooden stake through his heart and sending him back to his gay-marriage haven in a pine box (figuratively -- I don't need a visit from the Secret Service!).
As for my candidate, Fred Thompson, at this writing it looks as though he has managed the third-place finish he needed. In a diffuse race that looks like it could be dominated at different points by different candidates, he can stay viable if he can replenish his coffers. In the event that Romney goes down for good, maybe enough influential sellout conservatives will take the chance to redeem themselves by getting behind the only Republican in this race worth any excitement.
Congratulations to Huck for proving me wrong and winning this race tonight. His ability to reach out to average working people is rare for a Republican, especially for one who is not liberal (and he is not). Other Republicans can learn from him.
On the Democratic side, congratulations to Barack Obama. I don't agree with him politically on almost any issue, but I appreciate the hope and optimism he portrays and the fact that he does not run as a racially divisive candidate as Jesse/Sharpton did. I do think he's a good guy, which I would rarely say about a national Democratic figure, and I would not vote for him, but his approach to politics is good for the country. I thought Hillary would finish just ahead of Edwards, and apparently I was wrong, so she's in big trouble. She needs to win New Hampshire to keep the snowball from running further downhill, although she will stay in this race very late regardless.
Latest NFL Draft Top 200 Overall Rankings
By Jason Jones (posted by Rick Morris)
| Rank | Pos | Name | School |
| 1 | DT | Glenn Dorsey | LSU |
| 2 | RB | Darren McFadden | Arkansas |
| 3 | DE | Chris Long | Virginia |
| 4 | OT | Jake Long | Michigan |
| 5 | DE | Calais Campbell | Miami (FL) |
| 6 | QB | Matt Ryan | Boston College |
| 7 | DT | Sedrick Ellis | USC |
| 8 | CB | Malcolm Jenkins | Ohio St |
| 9 | FS | Kenny Phillips | Miami (FL) |
| 10 | WR | DeSean Jackson | Cal |
| 11 | QB | Brian Brohm | Louisville |
| 12 | OT | Sam Baker | USC |
| 13 | ILB | James Laurinautis | Ohio St |
| 14 | QB | Andre Woodson | Kentucky |
| 15 | DE | Vernon Gholston | Ohio St |
| 16 | OLB | Dan Connor | Penn St |
| 17 | OT | Ryan Clady | Boise St |
| 18 | RB | Jonathan Stewart | Oregon |
| 19 | WR | Early Doucet | LSU |
| 20 | DE | Derrick Harvey | Florida |
| 21 | OT | Gosder Cherilus | Boston College |
| 22 | OLB | Keith Rivers | USC |
| 23 | WR | Malcolm Kelly | Oklahoma |
| 24 | CB | Mike Jenkins | S. Florida |
| 25 | RB | Felix Jones | Arkansas |
| 26 | DE | Quentin Groves | Auburn |
| 27 | DE | Lawrence Jackson | USC |
| 28 | CB | Antione Cason | Arizona |
| 29 | TE | Fred Davis | USC |
| 30 | RB | Rashard Mendenhall | Illinois |
| 31 | OT | Michael Oher | Ole Miss |
| 32 | CB | Terrell Thomas | USC |
| 33 | RB | Jamaal Charles | Texas |
| 34 | WR | Mario Manningham | Michigan |
| 35 | TE | Jacob Tamme | Kentucky |
| 36 | OT | Alex Boone | Ohio St |
| 37 | DE | Tyson Jackson | LSU |
| 38 | WR | Jordy Nelson | Kansas St |
| 39 | DT | Frank Okam | Texas |
| 40 | DE | Titus Brown | Mississippi St |
| 41 | DT | Kentwan Balmer | UNC |
| 42 | OLB | Ali Highsmith | LSU |
| 43 | WR | Adarius Bowman | Oklahoma St |
| 44 | RB | Ray Rice | Rutgers |
| 45 | SS | Jonathan Hefney | Tennessee |
| 46 | WR | Limas Sweed | Texas |
| 47 | OLB | Xavier Adibi | Virginia Tech |
| 48 | OG | Eric Young | Tennessee |
| 49 | OT | Jeff Otah | Pitt |
| 50 | DE | Chris Ellis | Virginia Tech |
| 51 | OT | Tony Hills Jr | Texas |
| 52 | OLB | Vince Hall | Virginia Tech |
| 53 | RB | Allen Patrick | Oklahoma |
| 54 | OT | Barry Richardson | Clemson |
| 55 | ILB | Rey Maualuga | USC |
| 56 | DT | DeMario Pressley | N.C. State |
| 57 | ILB | Jonathan Goff | Vanderbilt |
| 58 | DT | DeMarcus Granger | Oklahoma |
| 59 | OLB | Brian Cushing | USC |
| 60 | OLB | Erin Henderson | Maryland |
| 61 | WR | James Hardy | Indiana |
| 62 | CB | Aqib Talib | Kansas |
| 63 | OG | Roy Schuening | Oregon St |
| 64 | RB | Tashard Choice | Georgia Tech |
| 65 | ILB | Jerod Mayo | Tennessee |
| 66 | RB | Steve Slaton | WVU |
| 67 | DT | Fili Moala | USC |
| 68 | OLB | Bruce Davis | UCLA |
| 69 | DT | Red Bryant | Texas Tech |
| 70 | QB | Erik Ainge | Tennessee |
| 71 | OLB | Marcus Freeman | Ohio St |
| 72 | DT | Myron Pryor | Kentucky |
| 73 | RB | Justin Forsett | Cal |
| 74 | OLB | Shawn Crable | Michigan |
| 75 | RB | Mike Hart | Michigan |
| 76 | TE | Chase Coffman | Missouri |
| 77 | DE | Kenny Iwebema | Iowa |
| 78 | OG | Adam Kraus | Michigan |
| 79 | DE | Tommy Blake | TCU |
| 80 | DE | Greyson Gunhiem | Washington |
| 81 | QB | Chad Henne | Michigan |
| 82 | RB | Cory Boyd | S. Carolina |
| 83 | WR | Paul Hubbard | Wisconsin |
| 84 | S | Tom Zbikowski | Notre Dame |
| 85 | CB | Chevin Jackson | LSU |
| 86 | OG | Drew Radovich | USC |
| 87 | OG | Shannon Tevaga | UCLA |
| 88 | DT | Dre Moore | Maryland |
| 89 | S | Wesley Woodyard | Kentucky |
| 90 | QB | John David Booty | USC |
| 91 | RB | Chris Johnson | E. Carolina |
| 92 | ILB | Ben Moffitt | S. Florida |
| 93 | FS | Marcus Griffin | Texas |
| 94 | OT | Kirk Barton | Ohio St |
| 95 | OLB | Darry Beckwith | LSU |
| 96 | ILB | Phillip Wheeler | Georgia Tech |
| 97 | S | Craig Steltz | LSU |
| 98 | DT | Demonte Bolden | Tennessee |
| 99 | DT | Terrence Taylor | Michigan |
| 100 | WR | Lavelle Hawkins | Cal |
| 101 | S | Michael Hamlin | Clemson |
| 102 | OLB | Geno Hayes | Florida St |
| 103 | DE | Chase Ortiz | TCU |
| 104 | WR | Marcus Monk | Arkansas |
| 105 | OT | Shannon Boatman | Florida St |
| 106 | CB | Jack Ikegwuonu | Wisconsin |
| 107 | DT | B.J. Raji | Boston College |
| 108 | QB | Colt Brennan | Hawaii |
| 109 | TE | Mike Rucker | Missouri |
| 110 | OT | Eric VandenHeuvel | Wisconsin |
| 111 | CB | Justin King | Penn St |
| 112 | RB | Yvenson Bernard | Oregon St |
| 113 | WR | Andre Caldwell | Florida |
| 114 | QB | Joe Flacco | Delaware |
| 115 | OG | Jordan Grimes | Purdue |
| 116 | QB | Matt Flynn | LSU |
| 117 | OT | Heath Benedict | Newberry |
| 118 | C | Alex Mack | Cal |
| 119 | QB | Dennis Dixon | Oregon |
| 120 | S | Josh Barrett | Arizona St |