MPP

85% of a True Story

2008-04-14T19:15:00.000-07:00

Today the journalism school smelled like shit. The whole building.

More often than not, one of the two men's bathrooms in the building will completely reek of shit, like some aspiring Bob Woodward just laid out the biggest crap on Earth. This almost exclusively occurs in the first floor bathroom (newly remodled), so every time I enter that bathroom I fully expect to inhale massive quantities of shit-smelling air.

But today it wasn't so bad. Young Bob Woodward must have taken his crap early today. Perhaps he had some bad Pizza Hut from the union.

The next thing I know I'm upstairs, entering the office to merely staple some pages together, and steal a paper clip. It doesn't take me long to notice.

The entire office reeks of shit.

This did not strike me as nearly a passing fart. This shit was pungent. Like young Bob Woodward dropped trou and took a shit right there, on the coffee table between the four chairs were other aspiring journalists wait for advisers. He must have shit right on the fucking magazines.

Eager to get out, I left the office. Of course, I had forgotten to print out a part of my story packet. So I had to go back to the overcrowded lab, using an editing computer to merely print a document, while that douchey kid who looks like Carson Palmer waits to do some shitty visual comm project of him reporting from the Dave Matthews concert.

Now I must return to the epicenter of shit, the J school office.

And what do you know? The office reeks of aerosol spray. No joke. Someone had clearly sprayed Lysol, or perhaps Glade, thoroughly in this room. Seeing me again, the secretary asks if I need anything.

"Ummm.... other than for you to refrain from shitting your pants at work? No." I use one more staple, and exit the room, adding "Next time, please do a courtesy tie of the bag you must have just shat into before the smell wafts out of it."

Now we're in the classroom. I'm feeling pretty good about finishing my story after putting it off until 2 am on the night before it was due, barely conducting interviews before that point. Class is at its usual, entertaining pace - of course I can not focus for over 3 minutes at a time.

When a familiar aroma hits me.

"Is it just me, or does this entire building smell like shit?" My open ended question may possibly boost my 60% participation grade.

"It totally does," says the goofy-haired kid who's entering the Peace Corps next year.

"I heard a squirrel died in a ceiling vent," says the girl who sits in the front.

"All right everyone go out and interview people about the shit smell," the professor says, and dismisses class early.

Unfortunately I, nor my classmates, found the scoop on this one. Looks like we won't get an eight dollar bonus from the IDS for having a front page article.

Perhaps one day I will be young Carl Bernstein, and finally discover my partner's shit.

Why Heath Ledger's Joker could be the best movie villain ever

2008-03-31T08:32:00.000-07:00

When you think of the best movie villains ever, who comes to mind? Freddy? Jason? Anton Chigurh? Jaws perhaps? There are plenty to debate (except for Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor). But after the tidbits of clips and previews I have seen for this summer's sure-to-be blockbuster The Dark Knight, I think Heath Ledger's role as the joker has the potential to top them all. And the simple reason is because he's dead.

Anyone who has read Chuck Klosterman's Killing Yourself To Live or my previous post about the legacy of Barbaro, which - like most other elements of my writing - are taken from Chuck Klosterman, knows that the most influential thing a person (or horse) can do to preserve and enhance their legacy is die. Now that Heath Ledger has passed on, his role as the Joker will be forever remembered as his final (completed) role.

The circumstances surrounding his death only enhance the effect. With all the reports/debates about drug abuse and a wide variety of perscription medications, Ledger's condition in his waning days almost seem to reflect the disturbed, psychotic personality of the Joker. Couple that with a kick-ass makeup job and you have a seriously fucked up character. I know when I see the movie I will constantly be associating Ledger's fate with the Joker's antics and overall disturbed behavior. Needless to say I cannot wait for this movie. Too bad Katie Holmes crapped out and we have to deal with Maggie Gyllenhaal.

Picture of the Day

2008-03-31T08:13:00.001-07:00

from Deadspin.com

The Rules of Breakfast

2008-03-29T11:53:00.000-07:00

"Breakfast is relative."

This was my key argument in a conversation I had with Mike Oshita regarding the rules of what could be considered breakfast, and what could not. We were looking for a place to eat at 10:30, and I referred to our impending meal as "breakfast," which caused his head to explode. But I stood by my definition, and as a result had to expand the details of my rules into what I will now present to you as my official "Rules of Breakfast (and all other meals)".

BREAKFAST

1) Breakfast is Relative

Like I said before, this was my key argument in the disagreement. To me, breakfast isn't determined by McDonald's schedule or what kind of food you eat, it's merely relative to the time you wake up. Therefore:

"Any meal consumed within an hour of waking is considered breakfast."

This rule is true for any type of food. Type of food is irrelevant in this entire post, so it will not be mentioned again. The point of this rule is that even if you wake up at 3, if you eat before 4 that meal is your breakfast.

2) Breakfast hours

In addition to the breakfast is relative rule, early hours meals will also usually be considered breakfast. Rule #2 states:

"Any meal consumed before noon will be considered breakfast."

Exception:
There is one exception to the breakfast hours rule:

I. If you have two meals before noon, and there is at least two hours separating the first and second meals, then the second meal will be considered lunch.

This exception is to accommodate most grade school students, as well as people with jobs that require them to get up early. If these people consume 1 meal before noon, that meal is breakfast. But this exception allows the possibility that they could also have a true lunch before noon, provided it comes two hours after their breakfast. A second meal coming within the two hour window would be considered a "second breakfast" or "brunch".

Breakfast exception #2:
The second breakfast exception is in regards to the breakfast is relative rule. If you wake up and it is already nightfall (this is much easier to do in winter hours), your first meal cannot be considered a breakfast. Now this is where it gets tricky. If you have a meal and are planning on having another meal later, than your first meal is lunch and your second is dinner, even if it comes at midnight. But if you wake up and have a big meal that you intend to be your only meal of the day, then that meal becomes dinner. Any subsequent meals will be referred to as Taco Bell-sponsored "Fourthmeal."

LUNCH

1) Lunch as first meal of the day

It is very easy for lunch to become the first meal of the day, hence lunch rule #1:

"If you do not consume a meal within an hour of waking, your first meal of the day is your lunch."

This rule is pretty simple. For example, I'll often wake up at 11:30, go to work, then before class eat at the Union. Even though it's my first meal of the day, it's my lunch.

Exception:
The Lunch exception is along the same lines as Breakfast Exception #2. If your first meal is not until nightfall, then it might not be your lunch. If you prepare that meal with the thought in mind that you will have another meal later, it's your lunch. But if you prepare that meal as it is your dinner, then it's your dinner. Any subsequent meals are Fourthmeal.

DINNER

Dinner rules are relatively simple, and rely on two situations:

"A meal is considered a dinner if it is consumed after nightfall with no subsequent meal intended, or the third meal of the day."

Like in the previous rules, dinner can be the first or second meal of the day if it is consumed at night with no future meals planned. But dinner can also occur before nightfall, if it is your third meal of the day. This is usually seen among the elderly. And I should admit that sometimes when you prepare a meal at night, you really don't know if you will eat again or not, so you don't know how to classify the meal. This is perfectly fine, sometimes the identity of your meal cannot be determined until the next day.

So there you have it, the official "Rules of Breakfast (and all other meals)." Like any good set of rules, amendments and changes could be added in the future. Leave your comments and suggestions, and they will be considered by the breakfast committee to be added to the official rules. Happy eating everybody!

(UPDATE)
BREAKFAST BILL OF RIGHTS

I told you I would add amendments to this post! I finally encountered one today. It will forever be known as the 1st amendment for the Breakfast Bill of Rights

1) Naps shall not be considered in the Rules of Breakfast.
Trying to take into account naps would complicate the rules of breakfast far too much, and thus they will not be considered. For example, today I woke up at 8:30 am for my radio show, which ran from 9-10. I did not eat anything during this time, and went back to sleep at roughly 11:30 am, then awake again around 3 pm, and ate a sub at about 3:45 pm. This meal is considered my LUNCH - it is as if the nap did not exist.

For clarification purposes, a nap will be considered any slumber that comes at least 2 hours after first awaking, and lasts for over 30 minutes. So if you wake up at 9 am, have a bite to eat, then go back to sleep at 9:30 and wake up at noon and then eat again, that meal is your BREAKFAST. Whatever you ate between 9 and 9:30 is considered a snack.

Super Blog XLII

2008-02-03T04:06:00.000-08:00

I'm writing this blog literally at 7:06 AM on the morning of February 3rd for two reasons:

1) Tonight is the biggest game in the New England Patriots' franchise history
and
2) I am too enraged by the sorry state of sports media for me to sleep

Despite going for the greatest accomplishment in sports history since 1972, instead - as of LAST NIGHT - we as football fans are subject to a series of the most absurd stories you can possibly put together. An explosion of Spygate stories, something that peaked at week 1 of the NFL season, have resurfaced the day before the Super Bowl because of a bunch of random people who need attention.

Not only are these revelations completely bogus, unwarranted, and just plain irrelevant to the outcome of Super Bowl XXXVI and other games the Patriots were involved in, the timing of these stories coming out is just plain ridiculous.

WHAT POSSIBLE IMPORTANCE does this story have on the 2007-2008 Patriots - what could possibly turn out to be the greatest team of all time. If every spygate rumor ever told is true (which is absurd to think of) then that STILL has absolutely no bearing on this year's Patriots. You think they really couldn't have beat the Jets in week 1, the only week of the entire franchise fucking history when they were actually proved to be cheating? At the very worst, I could care less what Spygate has to do with the past three Super Bowls the Patriots have won, it takes absolutely nothing away from the possibility of going 19-0 this season.

How sad it is that the state of sports media is this pathetic in 2008, that the DAY before the Super Bowl, we have to be subject to a ridiculous outburst of stories about Spygate - from SEVEN years ago no less! You'll read writers like Gregg Easterbrook who claim this was the NFL's fault for ignoring this when it was relevant, earlier in the season; but I ask 1) this really NEVER could have been brought up ONCE during the entire fucking season and 2) in the TWO FUCKING WEEKS of Super Bowl hype, this couldn't come up ONCE until the fucking DAY BEFORE the Super Bowl? You have got to be fucking kidding me. It's times like these, even typing a blog post on my bed at 7:15 AM, where it makes me proud to have absolutely no involvement in the sports media. Because if this is really the story I have to hear most before the biggest game in NFL history, then I've clearly chosen the wrong field to make my living in.

LOST Season Premiere Collaberative Blog Discussion Featuring Lindsey Weber

2008-02-01T22:45:00.001-08:00

Lindsey Weber is a senior at New York University studying Journalism and English. She has contributed to Stuff and New York Magazine, and this fall is planning to debut her off-broadway production "Too Many Chinamen". Her blog can be visited here. I asked her to collaberate with me following the season premiere of LOST on January 31st. This was our discussion:

*EDITOR'S NOTE: BECAUSE BLOGGER IS FUCKING RETARTED AND IMPOSSIBLE TO FORMAT, FONT SIZES MAY RANDOMLY CHANGE THROUGHOUT THIS POST

8 PM RECAP SHOW:
LJW:
so i'm starting with the pre-show recap - which attempts, in some crazy way, to retell the ENTIRE first three seasons of LOST - which, if you watch the show, is a daunting task.

OK WOW. how can they just GLOSS over some of these details?! they just flashed DAT CRAZY BLACKLIGHT MAP that is oh-so-important to the story. I think maybe someone watching for the first time would somewhat get it, but it's a shame because they really are missing so much. this is SO not a good substitute for the show. ew abc.

MPP: What really nicks my grits is that basically the whole map thing was more or less irrelevant to the show at this point. That's my favorite part about these last two seasons: having a set number of episodes remaining. No more random crap stretching the show out, like the episode with the hot girl getting bit by a spider and being buried alive (which was awesome).

LJW: OH BYE MICHAEL & WALT (AND VINCENT?) - does anyone realize they never wrapped up this dropped storyline? this better be for a REASON.

MPP:
What upsets me more is that Harold Perrineau (the actor who plays Michael) is STILL IN THE CREDITS. I want him to be gone! Him, Walt, and even Vincent! Get off the fucking show already! Is there truly no end in sight?!?! Worst characters on the show.

LJW: OMG SCARY OCEANIC FLIGHT ATTENDANT DOING AN AD FOR ABC'S NEW "YOU-WATCH-LOST-SO-WATCH-THIS-SHOW-BECAUSE-IT'S-CONVENIENTLY-AFTER SHOW." So it's about some dude... who is "a treat" and "irresistable." great. p.s. abc, stop trying to tell me that oceanic airlines really exists. it's fucking scary. i'm getting so depressed at how over-simplified this recap is. awesome hurley flashback with HARRY FROM SEX AND THE CITY - as my favorite LOST hallucination...totally beats crazy polarbear//blackcloud//jacob.

MPP:
Don’t forget he was the agent in CALIFORNICATION! I mean how can you forget someone when you've seen their face squirted by pussy juice.

LJW: WHERE IS EKO'S STORY/DEATH WHERE ARE MICHAEL & WALT'S STORY/DEPARTURE okay i can't deal with this recap anymore. on to the ACTUAL premiere. p.s. so ELI STONE is about a dude who is jesus? he floats? he has visions of GEORGE MICHAEL, i.e.: this show features GEORGE MICHAEL. if i ever miraculously start having visions, if they were of george michael, i would have to end my life. also, just because i watch LOST like a maniac does not mean i'm going to stick around for this crazy-ass show. i haven't even seen cloverfield yet (and it's j.j. abrams...) but, to give an ounce of credit, johnny lee miller looks good and he was once married to angelina jolie (* hackers*, anyone?)

MPP: I agree with you on Eli Stone. I mean, a show about a Jewish lawyer who has some sort of divine intervention, and it's NOT from his overbearing mother? Oy vey! You gotta be kiddin' me! Any show who’s central recurring joke is based around George Michael is doomed for failure. Cloverfield was great by the way, just got a little motion sickness from the camera moving.

ACTUAL EPISODE (SPOILERS INCLUDED)

BLACKOUT IN BLOOMINGTON

MPP:
I just finished watching the season premiere about an hour ago. It was fantastic. Unfortunately I did not get to see the last minute of the episode - or the preview for next week - because the power went out in the entire northwest section of Bloomington at 9:58 EST. Driving around was quite the scene, I had never witnessed anything like it.

LJW: *i cannot BELIEVE the power went out 2 min before the end - i would have cried and then called cablevision and screamed. ok maybe not. but i would have cried... or at least checked the web for what i missed. basically what you missed was: NOT-PENNY'S-BOAT GUY: ARE YOU JACK? JACK: (UH-OH/HURRAH/CONFUSED FACE) LOST *

BEGINNING THOUGHTS

LJW:
okay so there was a lot of build-up to tonight's episode and I really do need to pretend like i don't know that there's a writer's strike going on and pretend like i don't know that this long-awaited new season is doomed to stop abruptly like eight episodes in. as i push THAT to the back of my head, i reflect on the last few seasons (please see my responses to LOST recap.)

i also would like to say that the flash foward thing on the last ep of last season totally caught me by surprise - I FUCKING LOVED it, and i know you did too. so when this ep started with that shot of the papaya and you THOUGHT it was on the island (but it wasn't.) i was thrilled. who gets out of the crashed camero? obvi that's hurley's chubby arm (does it still bother anyone that hurley has maintained his fabulous-full-figure after months on the island?) we hear the first key phrase of the season: THE OCEANIC SIX. omgggggg WHAT DOES THIS MEAN - who are the six? we already know three (kate, jack, hurley)? who else? i'm so excited... they are like tom hanks castaway after-he-leaves-the-island survivors! (minus the volleyball...actually I guess he's somewhat like hurley's imaginary friend aka harry from sex and the city aka my favorite character...) and this comes to be (at least for me) the main aspect of this episode.

THE OCEANIC SIX

LJW:
i love that this season is going to revolve around piecing together
clues to figure out what happens BETWEEN two stories that we've already
(partially) seen. ok, that sort of doesn't make sense. so, the last seasons started with a plane crash then flashed backward to individual stories - using the plot-to-come (or the loose ends) open. that worked out so well that it's pretty much genius for the writers to craft the same structure for this season. jack asking hurley if he 'told anyone' about 'it' ... OMG what happened? who'd they fuck over to leave the island? who is STILL THERE? hurley keeps saying they have to go back... WHO IS STILL ALIVE? (ahhh, didn't that scary black dude in the mental hospital with no business card really freak you out? it makes me think that they are going to bring in oceanic airlines as part of this plane crash/magical island conspiracy.)

MPP: The first thing that honestly came into my mind when Jack asked Hurley that question was that they ate everyone else on the island.

FEAR FACTOR

MPP:
LOST is fucking scary. The show legitimately freaks me out at points. You nailed it when you said the scary black dude (aka the chief from The Wire) came to visit him at the mental home and give him the creepiest look ever while asking if they "were still alive". Batshit crazy.

LJW: *lost is scary. i agree. and that dude (who, by internet exploration is named ABADDON which is hebrew for DESTRUCTION (uh oh), is pretty damn creepy. i don't watch the wire (yet) but he must be a fucking badASS.*

REALITY BITES

MPP:
The Hurley flashbacks were great - kicking things off with his hallucinations puts you right back into that mindset of false reality: who's real, what's real, and how the fuck is Locke still alive after being shot into a ditch full of skeletons are just a few of the questions the show teases me with.

LJW:
so is charlie still alive? i know that he's DEAD but when he 'appears' to hurley, for like two seconds, i was like WAIT WHAT. first off, if he's dead, he looks great as a ghost - totally a rockstar in the afterlife (perhaps he's bringing back DriveShaft - god knows you would love to hear an acoustic version of "You All Everybody" but after the scene's over, i'm like SO IS HE DEAD? because that other crazy guy saw him and hurley did feel that slap it seems... AND i'm thinking about the other time when hurley saw Jacob's house then made it disappear by counting to five - same idea? i WANT charlie to be alive, but isn't that a cop-out? also, how does charlie know hurley's real name...he has NEVER
called him hugo while on the island. oy, how will i deal with a LOST where claire isn't constantly screaming, CHAHHHHHHHHHHLIEEEEEEEEEE.

MPP: OK, so this is what I was talking about before with reality. Charlie is definitely dead - we saw him die. We also saw Hurley make him disappear. The other crazy guy seeing him was one of those ridiculous things LOST writers throw in that they know are physically impossible to logistically explain, but they don't care because it's a TV show and a big cloud of black smoke is eating people on the island. As for Jacob's house, I honestly believe that that was real, maybe Hurley could see it then the way Locke could hear Jacob that one time. you could also see Jacob sitting in the same rocking chair where you see him for a glimpse when Locke is there, and the guy who popped up reminded me of the Russian guy who they've killed 5 times and still hasn't died. I think his name is Rasputin.

MPP: What the fuck is this new movie with Kate Hudson and Matthew McCougnahey? They already made a romantic comedy together with How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days. Was their chemistry THAT good to put them in the exact same fucking movie twice? Jesus.

LJW:
*don't insult how to lose a guy in 10 days. and don't forget: two's a charm: drew barrymoore and adam sandler in the wedding singer AND my favorite, 50 first dates.
*

THOUGHTS ON THE FUTURE

LJW:
ok, so mark, remember how after a good episode we would like run to the computer to check out those LOST message boards (don't pretend like this isn't true.) that's honestly how i know it's been a good one - if i'm dying to see if the little things i've noticed are actually legit (and if it's really good, they usually are.) this ep, i definitely felt like that. For example, did hurley SEE jacob? when he peeps into that cabin, you can see (through his eyes) someone IS IN that rocking chair before a crazy locke-eye popping up causes me jump five feet into the air. i'm SURE i saw that – so is HURLEY like the actual special island-person... i forget what ben said about 'seeing/hearing' jacob. if he is, i totally called that. hurley is the
best.

also, WHO DO WE THINK IS RIGHT? naomi is sketchy - but do i think this because i think that locke is legit? he's been right before, despite his crazy behavoirs. do you notice, that when she calls her 'people' before she dies, the dude on the other line says something like, 'don't worry, we're coming to get you and take you home' - i think that it's implied that the only intend on bringing her back ALIVE. anyhow, when they all choose sides... i'm paying attention to find dat OCEANIC SIX but kate, jack and hurley are split - how does that work? SOMETHING must happen. and flash foward hurley says, 'i wish i went with you,' implying that perhaps, locke wasn't making the best choice... so good of those crazy writers to fill in that detail - making it so i'm not ENTIRELY sure who i'd go with! but if I WAS one of those other survivors (you know, the ones that don't get to have actual lines, but occationally gets screentime when they hand a jack a gun or something), i probably would have gone with locke; he's a magical badass.

MPP: This is an example of the commercials ruining the element of surprise. I would have no idea who to believe either, except I already saw bearded-guy on the ad telling Jack "rescuing you isn't exactly our primary objective" - so I know Naomi's full of shit. What I DID like was Hurley telling Jack back home that he shouldn't have gone with Locke, because at that point I was sure Locke was right, but now it throws a wrinkle into the mix - like a quarter banging around in a dryer. MPP: And how about the music on LOST. Michael Giacchino is a genius. Adding the perfect amount of tension and filler, and creating themes for different emotions. Haven't heard a score that good since THERE WILL BE BLOOD (which did not garner Jonny Greenwood an Oscar nomination by the way, absurd).

LJW: *LOST music is intense, but not even close to being on the level of THERE WILL BE BLOOD-let's not lie. LOST music is mostly scary sounds which mimic classic horror films, which completely works.* LJW: SO FOR THE FINAL TALLIES: CHARLIE: DEAD (?) BUT LOOKS FINE FROM BEYOND THE GRAVE NOT PENNY'S BOAT: LEGIT ADVICE NAOMI: SKETCHY, DEAD & YES, YOU SHOULD FEEL SORRY FOR THE ACTRESS WHO PLAYED HER OCEANIC SIX: JACK, KATE, HURLEY, ?, ?, ? (FOR NOW, LET'S JUST SAY IT'S ROSE, ROUSSEAU AND VINCENT) TEAM LOCKE: SAWYER, CLAARON (THEY GO TOGETHER), HURLEY, BEN, ROUSSEAU, ROUSSEAU'S KID & HER ALMOST-BRAINWASHED BF...ALEX&KARL, FOR YOU LOSERS, AAAAANNNDDDD DESMOND. TEAM JACK: KATE, BERNARD, ROSE, JIN, SUN, SAYID, AND JULIET(DUH).

MPP: No way Claaron is being killed - she's 4. I say one of the Rose/Bernard combo is #5, and we'll say numebr 6 is... I don't know... that kid who's dating Ben and Rousseau's daughter, Karl I think. MPP: My LOST prediction for this season is halfway through they form a Union and are so upset with the others and the rescuers that they go on strike until they receive more of the residual coconut juice on the island.

LJW:
p.s. so do we like jack on-island, with scruff; post-island, full beard, or between these two moments, (mostly) CLEAN SHAVEN? i'm so happy we're given three different facial hair options for jack.

MPP:
As much as I like the full beard, you it's always been my dream to have a nice scruff. So on-island takes it.

The Tom Brady Boot Conspiracy Theory

2008-01-30T22:52:00.000-08:00

I had a revelation last Monday at the computer lab. I had just seen a link on ESPN.com's headlines about how Randy Moss' restraining order would be extended, when it occurred to me:

The Tom Brady Boot is a hoax.

Think about it. Remember how much of a story swirled around Randy Moss when the restraining order got filed? Other than Spygate, it was the biggest distraction to the Patriots this year. How much have you heard about it since TMZ got a shot of Tom Brady walking with a boot in NYC? Exactly.

How about 19-0. Obviously, it's brought up in discussions. But how much of the 72 Dolphins have you seen on TV in the two weeks of Super Bowl hype? How many questions have been asked to Patriots players about it? More questions about it than the injury report? Hell no.

We're talking about the smartest team in football here. A team who's exploitation of the illegal contact rule frustrated the Colts so much that Jim Irsay complained to the NFL and got referees to begin calling the rule more strictly. This is a team who revolutionized the gamesmanship behind injury reports, and helped start the trend of putting a guy between the cameraman and an injured player on the sideline (I was watching a replay of Super Bowl XXXVIII between the Patriots and Panthers the other day, and when they were examining Rodney Harrison on the sideline after his injury - which was a broken arm - Greg Gumbel announces "we've been told that Rodney Harrison will return"). A team who's defensive strategies became so advanced, they were taking footage of other teams' defensive signals during games.

So what better way to eliminate every other possible distraction from the biggest game of your franchise's history than to create the biggest distraction of them all. Tom Brady is perfectly suited to handle the kind of scrutiny of being the centerpiece of the hoax - obviously as the most important player, but also as a two-time Super Bowl MVP who has never once in his career appeared to be rattled by anything.

I mean were you watching the interviews with the team during the height of the Boot news? They were positively comical. Bill Belichick laughed and smirked so much during his press conferences it looked like he had gone absolutely insane. Wes Welker and Donte' Stallworth made identical jokes about replacing Brady as quarterback. It's like the team collectively formed one brain, and together in their massive superbrain they are beyond what any of our mortal brains can comprehend.

So if you're watching the game this Sunday and Brady gets hit low once and becomes gimpy, you can laugh in my face. But if he goes out and puts on another stellar, legendary, "where did that come from?" performance, remember what I said here. It's can be downright scary when the Patriots have two weeks to prepare and zero distractions.

The Pittsburgh Steelers: Laughing Stock of the 90s through the Present

2008-01-09T00:32:00.000-08:00

This is a topic I wish I brought up more. The Pittsburgh Steelers are a pathetic franchise. While they are often commended as "old-school", "hard-nosed", "Wonder-Bread Wops", and other out of date phrases - they should be viewed as they truly are: the laughing stock of this era of football.

The one Super Bowl they've won this era can largely be considered a fluke, because

They didn't have to play the Patriots in the playoffs
They won a game they easily could have (and probably should have and deserved to) lose against the Colts, after the most overrated running back of our generation Jerome Bettis decided to make his one-in-a-thousand fumble in the most crucial moment of his life, followed by a miraculous tackle by Ben Roethlisberger, followed by a Mike Vanderjagt choke-job.
They got to go against Jake Plummer in the AFC Championship.
They won what is widely considered the worst-officiated Super Bowl that anyone can remember.

Clearly the Steelers Super Bowl win was a fluke, so what else have they done in this era? They got spanked by the 49ers in the other Super Bowl they were in, and every other year they routinely perform well in the regular season and fall apart in the playoffs.

This is a team that talks more trash than anyone else during the season and going into the playoffs, then consistently underperform when it comes time to back up their words. Some memorable Steelers moments:

Players saying that the Patriots "weren't up to their level" when they ended New England's 21 game win streak in 2003, then were obliterated by the Patriots in the AFC Championship (at home).
Steelers fans booking flights to New Orleans for Super Bowl 31 before they got beat by the Patriots in the AFC Championship (at home)

Obviously my examples are a little Patriots-skewed, but any non-Steelers fan knows that Pittsburgh is the least threatening team you can go up against in the playoffs (with the exception of a team coached by Marty Schottenheimer).

So why do they get credit for being a top-notch franchise. Look at them for what they are! A pathetic, overrated, trash-talking, bunch of chokers who won a fluke Super Bowl and have never proved anything or are deserving of praise.

I Was Right! (My last post about the Ravens, I promise)

2008-01-09T00:28:00.000-08:00

Just thought it was worth mentioning one more time that in this post, which I immediately wrote in a fit of rage following the Ravens' first game of the season, I called Brian Billick a "fucking idiot" and predicted the Ravens (who the previous season had gone 13-3 and were the #1 seed in the AFC) to go 9-7.

While my prediction turned out to be on the generous end, I have to commend myself for picking up on their ineptitude after the first game of the season! And it turns out calling Billick a "fucking idiot" was the smartest thing I've ever blogged here, since he was fired midway through his contract after the season. Go me!

Revisiting My Ravens' Rage

2007-11-30T20:26:00.000-08:00

I was reading through the old posts of my blog, as I do every hour of every day, and paused from uncontrollable laughter to realize in the end of my angry rant against Brian Billick and the Baltimore Ravens I predicted the Ravens to go 9-7.

You could say I was completely wrong, but I'm going to go with half right on this one. The Ravens were coming off a year where they were the #1 seed in the AFC, they had just acquired Willis McGahee, and they were certainly expected to make the playoffs before this season began.

I realized in the horrific ending to that Ravens-Bengals game that the Ravens were actually horrible (in week 1!), and my 9-7 prediction definitely kept them out of the playoffs, as no 9-7 team in the AFC would ever make it (unless that team leads the AFC West).

The two things that I did not account for were
1) That the Bengals were actually horrible too.
and
2) The the Ravens were really, really horrible.

If the Patriots lose at Baltimore this Monday night, you can all blame me.

From the MPP Vault

2007-11-30T20:14:00.000-08:00

Upon the suggestion of a reader (yes, you exist), the following is a piece I originally wrote for the Indiana Daily Student's "Weekend" supplement. It was written in March of 2007, and originally intended to run in the April Fool's issue of the Weekend. It's a fake DVD review about two Iraq-war films, and I must say it is hilarious. However, the Weekend brain trust claimed it was "too close to the truth to run" (actual quote), "something about the tone didn't sit right" (another actual quote), and "running this review will get the paper's office wiretapped by the government" (may have not actually been said).

Nonetheless, here is the piece, in its entirety, unedited for you loyal reader(s).

IRAQ WAR FILMS ARE PROPA-GREAT!
“Flags of the Middle East”, “Letters from Camp X-Ray”
Directed by Ken Burns
Straight to DVD

By Mark Perlman-Price

Unable to garner the fanfare needed to release the films in theaters, the US Government funded war films “Flags of the Middle East” and “Letters from Camp X-Ray” have finally hit the shelves of the DVD department.

Originally meant to be a post-war retrospective, the lack of an “end” to the war has resulted in the films being officially marketed as an “in-war perspective”. No matter which way you market it, it’s clear that this is THE definitive source for a real look at the Iraq war.

“Flags” is the first of the series, and documents the many triumphs of the war thus far. The highlight of the film has to be the tearing down of Saddam Hussein’s statue, his trial and execution (cell phone video of corpse included) – but it’s the war’s subtleties that are most captivating. These include the on the ongoing search for WMDs, the warm reception that the US troops received upon arrival in each village, and the various charitable donations made to the community by Halliburton.

The second film of the series, “Letters from Camp X-Ray”, chronicles the tumultuous, riveting experiences and hardships endured by the US troops working at the terrorist internment camp in Guantanamo Bay. Stories featuring excerpts of actual letters from troops describe the intricacies of their torture and humiliation tactics, and the emotional toll that goes along with torturing and humiliating so many people.

The two-disc set is loaded with special features. Included are: the full, unedited version of President Bush’s ‘Mission Accomplished’ speech from the aircraft carrier in 2003, a month-by-month timeline of the times John Kerry supported the war or was against it, a list and map of the original ‘Coalition of the Willing’, and a ‘where are they now’ featurette on Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, John Ashcroft, and others who have since left the administration. And on the inside cover you’ll notice there is not the usual scene selection list, but rather an actual military recruitment form that you can fill out and mail for no postage fee. Combined with the “approval rating” price of 34 dollars, this set is a great deal – with the possibility of being even cheaper.

There’s no doubt that both “Flags” and “Letters” fall into the category of must-see films. If you’re tired of the conservative sensationalism of Fox News and the liberal bias of every other media outlet, these two films will provide the history – and present – view of one of our countries most dominating performances. From reliving the memories of ‘shock and awe’ all the way to today’s ‘cut and run’, these two films will have you so captivated, you’d think the war was on American soil.

Football! And Bill Belichick

2007-11-17T00:09:00.000-08:00

Sorry it's taken me so long to post - school is busy. When I graduate and spend 6ish months doing nothing, you can expect many more posts.

Anyway, I had to post now because of this article, by Elizabeth Merrill. ESPN has so much shit going on they're always looking for something to cover, but they pulled a Beverly Hillbillies and accidentally struck gold on this one, coming as close as they can to revolutionizing a view of Bill Belichick (I assume David Halberstam's book is inifinitely better).

ANYWAY, ESPN's goal is to always cause controversy, and I can't tell if this article is yet another satirical joke at the expense of Bill Belichick, or if it is a legit piece about him. I came to the conclusion you could probably read it as both. It has enough bullshit for you to make an argument to hate him, but if you really read it, you'll realize he is an amazing person and an even better coach.

Just because in this era, nobody can understand how someone can devote so much of their life to one thing - and be that good at it - doesn't mean Bill Belichick is a bad person. He is exactly the opposite, and arguably the greatest coach of all time. His genius is so advanced to a level that people cannot comprehend it, and if people interpret his legacy correctly, he should be revolutionary to the game of football, and in the futture I hope Jonathan Brady Moynahan is competing for the Bill Belichick trophy.

Gregg Easterbrook is the Worst Writer on Earth

2007-10-23T23:10:00.000-07:00

I would never force bad journalism upon you, but this article by Gregg Easterbrook is so atrocious, I had to get it out to the public. This is from ESPN.com of all places.

If you're looking for more terrible pieces of writing, just look through Easterbrook's archive.

I had previously thought that a random beat reporter's piece about Tim Wakefield ruining baseball because he throws a knuckleball was the worst article I ever read, but Easterbrook was able to top it.

The Price is Right - Drew Carey Era

2007-10-15T14:47:00.000-07:00

Today was the long-anticipated premiere of the 36th season of "The Price is Right". The show has finally moved on to its second host ever, Drew Carey.

Before anything I must address that this was a rare PERFECT SHOW, where each contestant in all six pricing games wins the prize. Even more than that, someone hit a dollar on the wheel in BOTH showcase showdowns, making it what I have dubbed an "uber-perfect show". The way it was going I expected someone in the final showcase showdown to be within 250 dollars and win both showcases, which would have created the probably the first of its kind "mega-uber show". Alas, this did not occur.

But the main story remains - Drew Carey's first show. How did he seem to fit in?

I thought he was terrible.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not calling for Drew Carey's firing on this one. I'm going to have infinite patience - I'd rather people just be happy and have the show continue on then have some hosting controversy. But the show's brain trust could not have chosen someone more different than Bob Barker.

First it starts with the speech pattern. In addition to their voices being completely different, Barker had a long, slow delivery that he honed into a flare for the dramatic. Carey speaks super fast and has a shill voice and squirrely laugh. A lot of what Barker did best was fill space, he seemed to be always talking - but not really saying much. Like when someone would get called down to contestant's row, Barker was always narrating their run, something I never really thought of much until I watched today and heard nothing from Carey. I wanted to go out there with him and coach him how to speak like Barker.

Carey's sense of humor doesn't really work for the show either. He made a few sarcastic quibs here and there, but they don't really play well on the show. He is certainly aware of the overall ridiculousness of the show and had no problem mentioning it occasionally, but that's not what people want to hear from the host, even though in reality it is funny.

Carey also came off (at least to me) as extremely nervous. It seemed every time he said something or was with a guest on stage, he would talk and then awkwardly finger his jacket pocket like he wanted to put his hand in his pocket and then decided not to. He stumbled on his words a lot, had trouble explaining the games, and just in general looked like he was hosting his first show. His timing was also wayyyy off - on the "One Away" game for a chance to win a car, he did the last two numbers so quickly the camera wasn't even showing them when they were revealed that the contestant had won. I guess the crew is used to Barker, too.

Carey comes off as completely genuine - he's friendly with the contestants, the ladies, even disembodied voice Rich Fields. He smiles a lot and unfortunately laughs a lot too. But with the exception of being creepy with beautiful women, there is no comparison between the two. Now it would be impossible for anyone to be like Bob Barker (although I think Dan Patrick would have been great), but Carey needs to do a little something to emulate him. Although he did end the show with "help control the pet population, have your pets spayed or neutered".

Why Eric Mangini Has No Integrity

2007-09-19T13:49:00.000-07:00

Thanks Peter King - even though in recent past works you have completely railed on Bill Belichick for illegal videotaping, you put out an excellent article today on why Eric Mangini is a huge asshole.

Et Tu, IU?

2007-09-12T21:03:00.000-07:00

This is a question that has been plaguing me since my return to campus:

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE CAESAR DRESSING IN THE DINING HALLS???

Long ago, when I was a wide-eyed, pizza-faced, 160ish lb sophomore, my mom and I made an agreement that any meal I ate involving a salad could be purchased with my/her credit card. Ever since, whenever I eat lunch at the Union I've made the effort to get a salad to go along with my personal pizza. And while the nearby Burger King is probably the best in the country, I have resisted temptation and eaten healthier/spent my mom's money.

But ever since I returned this year, there has been NO CAESAR DRESSING. I've been eating my Caesar salads with ITALIAN dressing. It makes no sense. I even went to the lengths of asking an employee of the Union dining area why they did not have any Caesar dressing. She replied "we're out of Caesar, we should be getting some in this week." WRONG, woman who works at the Union food area - YOU NEVER HAD CAESAR DRESSING.

THEN, I ate lunch at the library today. I rarely do this, and new nothing of the food options other than Chick-fil-A. Much to my surprise and enjoyment, the salads were here too - lunch would be on mom. I assumed the dressing selections must be different here, but when I looked down THERE WAS NO CAESAR.

PEOPLE, WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THE CAESAR DRESSING AT INDIANA UNIVERSITY?

Was That Brian Billick Coaching the Ravens-Bengals Game, or Marty Schottenheimer? or Norv Turner? or Dave Wannstedt? or Mike Davis?

2007-09-10T19:29:00.000-07:00

I was so enraged at the hopelessly pathetic ending of the Bengals/Ravens Monday Night Football game that I had to write an emergency blog post.

Cincinnati won 27-20, after a horrible offensive pass interference call on the Ravens, then a makeup-holding call on the Bengals, the Kyle Boller throwing something between 7 or 477 plays that involved him jumping backwards and throwing lame duck passes into/around the end zone. There were probably somewhere between 20 and 500 total plays the Ravens within the last 2 or 3 minutes of the game, I can't recall exactly because the whole thing has formed a sesspool in my brain.

For those of you who missed the ending, Kyle Boller was in the game because Steve McNair hurt his shoulder/sucks.

My question for Brian Billick - other than how have you not managed to have one servicable quarterback in your entire 9 year tenure (I don't care if he won the Super Bowl with Trent Dilfer) - is WHY THE FUCK DID YOU TRADE FOR WILLIS MCGAHEE!?!?!

McGahee had 19 carries for 77 yards and NO TDS. Could he not break through the vaunted (ranked 30th in 2006) Cincinnati defense? And where was the pass protection? Even Kyle Boller isn't fucking retarted enough to run back 10 yards and throw while leaping backwards for no reason - he was pressured practically every play. Maybe a DRAW would be in order? Since the ends were coming around every fucking time? The whole clusterfuck of a series involved 2 horrible penalties (one negating a TD), 2 near INTs and 1 actual INT, between 17 and 477 horrible passes from Kyle Boller, and maybe 3 runs by HUGE OFFSEASON ACQUISITION WILLIS MCGAHEE.

BRIAN BILLICK YOU ARE A FUCKING IDIOT.

My Ravens 2007 prediction: 9-7

My dad wears G-Unit sandals

2007-08-27T15:12:00.000-07:00

I found this out over the summer, and it was actually one of the original inspirations for making the blog. My dad did not know of G-Unit, but concluded the sandals were comfortable and he was pleased they could be considered hip.

Bizzaro recap of the day

2007-08-10T09:08:00.000-07:00

It's hard to get your bearings in the morning when you wake up to this on the radio:

"The St. Louis Cardinals were 5-0 winners over the Padres behind seven shutout innings from Joel Piniero and a three-run home run by newly-called-up outfielder Rick Ankiel."

BREAKING NEWS

2007-08-08T16:15:00.001-07:00

Huge props go to Zach Williams for finding this out:

Ryan Braun is JEWISH!!!!

This immediately catapults him into the top 5 Jewish baseball players of all time, along with Sandy Koufax, Hank Greenberg, Shawn Green, and Kevin Youkilis. Not to mention it immediately catapults him into my top 10 favorite players.

Check it out on wikipedia, which has such an absurd all-Jewish related miscellaneous section on Braun I almost didn't believe it was true, including a link to this article, actually on the official website of minor league baseball and actually titled "Minor League's top Jewish prospects", and it ACTUALLY has a disclaimer at the bottom saying "This story was not subject to the approval of the National Association of Professional Baseball Leagues or its clubs."

Nonetheless, here's to Braun and Youkilis and their ushering in a new era of Jewish baseball.

Athletes, they're just like us!

2007-08-08T15:00:00.000-07:00

They break the all time Major League Baseball record for career home runs!

They take pictures with people in related professions!

They commit double murders on their wives and friends!

They have paintings on the hoods of their cars of which a small portion depicts Benjamin Franklin smoking a joint while receiving a lap dance!

Picture of the Day

2007-07-29T21:16:00.001-07:00

as always, courtesy of deadspin.com

Mike & Mike in the ALL FUCKING DAY

2007-07-23T18:23:00.000-07:00

I want to start out this post saying I like Mike & Mike. I think Mike Greenberg is one of the best Sports Center anchors and Mike Golic is a charming personality and reasonably good analyst. They complement each other perfectly - which is exactly why ESPN no longer lets them do ANYTHING seperately.

For instance, last week when they appeared on Letterman (no this blog is not a sponsor of The Late Show, even though on today's pace I'll mention it 60 times in the next month) I made a crack about them being attached at the penis. Purely humorous. But after today's cohosting of a 90 minute/6 p.m. Sports Center, I'm not so sure.

This brings me back to this article about how ESPN (among other things) is straying away from news a bit and treating athletes more like celebrities. And I must say tonight's Mike & Mike-center definitely felt more like Entertainment Tonight, except without the lovely Mary Hart.

The show had obvious low points when they had a montage of activities Mike & Mike had done together, only to be topped when the Grambling marching band came on set and had Mike & Mike dance with them. But one of the smaller details that got to me was when Greenberg 'initiated' Golic into anchordom with his first real reader - an actual news story he read about the Steelers that I have no recollection of what it was about because Greenberg made it a bigger deal that Golic was actually reading a story like an anchor than whatever the story was about itself (sorry, had to vent that in one sentence).

Mike & Mike are fantastic on radio (too bad I'm only up before 10 a.m. about 15 times a year), they were cute at the spelling bee, and I'll even take them together on Letterman. But keep them off Sports Center, please, and leave the news as news.

In reference to co-hosting Sports Center, at one point Golic said to Greenberg "the sad thing is you went to school for this."

I couldn't agree with him more.

Picture of the Day

2007-07-23T18:13:00.000-07:00

Courtesy of deadspin.com

The Price is..... I can't bring myself to make the easiest joke in the book

2007-07-23T15:32:00.000-07:00

Watching the WBZ 4 News at 6 tonight, the guy who sits next to Sara Underwood reported that Drew Carey will announce on his Letterman appearance tonight that he has been offered and will accept the job as host of the Price is Right (before going on to suggest to Bob Lobel that he host the show - which would be 1,000 times more entertaining - then explaining that Lobel would be great hosting "plungo")*.

ANYWAY, I'm not thrilled about Carey filling in Bob Barker's shoes (although I recall past stories of Carey being a womanizer, which would fit in perfectly)**. I must say I was pulling for Dan Patrick - he has the perfect game show personality and has the dry wit and experience of dealing with people and TV... forget that. As I typed that sentence I realized that the absolute PERFECT choice in my mind would have been Kenny Mayne... but he probably wouldn't take the show seriously enough, which is why for the show itself Patrick would have been perfect. It kills me that he was actually offered the job and turned it down - I think he has too much professionalism left in him. I also wonder how many people were offered the job before Carey.

ANYWAY, the main point of this tangent filled post was Drew Carey, and I'm not quite sure what to think of him. But this probably would have been the case for whoever was named host, since NOBODY has hosted besides Barker. Carey definitely increases the comedy factor of the show, but still should be able to run a tight ship. His voice is significantly inferior to Barker's, and it's hard to imagine the type of people who would show up with a shirt professing their love for Drew Carey... I shudder to think what they would look like. I also can't imagine him holding the crazy 1 inch by 3 foot microphone, especially in comparison to a man of his girth. And now that he's rolling in the lap of luxury with the sweetest gig on TV, what if he balloons up to 300 lbs? Why don't we just get Louie Anderson to host in that case. I also can't imagine he'll continue Barker's war against the pet population, so I don't know how he'll sign off. I'm praying it won't be "Cleveland Rocks!". But here's what I CAN imagine Carey doing: Rod Roddy's old job of calling people down. He'd be perfect.

Nonetheless, I must still look forward to a new era of the Price is Right. I'm sick of watching reruns.

* the actual name of the game is, of course, "Plinko"
** I have no evidence to back up this accusation

Quote of the Day

2007-07-19T15:23:00.000-07:00

From tonight's 6 p.m Sports Center:

"...And Michael Vick's world seems to be crumbling around him - first he's indicted on federal charges, and now Nike won't release his new shoe. See what else is happening with the Falcons' quarterback next..."

No more living in the 'Now', please

2007-07-16T12:39:00.000-07:00

It's summer! Time moves slow, kids roam the street freely, and the blistering heat of getting into a parked car makes you feel pity on the inanimate objects already inside. There's also only one sport being played: baseball.

That's a problem for ESPN, who at this point basically have two shows (Sports Center and Baseball Tonight) covering one topic. So they needed a filler - and what do they create - a 32 person, full bracket, tournament style vote to determine "Who's Now"!

What does it mean to be now? (more or less transcribed from my memory) It's the athelete who's at the top of their sport, but also has juice (not to be confused with "Jews", which I thought I heard Scott Van Pelt say - in which case the winner would have to be Kevin Youkilis). To be "now" you have to be in the public eye, have hella endorsements, and date a lot of bangin' celebrities or other athletes.

A star-studded panel of Stu Scott, Kirk Herbstreit, Keyshawn Johnson, and Michael Wilbon then sit around and try to form cohesive arguments about popularity, a segment that this article by Devin Gordon likens to "chewing Styrofoam" (I highly suggest reading this article since I stole most of my material, and the photo, from it). Then the public votes on who is more nowier and that athlete advances (something that could be done with ZERO television coverage). Not to mention whenever a real athlete goes up against a filler/nobody athlete like a surfer/skier/snowboarder/skater/etc, the only argument the panel makes for the nobody are the girls he's dated.

Here's an accurate/humorous comparison from firejoemorgan.com, via an emailer:

"I have an idea for what to do after "Who's Now?" is over. It's called "what time is it?" A panel of ESPN experts would sit around and argue what time it was. They would never agree because the time would always be changing. People could vote online and it would all depend on when they voted.

At the end you would have some idea of what time it was."

Maybe we should just make Sports Center 45 minutes.

Paahk the Flying Caahr in Haahvard Yaahrd

2007-06-29T15:57:00.000-07:00

While most would expect Harvard University to be too snooty for shameless promotions, apparently they are not. According to this article, on July 20th, the day before the release of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Harvard Square will rename itself "Hogwarts Sqaure".

Here's a stupid explanation why, from Denise Jillson executive director of Harvard Square business association:

"'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows' and the hallowed halls of Harvard," she said, connecting the dots.

Details of the event include performances by the band "Harry & the Potters" (pictured below), and a scavenger hunt at the Harvard Museum of Natural History for owls, bats, red stones, and of course, Harvard's dignity.

And I had to add that transitively, if Harvard Sqaure is being renamed Hogwarts Square, then Harvard must be renamed Hogwarts as well. You just can't have one without the other. Wouldn't make sense. This would make the Red Line the Hogwarts Express - and, while I couldn't think of appropriate comparisons for each of the houses, Harvard Law School would definitely be Slytherin. Which would make Alan Dershowitz professor Snape.

Setting a new low of underachievment

2007-06-25T11:23:00.000-07:00

Today of out the "WOW" file - anything that caused me to look like Tim Duncan after a foul call while reading it - has to do with the Yankees' record. I originally intended this post to rip the Yankees playoff hopes and criticize Joe Torre for using Roger Clemens in relief (I'll probably do at least one later in the post anyway).

The American League is really, really good. I came to this conclusion last week. Peter Gammons recently referred to the Detroit Tigers as the "best team in baseball", even though the Red Sox and Angels both have better records. Then there's Cleveland, who's only 2 games behind Detroit and are 5-2 against the Tigers thusfar. They've also played most of their games without the pitching of Cliff Lee and Jake Westbrook, who are just coming off the disabled list. Meanwhile Seattle, Oakland, and Minnesota are all above .500 and dangerous (I don't actually believe this to be true). Then there's Toronto, who have fought valiantly to a .500 record despite injuries to their entire 25 man roster, mascot, several fans, and hotel attendants. THEN there's the Yankees: 1 game under .500, 11.5 out of first place, and 6.5 out of the wild card.

This is where I was going to declare the Yankees doomed. But I took a look at their Expected Win-Loss, which is some fancy formula using run differentials and something about pythagoreus to calculate what a team's record should be. Their current record is 36-37. The Yankee's ExWL? 43-30.

43-30!!

With that record the Yankees would currently be 4.5 games behind the Red Sox and a half game ahead wild card leading Cleveland. Think of it this way: the Yankees are more games behind themselves (7) than they are in the wild card (6.5).

Now while these numbers are somewhat disturbing and actually shocking, ultimately they're meaningless. They just exemplify how bad/unlucky the Yankees have been so far (a 4-12 record in one run games doesn't help). You could blame this on players not producing, atrocious managing, poor hitting/pitching coaching, poor baserunning coaching, poor fielding, poor ownership, take your pick! It's a fun game.

And while the Yankees are really a much better team than they've been so far, they've dug their own grave. And if they want to catch any of the big 4 AL teams mentioned before, they're going to need to play to their expected record, and at this point that might need to be better than 43-30.

(I told you I'd get around to ripping the Yankees)

Shows that cannot possibly be real: Part 1 of an indefinitely numbered series - Cash Cab

2007-06-20T14:30:00.000-07:00

This concept was originally meant to be one mega-post, but as I came up with more ideas, I thought it would fare better split into an indefinite amount of segments. If anyone was actually printing out posts and reading them on the toilet, I'd be so genuinely flattered that I'll personally put together a mega-post for you and print it out on toilet paper so you can read and wipe your ass with it.

ANYWAY, this series of posts (not necessarily consecutively) will examine TV shows that cannot possibly be real, or have glaring flaws in their realness. Today's show is Cash Cab.

If you haven't seen it, Cash Cab follows an "actual New York City cab" picking up "real passengers" going to "real places". During the ride, the driver asks them trivia questions. If they don't know they answer, they have two "shout-outs", one via cell phone and one to a "random" person on the street. At the end of the ride they get a big wad of cash and are released into the New York City streets.

Where to begin? First of all the cab really is painted exactly like a NYC cab and even has the number thing on top (# 1G12, and it's a minivan). It also wouldn't be a ridiculous promotion for the city, so I can see them allowing it. Not a huge flaw there.

Now there is the ride itself. Finding someone looking for a cab isn't a problem, but the flaws with the rides are four-fold:

Every ride on cash cab is perfectly timed. The driver always knows exactly when to change rounds or increase cash values, so people get relatively the same amount of questions. But how could this many random cab rides all be the exact same length with all the outside factors such as distance of trip, lights, traffic, etc.
Anyone who's been in a New York City cab knows that they drive - to put it lightly - "erratically". But Mr. Cash-Cab-Bald-Driver-Guy has no problem negotiating New York City traffic while simultaneously joking around and hosting a game show in his car, not to mention taking people to their "destinations".
Regarding the "shout outs", while a mobile shout out is plausible (no different than phoning a friend on "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire", the street shout outs are harder to believe. If I learned anything from "Borat" (surprisingly I learned more from that movie than a summer living in NYC), it's that people in New York City don't like to be approached my strangers. So to think that this cab just pulls over while some jackass passenger yells at someone on the sidewalk to help them with a trivia question without being shunned or held up at gunpoint is just not realistic.
The most ridiculous - and my favorite part - of Cash Cab is that with each question you answer incorrectly you get a strike, and three strikes gets you eliminated from the game. And not only do you not win money, but Mr. Cash-Cab-Bald-Driver-Guy pulls over and throws you out of the cab no matter where you are. Could you imagine this possibly happening in reality? Is it even legal? What if you're going from Manhattan to Yankee Stadium, lose the game, and get dumped in Harlem (or any neighborhood around the stadium). Or what if you actually have a legitimate place to be at a certain time and get left on the street because you don't know the atomic number of rubidium (37). What will you tell your angry boss/friends?

It is for those reasons (and more I probably forgot at this point, I've been working on this post for a few weeks now) that there is no way Cash Cab can possibly be real. Nonetheless, the next time I'm in New York City I'm gonna do my best to find that bastard and hail it down, because I'm broke.

Now they'll associate Israel with war, holy relics, and boobs

2007-06-20T14:11:00.000-07:00

Courtesy of our friend David Urman is this article about Maxim magazine's new "Girls of the Israeli Defense Forces" issue. Obviously there is controversy that goes along with a spread like this, so I'll spare you my preaching (I like it) and give you the explanation from the msnbc.com article:

"... in a recent BBC poll taken in 27 countries, 56 percent of respondents considered Israel a 'negative influence' in the world, higher than both Iran and the United States. But Israel's PR problem is that Americans - particularly those aged 18 to 35 - either associate the country with war or holy relics, or don't think of it at all. 'We have to find the right hook' he says. 'And what's relevant to men under 35? Good-looking women.' "

In a way this makes sense, and in many ways it does not. I don't really know if Maxim's audience covers the 27 mystery countries in the BBC poll, I'm gonna guess it doesn't. So the 'promotion' might not have the desired effect Israel is hoping for. I also don't like the fact that when I turn 35, good-looking women will no longer be relevant to me.

Anyway, here's the pictures/article. No shiksas in this bunch!

Picture of the Day

2007-06-19T09:40:00.001-07:00

Courtesy of deadspin.com

Yankees dubbed winners for defeating losers

2007-06-11T15:40:00.000-07:00

In the midst of their winning streak, the hot baseball topic is "are the Yankees back"?

The Yanks have won 6 in a row and 9 of their last 11, bringing their record to one game below .500 and their AL East deficit to 9 1/2 games. Crack open the bubbly! By the end of the week the Yankees could be above .500 and possibly even less games out of first place! Lookout Red Sox!

Here's an in depth look at the streak (including the 2 losses):

Yankees have averaged 7.64 runs scored and 4.73 allowed
Yankees have averaged 11.91 hits for and 9.64 allowed
Yankee starters have averaged 5.91 innings per game, with a 6.46 ERA
Yankees have averaged using 4.36 pitchers per game

The hitting numbers are what we would expect from the Yankee lineup (and finally they're living up to expectations). But the pitching? Well - also what we've grown to expect from the Yankee staff, shitty. And consider their competition: Boston, Toronto, White Sox, and Pittsburgh. They won 3 of the games against Boston and Toronto, and 6 of 7 against the White Sox and Pittsburgh (the current win streak).

Here's a look at the White Sox and Pirates' offensive ranks (all of MLB): (but before that, here's a creepy picture of Mariano Rivera!)

White Sox:

Last in Hits
Last in Runs
Last in Avg
Last in OBP
Last in SLG
Last in OPS

Pirates:

21st in Hits
24th in Runs
27th in Avg
29th in OBP
27th in SLG
28th in OPS

So while the Yankees have admirably thrived against 2 of the worst hitting teams in baseball, and won 3 from better competition (following a 5 game losing streak), let's hold off until they have a winning record and are within a week's games of being in first place before we declare them being "back".

Most shocking story of the NBA playoffs:

2007-06-05T22:30:00.001-07:00

Mike Brown used to be an assistant for Gregg Popovich.

Whhhhaaaaaaaaaa???????

The Legacy of Barbaro

2007-06-05T13:38:00.000-07:00

It's been written countless times (and is generally understood by the masses at this point) that when a prominent pop culture figure dies, their legacy is often more powerful than that of the living (see Cobain, Hendrix, Lennon, Belushi, Tupac etc.). But apparently now it has happened with a horse.

Riding into work today I heard an ad for the new HBO documentary "Barbaro". The piece covers the events of his short life and features interviews with sports reporters and "friends" talking about the late horse.

It was then I realized the connection. Barbaro, like many of the aforementioned artists, died in his absolute PRIME (maybe even moreso than the others). After winning the Kentucky Derby in one of the most dominating performances, he was a heavy Preakness favorite before shattering his leg and being carted off in the equine ambulance, never to race again.

And thus his legend grew, to the point that many believe he would have been the first Triple Crown winner since Affirmed in 1978, and the most dominant horse since Secretariat. But these are the facts: Barbaro won only 1 Triple Crown race. Many horses - even in the past decade - have won 2, then fizzle at the Belmont. Horse racing is very difficult to predict, and while Barbaro may have seemed like he was strong enough to win the Triple Crown, history says he probably wouldn't have done it. And what would he be now, if he had lived and failed? Just another name to go along with War Emblem, Funny Cide, Smarty Jones, Charismatic, Real Quiet, and (sadly) Fusaichi Pegasus (who's derby winning time was actually faster than Barbaro's).

So instead of fading away like his predecessors, Barbaro burned out. His leg shattered and he died, leaving his potential with a giant question mark, and a creepy cult following of people who worship him as the greatest horse of all time, since he forever "could have been".

But the legacy of Barbaro has a physical aspect that Kurt Cobain, Jimi Hendrix, Tupac, and the others never achieved: he lives on as a household product (although Biggie may have been made into hot dog meat).

So the next time you open up that bottle of glue, and - for some unexplained reason - it seems extra adherent, think of Barbaro. Because your shattered china could be being held together by what could have been the greatest horse ever.

Why the NHL Sucks

2007-06-04T23:10:00.001-07:00

Reason no. 2365428736:

It makes no sense.

Take, for example, tonight's game whatever (4 I think) in the Stanley Cup Finals. Anaheim was without Chris Pronger, who had been suspended. Since I recognize his name, I'll assume he is a good player.

Of course, Anaheim wins the game.

How does this make sense?

Red Sox Recap

2007-06-04T23:08:00.000-07:00

Before you start to panic about a Red Sox losing streak, just remember they were about 10 combined feet of David Ortiz power on two swings from winning both games.

You can put this loss on me...

2007-06-04T23:00:00.000-07:00

Tonight's game was my fault. I was writing my last post, sitting on the floor in front of my laptop, making sure to keep my hands, feet, and posture steady while the Red Sox made a ridiculous 9th inning comeback then kept the A's from winning in 2 even ridiculouser situations.

Plagued with the pain of sitting uncomfortably for so long, I had to lie down. The instant I did this, Nick Swisher was batting, and I thought - "I changed my position, here comes a walkoff." Well, one batter later, Chavez ends the game with a home run. Sorry everybody.

But this was actually my second psychic premonition of the game, the first was the be the original point of this post when I was sure the A's would not come back.

While I'm a supporter of the "Moneyball" philosophy to baseball, it has a serious flaw - clutch hitting. In the bottom of the 9th of tonight's game, with the bases loaded, nobody out, and facing the great JC Romero, Chavez was at the plate. I had the thought "Chavez is the exact kind of guy to ground into a double play here." Well, I was wrong. Chavez struck out. Bobby Crosby is the kind of guy to ground into a double play, as he promptly did to end the inning.

This harkens back to various playoff series' where the A's have failed to advance. Prior to last season, they had an abysmal record in series-clinching games (0-11 i think). Something's missing in the "Moneyball" strategy.

Effects of "Moneyball"

2007-06-04T22:01:00.000-07:00

So I'm watching the Red Sox-A's game earlier tonight, and randomly my dad says "they look like an all white team." After a second of confusion, I realized he was right on many levels.

First is the weird tradition of A's players wearing white shoes. One of the weirdest dress requirements (I assume) in baseball. Combined with their home whites, they obviously appear to be "very white" on the field.

Second is the fact that the longer I thought about it, the A's really do have a lot of white players. In fact, here are the only black/foreign players on the A's:

Kiko Calero, Santiago Casilla, Esteban Loaiza, Marco Scutaro, Milton Bradley, and Shannon Stewart.

That's 6 non-white players on the 25 man roster (and since Loaiza is on the DL, only 5 are currently active). So we'll call that 20%. Even this guy is an American-born citizen!

Now obviously I don't know which players have which amount of what ethnicities in them - so these 5 are the only players born outside of the USA. So I should probably say the A's are 20% foreign, not "non-white". But to make my point easier, let's just go ahead and say the A's are 80% white.

So it turns out my dad was right. What made this such a glaring point at the time (in addition to the white uniforms), was that the A's were in the field at the time, and of the 6 players listed, 3 are pitchers, and Milton Bradley wasn't playing. So with the exception of Marco Scutaro and Shannon Stewart, the A's really were all white.

Now, I'm not accusing the A's of being a racist organization - they probably have the most clear set of guidelines out of any Major League team as to exactly what they look for in players (see "Moneyball"). But this raises a lot of interesting questions. Are young black players not as patient at the plate as white guys? (Gary Sheffield would probably agree). The A's are very good at finding undervalued talent, so are more white players undervalued? Whatever it is, it seems the "Moneyball" approach seems to attract more white guys than a Republican debate. Funny, considering the A's logo is an elephant.

Doc Rivers Speaks

2007-06-03T18:53:00.000-07:00

The day after the Celtics' lottery debacle, I was listening to the radio and heard a Doc Rivers soundbyte on the Celtics upcoming season. I don't have it in print - so it's not exact - but it went something along the lines of this:

(same crap about nucleus of young players and staying healthy) ... "and I really think that if we can put it together we can be a pleasant surprise this season."

There you have it folks! If players stay healthy, play more maturely, and get some breaks to fall their way, they could reach their ceiling of pleasant surprise.

Print it on the cover of the media guide: The 07-08 Celtics! We COULD BE a pleasant surprise!

Why the Cubs suck

2007-05-31T17:14:00.001-07:00

If the Chicago Cubs don't win the World Series this season, next year will be their 100th season without winning one. A century of failure.

With Alfonso Soriano taking the year off, and Carlos Zambrano being affected in the exact OPPOSITE way as all other players in the history of a contract year (aka panicking instead of playing better), it looks like this won't be the Cubs' year. Even in the remote instance they put it together and win the NL pennant, they're not going to beat anyone in the AL in the World Series.

EDITOR'S NOTE: the preceding paragraphs were written before Carlos Zambrano and Michael Barrett's fight and Lou Pinella's explosion, so you can add that to the reasons why they won't win.

The Cubs are not as bad as they seem. They've outscored their opponents 239-233, but because of their unprecedented record in one-run games (2-12) and extra innings (1-5), they currently stand at 22-31 and 4th in the NL Central (the worst division in baseball). I have no idea how this is calculated, but the Cubs' expected win-loss should be 27-26, an example of how unlucky/huge choke artists they've been.

So there's your statistics as to how much the Cubs suck, but the title was WHY. And I believe that reason is Day Games.

The Cubs are plagued by the most outdated tradition in baseball: playing most of their home games during the day (51 to be exact). Add this to the 24 day games they have on the road, and the Cubs play 75 day games in the season - far and away more than any other team (I have no data to back this up).

I think that if you polled major league players about preference of playing in the day or at night, the vast majority would choose night (again, no data). You have to wake up early (probably hungover) to play a game during the summer at the hottest time of day (around 1-4), then when you lose another 1 run game (because you're the Cubs) you have all day to think about how you fucked up, instead of just getting hammered and going to strip clubs like normal post-night game activity.

I scoured the internets, but data was hard to come by. So far this year the Cubs are 13-18 during the day (9-13 at night). They're 10-17 at home, 12-14 on the road (this data isn't the best because of 1) small sample size and 2) the Cubs record just makes it look like they suck everywhere). But in the past couple years (the only data I could find), the Cubs have also had losing home records. In 2006, they're 36 home wins were the lowest in the majors; and they're 38 home wins in '05 was fourth lowest.

So forget about Billy Goats (the most contrived curse ever invented) and Bartman. Either the Cubs love traveling, hate their fans, or would rather play their games like every other team in baseball - at night.

Guaranteed Yankee win streak with this post

2007-05-30T16:07:00.000-07:00

This is just asking for horrible things to happen to the Red Sox, but I couldn't resist. Here's some interesting information from our friend Buster Olney from ESPN.com:

The Yankees have reached the point where they will almost require a historic comeback to make the playoffs:

The Yankees' deficit in the division race is 14.5 games. Only one team has won a division or league with a deficit of greater than 14 games: the 1914 Boston Braves.

The Yankees' deficit in the wild card is 8.5 games. Only four wild-card winners have overcome greater deficits than that: the '95 Yankees (who were once nine games out), the 2001 Athletics (once 10.5 games out), the 2003 Marlins (11.5 games out), and the 2005 Astros (11.5 games out).

Only two other times have the Yankees had a larger deficit in May: 1984, when the Tigers started 35-5, the Yankees fell 17.5 games out in May; and 1913, when the Yankees were as much as 18.5 games out in May.

It's pretty much a consensus opinion at this point that Clemens isn't making his first start against the Red Sox because the Yankees are terrified of the ramifications of a bad outing, and I wouldn't do it either if I was Torre. Instead he'll face the White Sox, whose team OBP is an MLB-lowest .311. That's compared to the Red Sox MLB-best .361 - not good for Clemens (probably a 6 inning starter at best) to debut against a team who specializes in taking pitches and wearing out pitchers.

A real Duke and his Hazzards

2007-05-26T23:51:00.000-07:00

Elijah Dukes of the Tampa Bay Devil Rays: my new favorite player.

Allow me to reintroduce myself my name is Blog

2007-05-25T21:42:00.000-07:00

Like a movie or any good TV show, I decided to officially title my blog after some content. The only explainable reason for this is that I wanted to get the content out before I forgot it all - which explains why it's so scatterbrained and poorly laid out (the latter problem should be fixable over time).

I'm hoping to keep the posts short and to the point, although I have much difficulty editing myself.

Not to mention the majority of my thoughts/ideas/writing style/pictures/layout will basically be from ideas I get from other blogs. Try to guess which ones!

-Mark

Baseball Fun Facts!

2007-05-25T21:08:00.001-07:00

For some reason I find this stuff interesting.

Youngest Team: Florida (avg. age of 26.6)
Oldest: Mets (31.1)
*Red Sox are fourth oldest at 30.7

Fattest Team: White Sox (avg. 220 lbs)
Lightest: Tampa Bay (199)
*Red Sox 13th fattest at 208

All teams avg. 6'1" or 6'2"

Comparing David Stern's irrationally stubborn apples to Bud Selig's steroid-laden oranges

2007-05-25T18:33:00.000-07:00

If Major League Baseball had the same penalties as the NBA, you know who would have been suspended after Thursday’s Marlins-Phillies game?*

Antonio Alfonseca, Clay Condrey, Adam Eaton, Freddy Garcia, Geoff Geary, Cole Hamels, Yoel Hernandez, Jon Lieber, Ryan Madson, Jamie Moyer, Francisco Rosario, Rod Barajas, Chris Coste, Carlos Ruiz, Greg Dobbs, Wes Helms, Ryan Howard, Abraham O. Nunez, Jimmy Rollins, Chase Utley, Michael Bourn, Pat Burrell, Aaron Rowand, Shane Victorino, Jayson Werth, Kevin Gregg, Matt Lindstrom, Randy Messenger, Justin Miller, Sergio Mitre, Ricky Nolasco, Wes Obermueller, Scott Olsen, Renyel Pinto, Taylor Tankersley, Dontrelle Willis, Matt Treanor, Jason Wood, Reggie Abercrombie, Todd Linden, and Josh Willingham.

That’s the 40 players who left the bench plus Dontrelle Willis (I left out Byung-Hyun Kim because I assumed he probably stayed in the dugout during the fracas). The list includes the entire Phillies roster, all Marlins’ bench players, and all Marlins pitchers (Dontrelle Willis would get two games). Not to mention both teams’ managers and coaches (notably Charlie Manuel and whoever manages the Marlins).

This, of course, is in reference to the NBA rule that roughly states that during an altercation, a player that leaves the bench is subject to a one-game suspension. If this were the NBA, the altercation would be Willis throwing behind batters and shouting at the Phillies' dugout. And the players receiving suspension for leaving the bench would be all of them.

**UPDATE! Coincidentally enough, Marlins' manager (Fredi Gonzalez) got suspended for a game for leaving the clubhouse after being ejected. I guess there are similarities in the NBA and MLB.

*Skip this list to get to the point - I also spent way to much time figuring out who would be suspended

Rock, Chalk, Playoffs

2007-05-25T18:18:00.000-07:00

Two games into the Eastern Conference finals and there's been much more talked about than just two games with identical scores (which, ironically is probably the most interesting thing to happen). Let's break it down:

LeBron James, heavily criticized for passing up the final shot in game
1 to a WIDE OPEN Donyell Marshall, obviously had the ball in hands in
the same situation in game two. Clearly thinking about the press
reaction to his game 1 decision, James predictably forced up a
horrible shot while being swarmed by defenders and missed. Points of
interest on the play:

James was more or less completely hammered by Richard "Dickie" Hamilton on the play, and while he and coach Mike Brown vented frustrations on the court neither complained after the game, instead saying they're a "no excuses" team. While they would have been right to complain, I actually find this admirable. The NBA has wayyyyyyy too much complaining, and it reflects poorly on everyone, not to mention it accomplishes nothing. I can only imagine if this had happened to Dallas, it probably would have consisted of something along the lines of Dirk Nowitzki's head exploding, Mark Cuban running onto the court and physically assaulting an official, and the Dallas Mavericks secession from the NBA.

Know why it's so easy to blame LeBron for his clutch decisionmaking? Because the rest of the Cavs are terrible! They're second best player is Larry Hughes. Again, Donyell Marshall missed a WIDE OPEN 3 that he should have made.

Detroit is one of the smartest teams in the league, they're starting 5 have been together forever and are closer than Greg Oden and Mike Conley on a weekend getaway to the Poconos. In short, they can coach themselves. So put them with semi-competent Flip Saunders and they're going to figure out that to stop the Cavs you quintuple-team LeBron and watch the rest of the players miss jump shots. So stop bringing up how few shots LeBron has in each game.

After LeBron's miss, Cavs #2 Larry Hughes missed a wide-open 9-footer, followed by Rasheed Wallace nearly tipping the ball into his own basket to lose the game. The game recap says it was Anderson Varejao who touched it, but if you watch the video that ball was tipped by 'Sheed. We were inches away from the craziest finish in NBA history.

Game 2 fun facts: Cleveland had a 34 point second quarter, but combined for 42 in the other 3.