See. What did I say the other night? Arrogant pretty boy.
Saturday, January 28, 2006
3 inches=$50,000
While waiting for a show to start the other night I caught the last five minutes of "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?" The lady player had the following question for 50-large-"What is the width of a standard National Hockey League puck?" I'm screaming at the TV for her to choose 3 inches. She, of course, chooses wrong(2 inches) and goes home empty-handed. I'm not saying everyone should know the correct answer; I'd simply like to point out that I'd never be so lucky as to get that question if I was in the hot seat. "So Bryan, for $50,000, what is the normal gestation period of a bottle-nosed dolphin............."
New Look
Hope I didn't throw anybody off with the new colors. I got tired of the black background so I thought I would brighten things up.
Wednesday, January 25, 2006
Friends in the News
I know it is spelled differently, but I liked the headline anyway. Would be pretty cool if it was our man Chris.
http://www.coloradoavalanche.com/news/currentdetails.asp?ID=460
http://www.coloradoavalanche.com/news/currentdetails.asp?ID=460
Super Mario?
I have mixed feelings about all the love being heaped upon Mario Lemieux in the wake of his second retirement. Obviously, I am a little biased. As a Caps fans my feelings toward Mario bordered on hatred as he routinely dismantled the Caps in the playoffs seemingly every year. It is indisputable, however, that he is a remarkable talent and one hell of a hockey player.
As a hockey fan, I enjoyed watching him make outstanding plays look easy. Anyone who has played even a little bit knows that it just isn't as simple as he makes it seem. Lemieux probably has to be considered one of the top five players of all-time (The Great One, Messier, Howe and Orr would be my others). If we're talking about offensive skill alone, you could make a case for him being the best ever. His combination of size and grace was rare when he entered the league.
Toss in some hard- to- duplicate feats (scoring on his first shift, scoring 5 goals in 5 different ways in one game, 2 Stanley Cup wins, 2 Conn Smythe trophies and a Gold Medal) and you have quite the resume.
He also fought through and returned to play from numerous injuries and illness including cancer. It is hard to tell what his numbers might have been like if these ailments hadn't robbed him of several seasons. It's kind of shame that he has to retire now because he should thrive in the revamped, wide-open NHL.
HOWEVER, there is plenty not to like about this guy. For starters, if you look a little further down his medical chart you notice his allergy to playing defense. He would constantly shirk his defensive responsibilities; at least center isn't an important defensive position. Hah!
Lemieux is also a first class whiner. He would bitch and moan(sometimes justified) about hooking or holding only to employ the same tactics minutes later. I've seen many Lemieux slashes and dirty plays go uncalled. He and Jagr were often the beneficiaries of phantom penalties caused by their incessant whining.
All I'm saying is don't forget that the amazing player who twice saved hockey in Pittsburgh has a whole bunch of arrogant pretty boy in him.
As a hockey fan, I enjoyed watching him make outstanding plays look easy. Anyone who has played even a little bit knows that it just isn't as simple as he makes it seem. Lemieux probably has to be considered one of the top five players of all-time (The Great One, Messier, Howe and Orr would be my others). If we're talking about offensive skill alone, you could make a case for him being the best ever. His combination of size and grace was rare when he entered the league.
Toss in some hard- to- duplicate feats (scoring on his first shift, scoring 5 goals in 5 different ways in one game, 2 Stanley Cup wins, 2 Conn Smythe trophies and a Gold Medal) and you have quite the resume.
He also fought through and returned to play from numerous injuries and illness including cancer. It is hard to tell what his numbers might have been like if these ailments hadn't robbed him of several seasons. It's kind of shame that he has to retire now because he should thrive in the revamped, wide-open NHL.
HOWEVER, there is plenty not to like about this guy. For starters, if you look a little further down his medical chart you notice his allergy to playing defense. He would constantly shirk his defensive responsibilities; at least center isn't an important defensive position. Hah!
Lemieux is also a first class whiner. He would bitch and moan(sometimes justified) about hooking or holding only to employ the same tactics minutes later. I've seen many Lemieux slashes and dirty plays go uncalled. He and Jagr were often the beneficiaries of phantom penalties caused by their incessant whining.
All I'm saying is don't forget that the amazing player who twice saved hockey in Pittsburgh has a whole bunch of arrogant pretty boy in him.
Monday, January 23, 2006
Hodge Podge
Just few quick hitters:
-Glad to see NBC finally pulled the plug on the West Wing. It has been slowly dying for the last three seasons. I haven't stopped watching because I really enjoy the characters, but it gets tougher every week to slog through these tedious storylines. It's a shame too, because the first three or four seasons were fantastic. Despite disagreeing with most of the politics I loved the crisp dialouge and well-crafted stories.
-Heard a radio spot for a local car dealership advising people to buy a car here because "with the money you save you can pay off your credit card debt." Am I missing something? Perhaps if you don't buy said car you would have even more money with which to pay off your credit card debt. Do people actually buy into this stuff?
-I plan to read up on the situation a little more, so forgive me (and let me know)if I have missed a big point, but I say 'Right On' to Google for refusing to turn over user records to the government. I have no illusions about how much of my personal info is actually accessible, but at least somebody is taking a bit of a stand. Would Google have to reveal any proprietary info that competitors would like to see as part of their cooperation? I suppose that would be reason enough to keep things private.
-Glad to see NBC finally pulled the plug on the West Wing. It has been slowly dying for the last three seasons. I haven't stopped watching because I really enjoy the characters, but it gets tougher every week to slog through these tedious storylines. It's a shame too, because the first three or four seasons were fantastic. Despite disagreeing with most of the politics I loved the crisp dialouge and well-crafted stories.
-Heard a radio spot for a local car dealership advising people to buy a car here because "with the money you save you can pay off your credit card debt." Am I missing something? Perhaps if you don't buy said car you would have even more money with which to pay off your credit card debt. Do people actually buy into this stuff?
-I plan to read up on the situation a little more, so forgive me (and let me know)if I have missed a big point, but I say 'Right On' to Google for refusing to turn over user records to the government. I have no illusions about how much of my personal info is actually accessible, but at least somebody is taking a bit of a stand. Would Google have to reveal any proprietary info that competitors would like to see as part of their cooperation? I suppose that would be reason enough to keep things private.
Saturday, January 21, 2006
It's Official:I'm A Loser
Okay, I admit it. I have a problem. I am not apologizing for it, mind you, just admitting it. I Despite the fact that I can feel my IQ dropping every time I watch it, I love ABC's Dancing with the Stars. I wish I could say I was stuck watching with my wife or that I had a gun to my head or that I was part of some well-paid focus group. But no, I just like it. Go ahead and laugh. I deserve it.
I usually hate most reality shows, especially ones with judges. I don't enjoy the judges on this one either and I certainly don't vote for my favorite star (A term to be used quite loosely with this group). I also cringe everytime the host, that Hollywood Squares guy, opens his mouth. I'd love to know what that guy's thinking everytime he has to read some lame intro or banter with some has-been. I bet it's something like, "Not again. Thank God I only have one more kid to put through college".
But even with all these troubles, I still love it. The music is great, the dancing is really athletic and intricate and the female dancers wear skimpy outfits. It has the perfect amount of cheesiness to it. On Friday they did some crazy 8 person ballroom dance to the Rocky theme song. I defy you to top that for cheesiness.
Besides, to paraphrase that old saying about Elvis, millions of people can't all be wrong, can they? Can they?
I usually hate most reality shows, especially ones with judges. I don't enjoy the judges on this one either and I certainly don't vote for my favorite star (A term to be used quite loosely with this group). I also cringe everytime the host, that Hollywood Squares guy, opens his mouth. I'd love to know what that guy's thinking everytime he has to read some lame intro or banter with some has-been. I bet it's something like, "Not again. Thank God I only have one more kid to put through college".
But even with all these troubles, I still love it. The music is great, the dancing is really athletic and intricate and the female dancers wear skimpy outfits. It has the perfect amount of cheesiness to it. On Friday they did some crazy 8 person ballroom dance to the Rocky theme song. I defy you to top that for cheesiness.
Besides, to paraphrase that old saying about Elvis, millions of people can't all be wrong, can they? Can they?
Thanks
Thanks to everybody who commented on my early posts. It's cool to know some eyeballs actually checked out my site.
Thursday, January 19, 2006
Putting the fan in fanatic
My friend, Killer(always opinionated, often thought-provoking, sometimes controversial), recently announced that he will no longer be rooting for specific sports teams. Apparently, a New Year's Day debacle involving both the Washington Capitals and Philadelphia Eagles stinking up their respective joints led to this epiphany. He now vows to watch sports with a non-partisan detachment. While I figure Killer will be back on somebody's bandwagon eventually, he does raise an interesting question: Why do sports fans invest so much time, energy and passion in cheering for specific teams?
I have no good answer to this question because logically it doesn't make sense to care so much. If you take gamblers and alumni out of the equation, what reason would a fan have to take the outcomes of games so personally? When it comes down to it aren't sports clubs just a collection of overpaid strangers? I can marvel at the athletic feats, but why do I care who can do them better? My life is no better if the Cowboys make the playoffs and no worse if the Caps lose by five goals tonight. The outcome really does not affect me in any tangible way.
Maybe we care because of civic pride. Yet, in this era of sports as big business, you'd be hard pressed to find more than a handful of players in each city who give a damn about the city or the fans. Don't get me wrong; I have civic pride. If Maryland goes to war with Pennsylvania you can bet I'll root for Maryland to kick some ass, but that doesn't mean I should care if the Orioles beat the snot out of the Phillies.
Maybe it is escapism. I think fans live vicariously through players in this culture of celebrity that we have created. It's the same reason people watch Entertainment Tonight to see what/who Paris Hilton and Brad Pitt are doing.
Maybe it's rooting for or against certain people. I root against South Carolina because Steve Spurrier is a jerk. I root against the Yankees because A-Rod is arrogant and because most of their fans are obnoxious. This reason makes sense to me. (Although, it begs the question: How do I know Steve Spurrier is a jerk or that A-Rod is arrogant? Have I ever met them? Of course not. I'm just making assumptions based on brief sound bites and newspaper stories. It always cracks me up when I catch myself saying I hate somebody that I've never met.)
My wife always rolls her eyes when I fling the remote or punch the couch when something "bad" happens to my team. I can't explain to her why I pace around the living room when Drew Bledsoe throws an interception or why my friends and I were hugging and shrieking like a bunch of cheerleaders when Joe Juneau's OT goal sent the Caps to the Stanley Cup Finals back in '98. And don't even get me started about soccer riots, curses or cities that set themselves on fire when they win a championship.
None of it makes sense, yet I will continue to cheer for my team, wearing my lucky shirt, sitting on the edge of my seat hoping some dude, who I'll never meet, makes a free-throw so that a team that I neither own nor work for can win a game that has no bearing on my life. So, honey, hide the remote and put in your earplugs; the Caps game starts in few minutes.
I have no good answer to this question because logically it doesn't make sense to care so much. If you take gamblers and alumni out of the equation, what reason would a fan have to take the outcomes of games so personally? When it comes down to it aren't sports clubs just a collection of overpaid strangers? I can marvel at the athletic feats, but why do I care who can do them better? My life is no better if the Cowboys make the playoffs and no worse if the Caps lose by five goals tonight. The outcome really does not affect me in any tangible way.
Maybe we care because of civic pride. Yet, in this era of sports as big business, you'd be hard pressed to find more than a handful of players in each city who give a damn about the city or the fans. Don't get me wrong; I have civic pride. If Maryland goes to war with Pennsylvania you can bet I'll root for Maryland to kick some ass, but that doesn't mean I should care if the Orioles beat the snot out of the Phillies.
Maybe it is escapism. I think fans live vicariously through players in this culture of celebrity that we have created. It's the same reason people watch Entertainment Tonight to see what/who Paris Hilton and Brad Pitt are doing.
Maybe it's rooting for or against certain people. I root against South Carolina because Steve Spurrier is a jerk. I root against the Yankees because A-Rod is arrogant and because most of their fans are obnoxious. This reason makes sense to me. (Although, it begs the question: How do I know Steve Spurrier is a jerk or that A-Rod is arrogant? Have I ever met them? Of course not. I'm just making assumptions based on brief sound bites and newspaper stories. It always cracks me up when I catch myself saying I hate somebody that I've never met.)
My wife always rolls her eyes when I fling the remote or punch the couch when something "bad" happens to my team. I can't explain to her why I pace around the living room when Drew Bledsoe throws an interception or why my friends and I were hugging and shrieking like a bunch of cheerleaders when Joe Juneau's OT goal sent the Caps to the Stanley Cup Finals back in '98. And don't even get me started about soccer riots, curses or cities that set themselves on fire when they win a championship.
None of it makes sense, yet I will continue to cheer for my team, wearing my lucky shirt, sitting on the edge of my seat hoping some dude, who I'll never meet, makes a free-throw so that a team that I neither own nor work for can win a game that has no bearing on my life. So, honey, hide the remote and put in your earplugs; the Caps game starts in few minutes.
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
Eight is Great
I know it involved some luck, but Alexander Ovechkin's goal on Monday was pretty amazing. If you haven't seen it, check it out.
Ovechkin's Amazing Goal
Ovechkin's Amazing Goal
SHOCKWAVE
I just finished an outstanding book that recounts the weeks leading up to the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I saw it on the library shelf and decided to pick it up because I didn't know much about the bombings. Stephen Walker's Shockwave reveals the thinking of the bomb builders, politicians on both sides of the war, airmen who carried out the missions and some survivors. It is a detailed and gut-wrenching examination of the moral implications of pushing into the atomic age. It shows the horrors of war without being judgemental and explains the reasoning behind the decisions.
I'm also fascinated by the way the scientists who ran The Manhattan Project had sort of split feelings. On one hand, they were conceiving and creating new technology and literally "changing the world". On the other hand, they knew the destructive power of their creation. Some of the men, upon learning that the bomb actually worked, immediately tried to dissuade Truman and his generals from ever using it.
Very cool book about an incredible and sad chapter in US miltary history.
I'm also fascinated by the way the scientists who ran The Manhattan Project had sort of split feelings. On one hand, they were conceiving and creating new technology and literally "changing the world". On the other hand, they knew the destructive power of their creation. Some of the men, upon learning that the bomb actually worked, immediately tried to dissuade Truman and his generals from ever using it.
Very cool book about an incredible and sad chapter in US miltary history.