GM has taken the week off, and I came close. That's what I'm thankful for.
My Thanksgiving visit to my parents has left me with no quick Internet access, so don’t expect any links. The same visit, however (picture George Costanza hanging out with parents Frank and Estelle), has brought some holiday memories back into focus, and I’ll get to those later.
It’s a shame when college and NFL coaches make decisions so irrational that we’re forced to post about them, but if our irritation powers this blog (and it does), then we have to take our fuel where we can get it. Saturday afternoon, I watched my virtual wallet shrink (LSU got 4 ½ points at Ole Miss!) as Les Miles deprived his team of a chance to win outright—the outcome I depended upon. Sure, the fact that he tried to spike the ball in less than one second of clock time on the road was ludicrous, but others have already made that point. Also, there’s the obvious curiosity one would have about why he waited so long to call timeout before the 4th-and-forever conversion. There are a few more complaints on this stakeholder’s end, though:
1. You don’t try an onside kick with 6 minutes left in the first half after you just went up 8 thanks to a stadium-deflating 50-yard field goal. Really! When Ole Miss got the ball with incredible field position, the card-carrying Klan members at Vaught-Hemingway were somewhere between confused and uninterested. It wasn’t until the Rebels scored the ensuing touchdown that anyone cheered! Now that’s a deflated crowd.
2. You don’t give your sack-loving, slowest-fit-black-man-alive, ankle-hampered quarterback a chance to take a sack on second down when you’re already in field-goal range. I’m not saying don’t pass, but don’t let him drop back.
3. You don’t follow up the sack with a slow-developing play in the flat.
4. You don’t call the fade when going for two to tie it. I hate the fade when you’re inside the 10! Hate it. And thanks to a penalty the first time, he tried it twice.
5. Finally, I’ve watched an embarrassing amount of football at levels below NCAA Division I. Those teams are completely capable of switching out the offense for the field-goal unit in the time LSU was given. So… you don’t tell the CBS sideline reporter that you didn’t think you had time to do it. Some of us know better.
How’s this for a pro-style blunder? Down by 2 with more than 2 minutes remaining against the best team in the conference, Ravens coach John Harbaugh called a timeout so he could consider whether or not he wanted to challenge what was clearly and absolutely a correct first-down spot for the Colts. He then challenged and, of course, lost a second timeout—his last. When Baltimore got the ball back, Ed Reed turned it over on the punt return, but better clock management (or understanding of the rules) would have given them close to 2 minutes! You don’t call a timeout and then challenge—ever! Have I mentioned that it bothers me that guys who get paid heftily to make intelligent decisions can’t do so late in games?
Now for some Thanksgiving memories. This won’t take long because it was the same every year. My parents, brother, sister, and I would drive down to Ripley, Mississippi (population: our maternal extended family). If we were lucky, we wouldn’t beat the Lions’ kickoff there. We’d see Aunt Sarah (pronounced SAY-ruh ‘round those parts), the lady of the house, in the kitchen preparing the driest turkey you’ve ever had in your life. Then we’d pass a couple dozen people who looked familiar but whose names we couldn’t come up with even if everyone promised to quit walking in front of the TV. My brother and I could typically find ways to identify people. There were the blonde-haired brothers with mullets, the woman with Victorian-style/1970s glasses, the diabetic guy who clucks, the woman who wore the same pair of white Keds and a tacky Christmas sweater every year, the guy with the beard who didn’t like football, the chain-smoking couple with massive noses, the resentful teenage girl, the fat conspiracy theorist, and the guy who was obsessed with the newest television/speaker technology. We were related to every last one of these people, but if they came to my brother’s wedding, he sure didn’t know how they got there. After a remarkably cold potluck meal in which everything had the texture of Jell-O, we would avoid the crowd by making our way upstairs and inevitably digging into the 1974 edition of the Guinness Book of World Records.
“Can you believe this? A guy walked 27 miles while balancing a full milk bottle on his nose!”
“Cluck,” remarked the gentleman to my right.
-JW
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Friday, November 20, 2009
Allen Iverson: He Wasn't Quite Good Enough, He's Not Quite Gone
JW,
Now that Allen Iverson has retired (note: signing with the Knicks doesn't count as a comeback), let's take a moment and put his career and inglorious exit in context. I'll start by saying that when future historians tell his story (and I know they will), I hope they include last Saturday's article in The Onion:
Memphis Grizzlies Continue To Insist They Have 5 Players Better Than Allen Iverson.
Has any story, satirical or not, ever captured a situation so perfectly? Take a look at some of its excerpts:
"We're really confident about the decision to put Mike Conley, Zach Randolph, Rudy Gay, O.J. Mayo, and Marc Gasol on the floor instead of Iverson," general manager Chris Wallace said of his starters, who combined have appeared in 10 fewer NBA All-Star games than the former No. 1 draft pick.
"[Marcus Williams has] been coming off the bench and putting up 4.4 points a game. He wowed us when he scored seven the other night."
Funny stuff, right? And yet the fictionalized (sort of) version of Chris Wallace has inadvertently hit upon a key truth. You really are better off playing crappy rookies and young guys, seeing what you've got, and getting a lottery pick than you are winning 41 meaningless games with A.I. and sneaking into the playoffs. Yeah, it's an NBA problem, but it's an Iverson problem, too. He's a ball hog. He's moody and ridiculous. He absolutely could never have won a championship without more help than Kobe had last year. Throw in the fact that his vaguely funny "practice" bit has become one of the all time most annoying pieces of self-referential fluff that ESPN anchors have ever filled air time with and you've got a career that, on balance, has got to be considered a waste.
But that's just me. Where do you rank the guy?
-GM
GM,
While you were writing, ESPN reported that the Knicks have decided not to offer Iverson a contract. GM Donnie Walsh said the decision "has nothing to do with Iverson." I don't see how a decision not to sign a player could have nothing to do with the player. I mean, certainly a 2-9 team would be willing to sign somebody if he were the right fit. The problem is that Allen Iverson isn't the right fit for anyone--not for anyone trying to win a championship, not for anyone trying to build its team into a contender. Not just now, but for his career, he's a remarkably talented athlete whose buckets are more entertaining than just about anyone's. His career field goal percentage of 41 percent is well below league average, as is his listed 6-foot height, which requires that a team's other guard be 6-foot-5 or better. What part of that sounds like a guy who really helps a team?
"He'll never win a championship," I said in 2001 after he won the MVP and took a completely mediocre team to the NBA Finals out of a historically weak Eastern Conference. "Neither will Tracy McGrady, Vince Carter, or Stephon Marbury as long as they're the offensive focal points of their teams." It's just impossible to build teams around these guys. The 2004 Olympics showed us that you can't even win a gold medal with Iverson as your offensive leader.
My team committed two of the three worst trades I've seen in my lifetime--trades that smart fans knew were idiotic the moment they happened. In chronological order, they go:
1. Jason Kidd (to Nets) for Stephon Marbury (to Suns)
2. Shawn Marion (to Heat) for Shaq (to Suns)
3. Chauncey Billups (to Nuggets) for Allen Iverson (to Pistons)
Sure, Iverson could probably beat Billups in a one-on-one game, but everyone knew that Billups was one of the best team players in the game while Iverson destroyed team chemistry. The results were even more lopsided than I expected. Billups actually received some MVP talk while making the Nuggets one of the four best teams in the NBA. Iverson ended up on the bench--complaining--for a team that had been a dynasty and all of a sudden became a lame-duck eighth seed. He winds up in Memphis because no one else was dumb enough to sign him, and he starts complaining again. If the Grizzlies can realize it, maybe the whole league can. It's doubtful that he'll never play again, but it's certain he'll never see significant time in another playoff game. Teams finally know better.
-JW
Now that Allen Iverson has retired (note: signing with the Knicks doesn't count as a comeback), let's take a moment and put his career and inglorious exit in context. I'll start by saying that when future historians tell his story (and I know they will), I hope they include last Saturday's article in The Onion:
Memphis Grizzlies Continue To Insist They Have 5 Players Better Than Allen Iverson.
Has any story, satirical or not, ever captured a situation so perfectly? Take a look at some of its excerpts:
"We're really confident about the decision to put Mike Conley, Zach Randolph, Rudy Gay, O.J. Mayo, and Marc Gasol on the floor instead of Iverson," general manager Chris Wallace said of his starters, who combined have appeared in 10 fewer NBA All-Star games than the former No. 1 draft pick.
"[Marcus Williams has] been coming off the bench and putting up 4.4 points a game. He wowed us when he scored seven the other night."
Funny stuff, right? And yet the fictionalized (sort of) version of Chris Wallace has inadvertently hit upon a key truth. You really are better off playing crappy rookies and young guys, seeing what you've got, and getting a lottery pick than you are winning 41 meaningless games with A.I. and sneaking into the playoffs. Yeah, it's an NBA problem, but it's an Iverson problem, too. He's a ball hog. He's moody and ridiculous. He absolutely could never have won a championship without more help than Kobe had last year. Throw in the fact that his vaguely funny "practice" bit has become one of the all time most annoying pieces of self-referential fluff that ESPN anchors have ever filled air time with and you've got a career that, on balance, has got to be considered a waste.
But that's just me. Where do you rank the guy?
-GM
GM,
While you were writing, ESPN reported that the Knicks have decided not to offer Iverson a contract. GM Donnie Walsh said the decision "has nothing to do with Iverson." I don't see how a decision not to sign a player could have nothing to do with the player. I mean, certainly a 2-9 team would be willing to sign somebody if he were the right fit. The problem is that Allen Iverson isn't the right fit for anyone--not for anyone trying to win a championship, not for anyone trying to build its team into a contender. Not just now, but for his career, he's a remarkably talented athlete whose buckets are more entertaining than just about anyone's. His career field goal percentage of 41 percent is well below league average, as is his listed 6-foot height, which requires that a team's other guard be 6-foot-5 or better. What part of that sounds like a guy who really helps a team?
"He'll never win a championship," I said in 2001 after he won the MVP and took a completely mediocre team to the NBA Finals out of a historically weak Eastern Conference. "Neither will Tracy McGrady, Vince Carter, or Stephon Marbury as long as they're the offensive focal points of their teams." It's just impossible to build teams around these guys. The 2004 Olympics showed us that you can't even win a gold medal with Iverson as your offensive leader.
My team committed two of the three worst trades I've seen in my lifetime--trades that smart fans knew were idiotic the moment they happened. In chronological order, they go:
1. Jason Kidd (to Nets) for Stephon Marbury (to Suns)
2. Shawn Marion (to Heat) for Shaq (to Suns)
3. Chauncey Billups (to Nuggets) for Allen Iverson (to Pistons)
Sure, Iverson could probably beat Billups in a one-on-one game, but everyone knew that Billups was one of the best team players in the game while Iverson destroyed team chemistry. The results were even more lopsided than I expected. Billups actually received some MVP talk while making the Nuggets one of the four best teams in the NBA. Iverson ended up on the bench--complaining--for a team that had been a dynasty and all of a sudden became a lame-duck eighth seed. He winds up in Memphis because no one else was dumb enough to sign him, and he starts complaining again. If the Grizzlies can realize it, maybe the whole league can. It's doubtful that he'll never play again, but it's certain he'll never see significant time in another playoff game. Teams finally know better.
-JW
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Homelessness: A Smarter Look at the Last Social Cohort We Haven't Yet Insulted
GM,
Walking through the downtown streets yesterday evening, I was approached by two homeless gentlemen, the first of which--an unkempt white man--successfully drained me of my change. This was an unlucky break for the second guy, although I must say he seemed to be in better shape. It was sprinkling, and he had a windbreaker and an umbrella, plus his attitude was about as dynamic as a sorority girl's the night of a themed social. I truthfully told him I was out of cash, to which he replied, "I know how it is, brother." Then his cell phone rang.
I'm no authority on personal finances, but do homeless people really need cell phones. You're a homeowner, GM, and you don't even have a cell phone! And if homeless people are to buy cell phones, shouldn't they turn them on silent while begging? A guy from New York once told me that many of the beggars there aren't even homeless--that they wake up in their downtown lofts, walk to a busy spot, and make $200-300 tax-free dollars a day before returning home. If that's true, perhaps panhandling should be more highly prioritized when making career choices.
I have mixed views on the homeless. There are stories of triumph, stories of gloom, and stories that flat-out prove the theory that it's mostly the result of laziness. I think the proper outlook is this: There will be losers in any capitalist society, but to be a complete loser in this capitalist society, you have to be pretty damn lazy.
Got any stories for me?
-JW
JW,
I keep waiting for the Obama administration to make a policy announcement that goes something like this: "We need to encourage home sales, we don't like homelessness, and we're totally comfortable printing money that's backed up by nothing. From now on, every homeless person in America gets a free house."
But seriously, I love the homeless! From whom else can you hear stories like "My wife was kidnapped and I'm two bucks short of the ransom" (actually heard), "Today's National Homeless Day and the city is matching all contributions" (actually heard), and "I know I look twenty years older than you, but I'm actually your illegitimate child" (okay, I made that one up)? Without homelessness, my already low self-esteem would be totally shot to hell. After all, I often go days at a time without eating garbage, groveling, or being outside. Why shouldn't my obvious superiority make me feel great?
I wonder, by the way, if that wasn't the mindset of the guy featured in your last link--the guy who started out with $25 and the clothes on his back and worked his way toward an apartment and some modest savings. Sure, he had some philosophical questions about the feasability of the American Dream, but he also wanted the ego boost (not to mention the royalties from his inevitable New York Times bestseller). Yeah, he was interested in an adventure, but the real truth is that feigning homelessness was the best-paying job his bachelors-degreed ass could find.
The deeper truth, of course, is that nothing anyone says or does will ever put an end to homelessness, poverty, racism, income inequality, or the tendency of Americans to make meaningless, guilt-induced gestures. As long as that's the case, I don't mind that your cell-phone carrying buddy is making a profit.
Walking through the downtown streets yesterday evening, I was approached by two homeless gentlemen, the first of which--an unkempt white man--successfully drained me of my change. This was an unlucky break for the second guy, although I must say he seemed to be in better shape. It was sprinkling, and he had a windbreaker and an umbrella, plus his attitude was about as dynamic as a sorority girl's the night of a themed social. I truthfully told him I was out of cash, to which he replied, "I know how it is, brother." Then his cell phone rang.
I'm no authority on personal finances, but do homeless people really need cell phones. You're a homeowner, GM, and you don't even have a cell phone! And if homeless people are to buy cell phones, shouldn't they turn them on silent while begging? A guy from New York once told me that many of the beggars there aren't even homeless--that they wake up in their downtown lofts, walk to a busy spot, and make $200-300 tax-free dollars a day before returning home. If that's true, perhaps panhandling should be more highly prioritized when making career choices.
I have mixed views on the homeless. There are stories of triumph, stories of gloom, and stories that flat-out prove the theory that it's mostly the result of laziness. I think the proper outlook is this: There will be losers in any capitalist society, but to be a complete loser in this capitalist society, you have to be pretty damn lazy.
Got any stories for me?
-JW
JW,
I keep waiting for the Obama administration to make a policy announcement that goes something like this: "We need to encourage home sales, we don't like homelessness, and we're totally comfortable printing money that's backed up by nothing. From now on, every homeless person in America gets a free house."
But seriously, I love the homeless! From whom else can you hear stories like "My wife was kidnapped and I'm two bucks short of the ransom" (actually heard), "Today's National Homeless Day and the city is matching all contributions" (actually heard), and "I know I look twenty years older than you, but I'm actually your illegitimate child" (okay, I made that one up)? Without homelessness, my already low self-esteem would be totally shot to hell. After all, I often go days at a time without eating garbage, groveling, or being outside. Why shouldn't my obvious superiority make me feel great?
I wonder, by the way, if that wasn't the mindset of the guy featured in your last link--the guy who started out with $25 and the clothes on his back and worked his way toward an apartment and some modest savings. Sure, he had some philosophical questions about the feasability of the American Dream, but he also wanted the ego boost (not to mention the royalties from his inevitable New York Times bestseller). Yeah, he was interested in an adventure, but the real truth is that feigning homelessness was the best-paying job his bachelors-degreed ass could find.
The deeper truth, of course, is that nothing anyone says or does will ever put an end to homelessness, poverty, racism, income inequality, or the tendency of Americans to make meaningless, guilt-induced gestures. As long as that's the case, I don't mind that your cell-phone carrying buddy is making a profit.
-GM
Monday, November 16, 2009
The Call: An Apology
GM,
I emotionally hedged the Patriots/Colts game last night, and the payout was huge. Huge! After watching my Dolphins try their best to give away a game against the Buccaneers but pull it out in the end, I decided I was willing to pay for a New England loss. I took the Pats +2.5, which is very similar to what I did in the 2007 (2006 season) AFC championship game. And while that historic playoff collapse was perhaps my favorite of all time, it cost me money. Last night's result, a one-point win for Indianapolis, helped my wallet, helped the Dolphins' playoff chances, and gave the media a full week to criticize Bill Belichick's coaching decision. What's funny, though, is that I almost always agree with the evil emperor's 4th-down/clock management; I even agreed with that call--the one to go for it on 4th-and-2 from his own 30 with two minutes left and a six-point lead. I'll admit, though, that his burning of two timeouts prior to that was unjustifiable.
Before we get into that, let's rewind a few hours to the end of the Jets/Jaguars affair. Down a point with just under two minutes to go, Maurice Jones-Drew downed himself at the Jets' 1-yard line when he easily could have scored. First of all, why was it so easy? It was easy because Rex Ryan, who also seems to have a more functional brain than most head coaches, instructed his defense to let the Jags score as quickly as possible. Jones-Drew took the knee (on the advice of RB coach Kennedy Polu if you believe this nonsensical tweet from ESPN's Chris Mortensen) so that his team could kneel the ball three times, exhaust clock and the Jets' timeouts, and kick a game-winning field goal with no time left. It worked perfectly.
ESPN's Tom Jackson was infuriated--with both teams. I'm paraphrasing, but the complaint went something like this: "I wouldn't trust my kicking unit in that situation. When you can score, you score. The Jaguars were behind in the game, and when you're behind, you shouldn't get all cute with your strategy. I'm even more irritated with the Jets for trying to let them score a touchdown. Anything can happen if you play defense."
Well, Tom, welcome to 2009. In fact, welcome to math. Which is more likely: a 20-yard field goal going wrong or a two-minute drill resulting in a touchdown? Both coaches knew that it was the latter, so both coaches played accordingly. In late-game situations, you should never do what your opponents' smart fans want you to do. And of course, if I were a Jets fan, I would have been screaming, "Score now!" at the television.
If I were a Colts fan, I would have been thinking: "Perfect. Punt it to us with two minutes left. We'll start from our own 25, and Peyton will march down the field and score with no time left for Brady." Belichick didn't trust his defense--and with good reason. I still love the fact that all the analysts will kill Belichick for this. Sure, he's the only current NFL coach with three rings and endless job security, and he's the only one who would have made that decision. But if you think Tom Jackson was mad before...
-JW
JW,
You stole my thunder. Yes, Belichick made the right call, and yes, he'll be killed for it. As I've argued before, giving Peyton Manning more than fifteen seconds to gyrate, squeal, and rinky-dink his way down the field is a recipe for disaster, be it eighty yards or eighteen. The fact of the matter is that the Pats weren't winning that game unless they converted the fourth down, and their inability to challenge the play was just bad luck.
What I fail to understand is why New England didn't employ the aforementioned New York Jets strategy after turning the ball over on downs. Look at the play-by-play again. From 1st and 10 at their own 14, the Pats allowed Joseph Addai to run all the way to the one yard line before inexplicably tackling him. On 1st and Goal from the 1, they tackled him again. Let him score on either of those and you've got a chance. Stop him and you've got none. I'm so impressed by Manning at this point (damn him), I can't help wondering if that run from the 1 was mere strategy. It was Joseph Addai, after all, and now that Larry Johnson has retired, no back in the league gives you a better chance at no gain. Short yardage to Wayne is pretty much automatic, so why not intentionally waste a down?
Looking back, I think I'll remember my certainty more than anything. Down two touchdowns with four minutes to play, I knew for a fact that Indianapolis was winning that game. The last time I felt that way about them was during the 2006 season. We should probably be expecting the same result.
-GM
I emotionally hedged the Patriots/Colts game last night, and the payout was huge. Huge! After watching my Dolphins try their best to give away a game against the Buccaneers but pull it out in the end, I decided I was willing to pay for a New England loss. I took the Pats +2.5, which is very similar to what I did in the 2007 (2006 season) AFC championship game. And while that historic playoff collapse was perhaps my favorite of all time, it cost me money. Last night's result, a one-point win for Indianapolis, helped my wallet, helped the Dolphins' playoff chances, and gave the media a full week to criticize Bill Belichick's coaching decision. What's funny, though, is that I almost always agree with the evil emperor's 4th-down/clock management; I even agreed with that call--the one to go for it on 4th-and-2 from his own 30 with two minutes left and a six-point lead. I'll admit, though, that his burning of two timeouts prior to that was unjustifiable.
Before we get into that, let's rewind a few hours to the end of the Jets/Jaguars affair. Down a point with just under two minutes to go, Maurice Jones-Drew downed himself at the Jets' 1-yard line when he easily could have scored. First of all, why was it so easy? It was easy because Rex Ryan, who also seems to have a more functional brain than most head coaches, instructed his defense to let the Jags score as quickly as possible. Jones-Drew took the knee (on the advice of RB coach Kennedy Polu if you believe this nonsensical tweet from ESPN's Chris Mortensen) so that his team could kneel the ball three times, exhaust clock and the Jets' timeouts, and kick a game-winning field goal with no time left. It worked perfectly.
ESPN's Tom Jackson was infuriated--with both teams. I'm paraphrasing, but the complaint went something like this: "I wouldn't trust my kicking unit in that situation. When you can score, you score. The Jaguars were behind in the game, and when you're behind, you shouldn't get all cute with your strategy. I'm even more irritated with the Jets for trying to let them score a touchdown. Anything can happen if you play defense."
Well, Tom, welcome to 2009. In fact, welcome to math. Which is more likely: a 20-yard field goal going wrong or a two-minute drill resulting in a touchdown? Both coaches knew that it was the latter, so both coaches played accordingly. In late-game situations, you should never do what your opponents' smart fans want you to do. And of course, if I were a Jets fan, I would have been screaming, "Score now!" at the television.
If I were a Colts fan, I would have been thinking: "Perfect. Punt it to us with two minutes left. We'll start from our own 25, and Peyton will march down the field and score with no time left for Brady." Belichick didn't trust his defense--and with good reason. I still love the fact that all the analysts will kill Belichick for this. Sure, he's the only current NFL coach with three rings and endless job security, and he's the only one who would have made that decision. But if you think Tom Jackson was mad before...
-JW
JW,
You stole my thunder. Yes, Belichick made the right call, and yes, he'll be killed for it. As I've argued before, giving Peyton Manning more than fifteen seconds to gyrate, squeal, and rinky-dink his way down the field is a recipe for disaster, be it eighty yards or eighteen. The fact of the matter is that the Pats weren't winning that game unless they converted the fourth down, and their inability to challenge the play was just bad luck.
What I fail to understand is why New England didn't employ the aforementioned New York Jets strategy after turning the ball over on downs. Look at the play-by-play again. From 1st and 10 at their own 14, the Pats allowed Joseph Addai to run all the way to the one yard line before inexplicably tackling him. On 1st and Goal from the 1, they tackled him again. Let him score on either of those and you've got a chance. Stop him and you've got none. I'm so impressed by Manning at this point (damn him), I can't help wondering if that run from the 1 was mere strategy. It was Joseph Addai, after all, and now that Larry Johnson has retired, no back in the league gives you a better chance at no gain. Short yardage to Wayne is pretty much automatic, so why not intentionally waste a down?
Looking back, I think I'll remember my certainty more than anything. Down two touchdowns with four minutes to play, I knew for a fact that Indianapolis was winning that game. The last time I felt that way about them was during the 2006 season. We should probably be expecting the same result.
-GM
Friday, November 13, 2009
I Wanted the NFL. I WENT to the NFL. And the NFL Sucked.
JW,
Last night, those of us (un)lucky enough to get the NFL Network witnessed one of the all-time lousy performances by a quarterback. Five interceptions, zero touchdowns, seventeen completely unwarranted sneers and sniffles, and one entirely avoidable loss. Cutler's play was so bad that I considered the alternate titles "Cutler: An Evisceration" and "Cutler: Stop Throwing Picks, You Weak-Chinned Bitch" before settling on what you just read. And while I'm sure that the coming weeks will give us some tempting lines, I'm ready to declare that I will never, ever wager on #6 again.
The really perverse thing, when you think about it, is that the general level of excitement for Chicago's season as recently as two months ago was notably higher than it was for Denver's. Kyle Orton was a career backup--a guy who couldn't take Rex Grossman's job, for heaven's sake--and Cutler was the Pro Bowler ready to break out on a team that wanted him. (A side note: Enough with the Cutler Pro Bowl thing. Not since Zack, Slater, and Screech spent an eight-episode arc in Maui has so much been made over one trip to Hawaii.) Now? Orton's the ultimate game manager and the guy who helped bring Brandon Marshall back into the fold. Denver wouldn't trade Orton back to Chicago for a deal twice as good as the original, and Cutler's heading for numbers that would get Jake Delhomme benched. (According to Wikipedia, Cutler does volunteer work with mentally challenged young people. And copies their throwing motions, apparently.)
Strangely enough, though, I found myself believing that Cutler would pull off the win last night even while knowing everything I just wrote. When he marched the Bears down the field at the end of the fourth quarter (Perhaps "marched" is the wrong word--we haven't seen a two-minute drill this ugly since the last time JaMarcus Russell went three-and-out against his practice squad), I allowed myself to hope that he'd make a miracle happen. I was actually a bit surprised when he threw that final pick.
JW, I'm going out on a limb and guessing you didn't watch this disaster of a football game. Any sports related idiocy you'd like to talk about?
-GM
GM,
Honestly, no.
I have, however, recently come across some information that completely shook the foundation of my mentality! (It surprised me.)
1. The Colts' coach is black?! I was sure it was this guy! I remember some ESPN guys talking about how they had been planning on promoting him as soon as Dungy retired, and I've seen that guy (offensive coordinator Tom Moore) on the sidelines many times. Turns out it's Jim Caldwell who's the head man in Indy--well, behind Peyton, of course.
2. Adam Morrison plays for the Lakers?! OK, it didn't surprise me that the Bobcats wanted to get rid of this schmohawk, but why would the Lakers sign him?! He's a 37-percent career shooter whose only strength is shooting!
3. Twenty-year-old Corey Zickefoose said that the three Tennessee football players who allegedly (shouldn't he know?) held him at gunpoint should remain on the football team and that he has no plans to press charges. He's such a UT fan that he only wants what's best for the team! I don't want to insult a recently traumatized die-hard fan, but he should revisit his list of priorities.
4. Lou Holtz's entire gimmick (assuming it's not having distracting dentures) is being the biggest homer on the planet. He picked his two former teams (Notre Dame and South Carolina) to upset No. 12 Pittsburgh and No. 1 Florida this weekend. What's the point of even watching the ESPN "experts" predict if they're going to be like that?
-JW
Last night, those of us (un)lucky enough to get the NFL Network witnessed one of the all-time lousy performances by a quarterback. Five interceptions, zero touchdowns, seventeen completely unwarranted sneers and sniffles, and one entirely avoidable loss. Cutler's play was so bad that I considered the alternate titles "Cutler: An Evisceration" and "Cutler: Stop Throwing Picks, You Weak-Chinned Bitch" before settling on what you just read. And while I'm sure that the coming weeks will give us some tempting lines, I'm ready to declare that I will never, ever wager on #6 again.
The really perverse thing, when you think about it, is that the general level of excitement for Chicago's season as recently as two months ago was notably higher than it was for Denver's. Kyle Orton was a career backup--a guy who couldn't take Rex Grossman's job, for heaven's sake--and Cutler was the Pro Bowler ready to break out on a team that wanted him. (A side note: Enough with the Cutler Pro Bowl thing. Not since Zack, Slater, and Screech spent an eight-episode arc in Maui has so much been made over one trip to Hawaii.) Now? Orton's the ultimate game manager and the guy who helped bring Brandon Marshall back into the fold. Denver wouldn't trade Orton back to Chicago for a deal twice as good as the original, and Cutler's heading for numbers that would get Jake Delhomme benched. (According to Wikipedia, Cutler does volunteer work with mentally challenged young people. And copies their throwing motions, apparently.)
Strangely enough, though, I found myself believing that Cutler would pull off the win last night even while knowing everything I just wrote. When he marched the Bears down the field at the end of the fourth quarter (Perhaps "marched" is the wrong word--we haven't seen a two-minute drill this ugly since the last time JaMarcus Russell went three-and-out against his practice squad), I allowed myself to hope that he'd make a miracle happen. I was actually a bit surprised when he threw that final pick.
JW, I'm going out on a limb and guessing you didn't watch this disaster of a football game. Any sports related idiocy you'd like to talk about?
-GM
GM,
Honestly, no.
I have, however, recently come across some information that completely shook the foundation of my mentality! (It surprised me.)
1. The Colts' coach is black?! I was sure it was this guy! I remember some ESPN guys talking about how they had been planning on promoting him as soon as Dungy retired, and I've seen that guy (offensive coordinator Tom Moore) on the sidelines many times. Turns out it's Jim Caldwell who's the head man in Indy--well, behind Peyton, of course.
2. Adam Morrison plays for the Lakers?! OK, it didn't surprise me that the Bobcats wanted to get rid of this schmohawk, but why would the Lakers sign him?! He's a 37-percent career shooter whose only strength is shooting!
3. Twenty-year-old Corey Zickefoose said that the three Tennessee football players who allegedly (shouldn't he know?) held him at gunpoint should remain on the football team and that he has no plans to press charges. He's such a UT fan that he only wants what's best for the team! I don't want to insult a recently traumatized die-hard fan, but he should revisit his list of priorities.
4. Lou Holtz's entire gimmick (assuming it's not having distracting dentures) is being the biggest homer on the planet. He picked his two former teams (Notre Dame and South Carolina) to upset No. 12 Pittsburgh and No. 1 Florida this weekend. What's the point of even watching the ESPN "experts" predict if they're going to be like that?
-JW
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Some Tricky Questions
GM,
I just answered 230 questions from a personality survey that was required just to apply for a job I won’t get. You know the type. It's one of those that makes about eight statements in 30 different ways and asks you to rate your level of agreement from “Strongly Disagree” to “Strongly Agree.” Just so the outside world can know the reason for my fleeting sanity, I’ve copied and pasted some of my favorites from the survey. Notice the numbers next to each, which represents the order in which I was asked them.
The Annoying:
213. Business decisions must be based on the assessment of facts.
215. The assessment of facts must serve as the basis for business decisions.
The Streaky Annoying:
128. In almost all situations, proven processes should not be changed.
129. It is important to experiment with new ideas in the workplace.
130. I adapt quickly to changing work situations.
131. Coworkers would describe me as someone who prefers a frequently changing work environment.
132. I have always adapted fairly easily to changes at work.
133. I adapt quickly to new work environments.
The "We don't mind insulting your intelligence" Annoying:
180. I like to see other people get ahead in the workplace.
211. I like to see other people succeed in the workplace.
The "There is no God" Annoying:
205. I feel hurt when I receive criticisms of my performance.
206. I am hurt by criticisms of my performance.
If this company actually hires me, nothing will stop me from completely wasting two hours in the first week--perhaps to blog. I want my survey time back.
-JW
JW,As a member of a field (higher education) whose job-seeker to job ratio engenders emotions that can best be described as "Kafka-esque," I sympathize with your troubles. Clearly, someone in HR is having a laugh at your expense right now, and if that joker is reading this blog, let me join the long line of people who undoubtedly hope that he'll go f--k himself. 230 questions? For every applicant? Are they trying to weed out anyone who isn't desperate?
Actually, that's exactly what they're trying to do, if my thinking is correct. We've all taken these tests, after all, but no one's ever heard the psychological validation for this kind of thing. I'm not even sure what they're looking for. Consistency? Inconsistency? The ability to finish the test while all of your instincts are shouting "stop"? And what would happen if an applicant took careful notes and managed perfect consistency, on the molecular level? While that sounds impressive, I'd be hesitant to hire someone so unphased by subtlety. What a drag around the office!
The underlying issue, of course, is that in a job market this bad, employers have way too much power to nitpick. I've been to lots of businesses, and I've interacted with several corporations, and I'm here to tell you that whatever skill this test supposedly measures is not one that is possessed by the average person in corporate America. (Don't get me started on the people to whom we outsource jobs. Yikes.)
The point is, if you don't like this test, just wait awhile. In fifty years or so, you'll be giving it out to people who want to hire you. That'll be the day.
-GM
Monday, November 9, 2009
Hasan Was a Terrorist, Dammit. We Refuse to Stop Saying So.
JW,
When I came across this article on MSN.com (via MSNBC.com and first appearing in the New York Times--and they say the Right is well-organized), I was immediately drawn to its title: Muslims at Fort Hood voice outrage. My first thought (well, my first thought after "outraged Muslims = bad news for commercial airline passengers") was that the outrage in question had to be directed toward murderer and obvious terrorist Nidal Malik Hasan. Right? It couldn't possibly be directed at the army, the West, or any other jihad-inducing Straw Man. Could it?
In fact, the article's first paragraph seems to lean in the direction of reasonableness. "Leaders of the vibrant Muslim community here," we read, "expressed outrage on Friday at the shooting rampage being laid to one of their members, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, who had become a regular attendee of prayers at the local mosque."
I could do without "vibrant"--a word used solely by white liberals to describe communities of color--but this is good stuff, right? It's exactly what we want to hear from the Muslim community right now. The problem occurs with the article's first two quotes. I'll let you decide if they sufficiently fulfill the first graph's promises.
"When a white guy shoots up a post office, they call that going postal," said Victor Benjamin II, 30, a former member of the Army. "But when a Muslim does it, they call it jihad."
. . . and . . .
"Ultimately it was Brother Nidal’s doing, but the command should be held accountable," Mr. Benjamin said.
Some outrage.
As you can imagine, the rest of the article is more of the same. Muslims fear retribution; Muslims have always "lived peacefully" with their Christian neighbors. All the way down in paragraph eleven, we get some decent condemnation ("The Islamic community strongly condemns this cowardly attack, which was particularly heinous in that it was directed at the all-volunteer army that protects our nation."), but the general thrust of the article has little to do with Hasan's actions and much to do with Islam's perceived grievances.
Looking again at the first paragraph, in fact, I can't help wondering what the phrase "being laid to" is all about. It's syntactically unfamiliar--unidiomatic, even--and it reads very much like "being blamed on." It wouldn't be a problem if we were dealing with a situation in which blame was at all negotiable, but Hasan clearly shot those people. He was himself shot while doing so. The idea--a mere rhetorical seed, but a potent one--that, looking around for some place to lay blame, we settled on a Muslim is an absurdity. This is the guy! He did it!
Nevertheless, the "coverage" of the shootings has been dominated by breathless concern for soldiers' breaking points (try here and here for two examples among many), as if Hasan is in any way the moral or factual equivalent of actual veterans (he never saw combat) returning from actual wars (he was never deployed).
Of course, that's nothing compared to the morally bankrupt ending of our original article:
"[Muslims] do have the right to retaliate," [Victor Benjamin] said, "but he who does not is twice blessed."
Chilling.
-GM
GM,
According to the article, yes, the outrage was directed toward Hasan with a very quick "but" to follow. The fact that a guy named Victor Benjamin II is sharing in their sentiment--that Hasan's action may be a product of extreme burnout or trauma--would seem strange to me if I didn't already know so many Americans who seek to apologize for everyone else first. I realize that people can't be expected to produce off-the-cuff statements that completely reflect their actual views, but I would like to explore this Benjamin quote simply because it seems so misguided:
When I came across this article on MSN.com (via MSNBC.com and first appearing in the New York Times--and they say the Right is well-organized), I was immediately drawn to its title: Muslims at Fort Hood voice outrage. My first thought (well, my first thought after "outraged Muslims = bad news for commercial airline passengers") was that the outrage in question had to be directed toward murderer and obvious terrorist Nidal Malik Hasan. Right? It couldn't possibly be directed at the army, the West, or any other jihad-inducing Straw Man. Could it?
In fact, the article's first paragraph seems to lean in the direction of reasonableness. "Leaders of the vibrant Muslim community here," we read, "expressed outrage on Friday at the shooting rampage being laid to one of their members, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, who had become a regular attendee of prayers at the local mosque."
I could do without "vibrant"--a word used solely by white liberals to describe communities of color--but this is good stuff, right? It's exactly what we want to hear from the Muslim community right now. The problem occurs with the article's first two quotes. I'll let you decide if they sufficiently fulfill the first graph's promises.
"When a white guy shoots up a post office, they call that going postal," said Victor Benjamin II, 30, a former member of the Army. "But when a Muslim does it, they call it jihad."
. . . and . . .
"Ultimately it was Brother Nidal’s doing, but the command should be held accountable," Mr. Benjamin said.
Some outrage.
As you can imagine, the rest of the article is more of the same. Muslims fear retribution; Muslims have always "lived peacefully" with their Christian neighbors. All the way down in paragraph eleven, we get some decent condemnation ("The Islamic community strongly condemns this cowardly attack, which was particularly heinous in that it was directed at the all-volunteer army that protects our nation."), but the general thrust of the article has little to do with Hasan's actions and much to do with Islam's perceived grievances.
Looking again at the first paragraph, in fact, I can't help wondering what the phrase "being laid to" is all about. It's syntactically unfamiliar--unidiomatic, even--and it reads very much like "being blamed on." It wouldn't be a problem if we were dealing with a situation in which blame was at all negotiable, but Hasan clearly shot those people. He was himself shot while doing so. The idea--a mere rhetorical seed, but a potent one--that, looking around for some place to lay blame, we settled on a Muslim is an absurdity. This is the guy! He did it!
Nevertheless, the "coverage" of the shootings has been dominated by breathless concern for soldiers' breaking points (try here and here for two examples among many), as if Hasan is in any way the moral or factual equivalent of actual veterans (he never saw combat) returning from actual wars (he was never deployed).
Of course, that's nothing compared to the morally bankrupt ending of our original article:
"[Muslims] do have the right to retaliate," [Victor Benjamin] said, "but he who does not is twice blessed."
Chilling.
-GM
GM,
According to the article, yes, the outrage was directed toward Hasan with a very quick "but" to follow. The fact that a guy named Victor Benjamin II is sharing in their sentiment--that Hasan's action may be a product of extreme burnout or trauma--would seem strange to me if I didn't already know so many Americans who seek to apologize for everyone else first. I realize that people can't be expected to produce off-the-cuff statements that completely reflect their actual views, but I would like to explore this Benjamin quote simply because it seems so misguided:
“G.I.’s are like any equipment in the Army. When it breaks, those who were in charge of keeping it fit should be held responsible for it.”
I've heard some poor analogies in my time, but this one belongs on the short list. If a tank or helicopter breaks, it doesn't go on a killing spree. You also usually know when it's broken. Hasan's homicidal demeanor probably wasn't as easy to detect. Is Benjamin suggesting that the military is somehow responsible for knowing the psychological state of its entire personnel? Should we really spend more tax dollars on Army psychiatrists, especially considering that Hasan was just that?! It seems like the easier solution would be to make it clear on the front end that killing sprees are frowned upon. After all, if it was just a matter of "going postal," then Hasan's urges could have been prevented with a little therapy, maybe some morale-boosting videos or messages of caution. But, of course, if the guy who attended church at the same Virginia mosque as two 9/11 hijackers happened to be acting on religious beliefs, maybe we shouldn't let those types of people into the military. Here in America, though, even practical "discrimination" is an ugly word.
-JW
JW,
I'm writing a one-time-only follow-up due to your suggestion that "If a tank or helicopter breaks, it doesn't go on a killing spree. You also usually know when it's broken."
In fact, the Times reported today, U.S. Intelligence Agencies (no doubt crippled by Obama's Don't Make Muslims Look Bad policies) did know that Hasan was broken. They intercepted communications between him and Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical American cleric who has already praised Hasan's attacks, and they did nothing.
But hey, it's a big army. Maybe the CIA thought Hasan was talking to the guy undercover.
-GM
Friday, November 6, 2009
Mean Girls, Mean Boy
GM,
It occurred to me this morning that we don't discuss women enough and that we've never given any attention to soccer. New Mexico junior defender Elizabeth Lambert has given us reason to touch on both. Thanks to play so unsportsmanlike that ESPN gave it 90 seconds of highlights, Lambert will open the eyes of many to the unnecessary brutality of women's soccer. Hair-pull takedowns, kicks to the head, punches to the back--apparently all part of the game and not even worthy of an ejection in her case.
This type of behavior really shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Take Rachel McAdams's character in Mean Girls--a movie liked by an astonishing number of guys and somehow tolerated by me. She's deceitful, manipulative, arrogant, conniving, and hyper-competitive. Attribute those characteristics to a butch college athlete (I don't care what her sexual orientation is; that chick is butch), and you could understand how she would play "with no regard for human life" (Kevin Harlan voice)!
I don't know what's so attractive about violence in our society. These UFC and MMA matches bore me worse than an August baseball game between the Royals and Orioles. I haven't been in a fight in well over a decade, and I'm thrilled about it. Who has the energy?! Even the winner of a fight comes out a little worse off than he was going in. Right, Tom Cable?
-JW
JW,
Speaking of Cable, it's not just assistant Randy Hanson who's been on the receiving end of his rage. Reports have been leaking in the last few days that Cable was also abusive to the women he dated (or all women if the title bar of this article is to be believed). My only question is whether or not Cable shouted "Allahu akbar" as he hit them. The Fort Hood gunman did (fast-forward to 3:20), and that's being equally underreported.
I'll be honest. If Smarter Than Y'all weren't such a great name, I'd be happy with Too Lazy For Violence. We've written before about MMA and its attendant silliness, but it's worth restating that only sociopaths (both functional and non-) can watch this s--t without getting sleepy. Women soccer players are biting each other's tits off? Of course they are! They saw it on TV!
I'll close with a warning and some mockery. The inevitable by-product of society's comfort with violence occurred yesterday. Nidal Hassan (nickname: I'm Obviously a Terrorist) may have been evil, but he wasn't an evil genius. He got his plan the same place they all do: every video game, movie, and television program released in the last decade.
Too bad he couldn't have been satisfied with Mean Girls.
-GM
It occurred to me this morning that we don't discuss women enough and that we've never given any attention to soccer. New Mexico junior defender Elizabeth Lambert has given us reason to touch on both. Thanks to play so unsportsmanlike that ESPN gave it 90 seconds of highlights, Lambert will open the eyes of many to the unnecessary brutality of women's soccer. Hair-pull takedowns, kicks to the head, punches to the back--apparently all part of the game and not even worthy of an ejection in her case.
This type of behavior really shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Take Rachel McAdams's character in Mean Girls--a movie liked by an astonishing number of guys and somehow tolerated by me. She's deceitful, manipulative, arrogant, conniving, and hyper-competitive. Attribute those characteristics to a butch college athlete (I don't care what her sexual orientation is; that chick is butch), and you could understand how she would play "with no regard for human life" (Kevin Harlan voice)!
I don't know what's so attractive about violence in our society. These UFC and MMA matches bore me worse than an August baseball game between the Royals and Orioles. I haven't been in a fight in well over a decade, and I'm thrilled about it. Who has the energy?! Even the winner of a fight comes out a little worse off than he was going in. Right, Tom Cable?
-JW
JW,
Speaking of Cable, it's not just assistant Randy Hanson who's been on the receiving end of his rage. Reports have been leaking in the last few days that Cable was also abusive to the women he dated (or all women if the title bar of this article is to be believed). My only question is whether or not Cable shouted "Allahu akbar" as he hit them. The Fort Hood gunman did (fast-forward to 3:20), and that's being equally underreported.
I'll be honest. If Smarter Than Y'all weren't such a great name, I'd be happy with Too Lazy For Violence. We've written before about MMA and its attendant silliness, but it's worth restating that only sociopaths (both functional and non-) can watch this s--t without getting sleepy. Women soccer players are biting each other's tits off? Of course they are! They saw it on TV!
I'll close with a warning and some mockery. The inevitable by-product of society's comfort with violence occurred yesterday. Nidal Hassan (nickname: I'm Obviously a Terrorist) may have been evil, but he wasn't an evil genius. He got his plan the same place they all do: every video game, movie, and television program released in the last decade.
Too bad he couldn't have been satisfied with Mean Girls.
-GM
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
An Attack the San Antonio Spurs Probably Deserved
JW,
Like many sports fans, I find it difficult to pay attention to the NBA while football season is still in full swing. Teams are still finding themselves, the best players aren't really trying, Shaq is still seventy games away from playing himself into shape, and individual wins and losses mean relatively little. Truth be told, I can think of only three reasons why an NBA fan would start paying attention before January:
1) You're a Wizards fan and you want to see Gilbert Arenas play a few games before his inevitable season-ending injury;
2) You're a Grizzlies fan and you enjoy the annual season-opening 0-10 streak;
3) You're a compulsive gambler, to the extent that you're willing to bet on the NBA (!) before anyone really knows anything (!!).
That's it.
Sadly, though, this perfectly reasonable attitude has its consequences--namely, you risk missing moments like this one, in which San Antonio Spurs guard Manu Ginobili killed a bat with his bare hands, midgame. Let me repeat that. A bat was flying around the arena annoying people, and Ginobili killed it with his bare hands! I don't know what's more impressive: Ginobili's perfect swing or the fact that he got an arena attendant (or just a random fan???) to take the bat from him without gloves. Yikes.
Tempting though it is to use the scene as a metaphor (Ginobili is Maine voters, the bat is gay marriage; Ginobili is Christopher Christie and Robert McDonnell, the bat is Obama's chances to hold the House next year.), I'm going to refrain from doing so. No, the bat-killing refers only to itself. It's the pure thing, the real deal. This, I'm ready to declare, is why the regular season still matters.
-GM
GM,
It had to be a tough international player who swatted that bat, and there aren't too many of those in the NBA. If you watch the video more closely, you'll see Tim Duncan clutching Gregg Popovich and shrieking. While Americans fear bats and the diseases they may carry, it turns out Argentina is riddled with the flying mammals. This leads me to my next point.
I showed the video to a more liberal friend of mine, and he immediately said, "I don't know if we should be killing bats; it's not like they're insects." Decent point on the surface, I suppose. I might not be so accepting of Manu if he had gone on a bat hunt with no intention of eating what he killed. Honestly, it wouldn't bother me at all, but Wikipedia just informed me that bats serve "vital ecological roles." Certainly, though, if a furry, flying creature enters an arena and threatens the peace of mind of thousands, it deserves to die.
Speaking of vital roles, I just received a phone call about a job I applied to yesterday. That's the first bad sign. No company that calls me back this quickly could be worth getting on with. Also, the fact that the job description started out like this was far from appealing:
If you are self-motivated (I'm not), have amazing people skills (I make at least one enemy per week) and pride yourself on hard work (Does anyone actually do that?!), you might be exactly who we are looking for.
Still, I answered Leslie's (real name) call. You know it's never a good thing when you find yourself saying, "I'm not trying to start an argument or anything." Apparently, one should refrain from telling an HR person that a job description is "vague"--just in case she's the one who wrote it.
-JW
Like many sports fans, I find it difficult to pay attention to the NBA while football season is still in full swing. Teams are still finding themselves, the best players aren't really trying, Shaq is still seventy games away from playing himself into shape, and individual wins and losses mean relatively little. Truth be told, I can think of only three reasons why an NBA fan would start paying attention before January:
1) You're a Wizards fan and you want to see Gilbert Arenas play a few games before his inevitable season-ending injury;
2) You're a Grizzlies fan and you enjoy the annual season-opening 0-10 streak;
3) You're a compulsive gambler, to the extent that you're willing to bet on the NBA (!) before anyone really knows anything (!!).
That's it.
Sadly, though, this perfectly reasonable attitude has its consequences--namely, you risk missing moments like this one, in which San Antonio Spurs guard Manu Ginobili killed a bat with his bare hands, midgame. Let me repeat that. A bat was flying around the arena annoying people, and Ginobili killed it with his bare hands! I don't know what's more impressive: Ginobili's perfect swing or the fact that he got an arena attendant (or just a random fan???) to take the bat from him without gloves. Yikes.
Tempting though it is to use the scene as a metaphor (Ginobili is Maine voters, the bat is gay marriage; Ginobili is Christopher Christie and Robert McDonnell, the bat is Obama's chances to hold the House next year.), I'm going to refrain from doing so. No, the bat-killing refers only to itself. It's the pure thing, the real deal. This, I'm ready to declare, is why the regular season still matters.
-GM
GM,
It had to be a tough international player who swatted that bat, and there aren't too many of those in the NBA. If you watch the video more closely, you'll see Tim Duncan clutching Gregg Popovich and shrieking. While Americans fear bats and the diseases they may carry, it turns out Argentina is riddled with the flying mammals. This leads me to my next point.
I showed the video to a more liberal friend of mine, and he immediately said, "I don't know if we should be killing bats; it's not like they're insects." Decent point on the surface, I suppose. I might not be so accepting of Manu if he had gone on a bat hunt with no intention of eating what he killed. Honestly, it wouldn't bother me at all, but Wikipedia just informed me that bats serve "vital ecological roles." Certainly, though, if a furry, flying creature enters an arena and threatens the peace of mind of thousands, it deserves to die.
Speaking of vital roles, I just received a phone call about a job I applied to yesterday. That's the first bad sign. No company that calls me back this quickly could be worth getting on with. Also, the fact that the job description started out like this was far from appealing:
If you are self-motivated (I'm not), have amazing people skills (I make at least one enemy per week) and pride yourself on hard work (Does anyone actually do that?!), you might be exactly who we are looking for.
Still, I answered Leslie's (real name) call. You know it's never a good thing when you find yourself saying, "I'm not trying to start an argument or anything." Apparently, one should refrain from telling an HR person that a job description is "vague"--just in case she's the one who wrote it.
-JW
Monday, November 2, 2009
SEC Field Trip: An Abbreviated History
JW,
It was around the middle of the third quarter that I realized the man sitting seven rows behind me in Neyland Stadium was no ordinary Vols fan. Picture the average cast member from HBO's Deadwood, then cross him with whatever comes to mind when you listen to Bob Dylan's version of "Moonshiner." Throw in some shockingly loud bellowing and you've got the general idea. Beginning in the first quarter but picking up steam as the night grew colder, this guy had a cross word for everyone. From Tennessee quarterback Jonathan Crompton ("How about some more picks, Johnny!"), to Steve Spurrier ("What now, Steve! What now!"), to an injured Gamecock fallen at midfield ("Get up, you p---y!"), no one was safe. And the voice! I tell you, UT's marching band would have been happy with its resonance.
It's safe to say, then, that my trip to east Tennessee was a successful one. A study in contrasts, Knoxville combines the remnants of pre-war industry with stunning foliage and a topography reminiscent at times of San Francisco's. Neyland itself sits right against the Tennessee River--Vols fans lean over the middle deck railings at halftime and sneak cigarettes--and between the factories in the distance and the boats moving upstream, I had myself convinced that it was 1900. The university's academic reputation is not what it should be, of course, but what other walk from downtown to a college stadium involves passing a statue of Sergei Rachmaninoff? That's got to count for something, right?
As for the game, I'm here to attest that your father's Steve Spurrier is no longer operational. "I'll be damned if I waste a scholarship on a kicker" has given way to "I'll be damned if I waste one on a non-slot receiver." Fun 'n' Gun has turned into Run 'n' Run . . . up the middle for no gain, and if I never see another three-yard dump over the middle on third and six, it'll be too soon. Even Vols fans, still smarting from the whole "You can't spell Citrus without UT" thing, seemed largely bored with the ol' ball coach, and the conversation in my section hinged more on Urban Meyer's inevitable odyssey to Notre Dame than on anything Spurrier was doing. A traditionalist and a holder of long grudges, I'll admit to being a little bit disappointed.
Still, you can't beat SEC football on a Saturday night. Neyland was shaking (literally and frighteningly), the band was on fire, and Tennessee's Halloween-themed uniforms had us giggling for most of the evening. All things considered, I defy you to tell me that Jacksonville was a better time.
-GM
GM,
It was a better time by typical young-adult standards--certainly not by ours. Your experience was the kind that leads to fond memories and clever blogging. Mine was the kind that leads to memory loss, credit-card loss, bank-account dwindling, cell-phone breakage, personal injury, shorter life expectancy, and perhaps unflattering new nicknames among peers. The crowd I run with these days is an intense one, and it's serious about "having a good time." I feel much too old to act so irresponsible, and I'm well below the average age! I knew I was in for a rough ride when I woke up at 9:30 the first morning to go for a run on the beach and was severely scolded by everyone for not already having a drink in my hand.
Truth be told, a larger portion of the "World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party" happens in St. Simons Island, Georgia in the days surrounding the football game. UGA is actually given a one-day Fall Break the Friday before the game, so the typical formula includes cutting Thursday classes to make it down in time for three straight nights of activities that would make Jim Belushi's Animal House character blush. St. Simons serves as the UGA embassy; the entire campus has essentially been transported there for the weekend. What strikes me as amazing is the inability of some (my friends) to take advantage of the new setting.
Beach? Check.
Girls? Everywhere.
Alcohol? More than we could finish.
Weather? Gorgeous.
Condo security deposit? Decidedly insecure.
Somehow, the idea of paying for a cab to take us to some bars two miles off the coast won out. Overwhelmingly. Each night. From what I recall, Florida remains undefeated.
-JW
It was around the middle of the third quarter that I realized the man sitting seven rows behind me in Neyland Stadium was no ordinary Vols fan. Picture the average cast member from HBO's Deadwood, then cross him with whatever comes to mind when you listen to Bob Dylan's version of "Moonshiner." Throw in some shockingly loud bellowing and you've got the general idea. Beginning in the first quarter but picking up steam as the night grew colder, this guy had a cross word for everyone. From Tennessee quarterback Jonathan Crompton ("How about some more picks, Johnny!"), to Steve Spurrier ("What now, Steve! What now!"), to an injured Gamecock fallen at midfield ("Get up, you p---y!"), no one was safe. And the voice! I tell you, UT's marching band would have been happy with its resonance.
It's safe to say, then, that my trip to east Tennessee was a successful one. A study in contrasts, Knoxville combines the remnants of pre-war industry with stunning foliage and a topography reminiscent at times of San Francisco's. Neyland itself sits right against the Tennessee River--Vols fans lean over the middle deck railings at halftime and sneak cigarettes--and between the factories in the distance and the boats moving upstream, I had myself convinced that it was 1900. The university's academic reputation is not what it should be, of course, but what other walk from downtown to a college stadium involves passing a statue of Sergei Rachmaninoff? That's got to count for something, right?
As for the game, I'm here to attest that your father's Steve Spurrier is no longer operational. "I'll be damned if I waste a scholarship on a kicker" has given way to "I'll be damned if I waste one on a non-slot receiver." Fun 'n' Gun has turned into Run 'n' Run . . . up the middle for no gain, and if I never see another three-yard dump over the middle on third and six, it'll be too soon. Even Vols fans, still smarting from the whole "You can't spell Citrus without UT" thing, seemed largely bored with the ol' ball coach, and the conversation in my section hinged more on Urban Meyer's inevitable odyssey to Notre Dame than on anything Spurrier was doing. A traditionalist and a holder of long grudges, I'll admit to being a little bit disappointed.
Still, you can't beat SEC football on a Saturday night. Neyland was shaking (literally and frighteningly), the band was on fire, and Tennessee's Halloween-themed uniforms had us giggling for most of the evening. All things considered, I defy you to tell me that Jacksonville was a better time.
-GM
GM,
It was a better time by typical young-adult standards--certainly not by ours. Your experience was the kind that leads to fond memories and clever blogging. Mine was the kind that leads to memory loss, credit-card loss, bank-account dwindling, cell-phone breakage, personal injury, shorter life expectancy, and perhaps unflattering new nicknames among peers. The crowd I run with these days is an intense one, and it's serious about "having a good time." I feel much too old to act so irresponsible, and I'm well below the average age! I knew I was in for a rough ride when I woke up at 9:30 the first morning to go for a run on the beach and was severely scolded by everyone for not already having a drink in my hand.
Truth be told, a larger portion of the "World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party" happens in St. Simons Island, Georgia in the days surrounding the football game. UGA is actually given a one-day Fall Break the Friday before the game, so the typical formula includes cutting Thursday classes to make it down in time for three straight nights of activities that would make Jim Belushi's Animal House character blush. St. Simons serves as the UGA embassy; the entire campus has essentially been transported there for the weekend. What strikes me as amazing is the inability of some (my friends) to take advantage of the new setting.
Beach? Check.
Girls? Everywhere.
Alcohol? More than we could finish.
Weather? Gorgeous.
Condo security deposit? Decidedly insecure.
Somehow, the idea of paying for a cab to take us to some bars two miles off the coast won out. Overwhelmingly. Each night. From what I recall, Florida remains undefeated.
-JW
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
