JW,
Unless you've been living under a rock (or unless you rely solely on the mainstream media for your news), you've probably seen this video or one of its counterparts. If you haven't, drop everything and watch it. Right now.
What you'll see is a young conservative activist named James O'Keefe accompanying his female partner, Hannah Giles, into the San Bernardino office of ACORN, Barack Obama's nationwide bigotry and vote-rigging operation. Posing as a pimp and his prostitute, O'Keefe and Giles proceed to solicit information from an ACORN worker on such matters as avoiding prosecution for kidnapping underage El Salvadorian girls, laundering money meant for O'Keefe's congressional run, and securing a mortgage loan for their whorehouse. As you're probably guessing, ACORN worker Tresa Kaelke is more than happy to help.
While the entire clip is comedy of the highest standard, the real magic begins around the 4:20 mark, when Kaelke sums up liberalism so succinctly that Karl Marx is smiling up at her from hell. Responding to the fact that O'Keefe and Giles have had trouble securing financing for the brothel, Kaelke states the following:
There are a lot of narrow-minded, you know, one-sided, um, let's see, right-wing, bleeding- heart liberals out there that, that, you know and they're, I mean, bleeding hearts, not necessarily liberals, because if they were liberals they would be helping you.
Let's pause for a moment just to let that breathe. If they were liberals, they would be helping you.
I'm perfectly aware, of course, that a documentary crew traversing the nation's home-schooling associations and youth groups could capture right-wingers saying some fairly damning s--t, but you've got to admit that Kaelke's bravado in the face of immorality is staggering, as is her claim a few moments later that Obama's campaign was itself built on "bootlegging and prostitution." Thank God Jimmy Carter's around to change the subject.
One last thing and I'll let you take it from here. I mentioned the mainstream media earlier because this is the exact sort of thing that doesn't get reported nationally unless YouTube gets involved. (Check out this article bemoaning the lack of coverage for some interesting insight.) As far as I know, the New York Times' only serious contribution came this morning, under the headline "Conservatives Draw Blood From Acorn."
Not "Acorn Errs" but "Conservatives Attack." You don't have to be a rhetorician to see the spin. You just have to be awake.
-GM
GM,
If you don't mind my adding facts to your prompt--facts I mainly retrieved from your own hyperlinks--allow me to slip a few key details into the discussion.
1. John A. Boehner, the House Republican leader from Ohio, wrote Obama Tuesday asking him to stop giving federal dollars to ACORN and its affiliates. By the way, ACORN is legally nonpartisan, but its "legally separate political action arm" has "lobbied in every Democratic National Convention since 1980" (Wikipedia). (As I was typing this response, Wikipedia added a "2009 undercover videos" section.)
2. The Department of Housing and Urban Development has already made the decision to stop funding ACORN.
3. According to your Fox News story, employees (or "officials," depending on how much a given article wants these people to be the face of ACORN) at "no fewer than four ACORN offices" have been caught doing the same thing Kaelke did, or worse.
4. Like many terrible and offensive things, ACORN's headquarters is in New Orleans.
With that said, this is a legitimate scandal, right? A very liberal (or at least Democrat-friendly) group was using federal money to advise people on how to operate whorehouses--with not just any type of whores. We're talking underage girls imported from El Salvador. From the sound of these interviews with Baltimore's ACORN branch, ACORN employees seem to be experts in underage trafficking, illegal immigration, prostitution, and tax evasion. Please watch Parts 1 and 2. To show their support, the employees give the fake pimp $100 off his tax return fee. They probably intend to vote for him when he runs for congress (!), which he tells them he'll one day do.
If I were a film critic, I'd use words like "astonishing" and "eye-opening" to describe this mini-documentary. If I were a Democrat, I'd use words like "racism," "sensationalism," and "malicious attacks" in order to discredit those who rightfully want to put a megaphone in front of O'Keefe's whistle. We discussed Tuesday how we're not allowed to question Obama without being called racists; now we can't even question his interest groups without incurring the same scorn. Though he often deserved it, was George W. Bush not the constant object of ridicule and sarcasm? Now, all of a sudden, the office of the presidency commands immediate respect without question?! Screw that. The presidency deserves the highest level of scrutiny no matter who's in the White House. It's unlikely, in my opinion, that Kaelke had the damnedest clue what she was talking about when she said Obama probably had a few highly illegal sources for campaign financing. Then again, people who don't have the damnedest clue--people who utter phrases like "right-wing, bleeding-heart liberals"--did vote for the man.
-JW
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Maureen Dowd Calls Joe Wilson a Racist. (America Shrugs.)
JW,
If you weren't already convinced of the American Left's willingness to ignore logical soundness in pursuit of political ends, take a look at Maureen Dowd's recent excoriation of Joe Wilson and his now-famous interruption of what must have been Barack Obama's hundred-thousandth primetime address. Here's the pertinent section:
I’ve been loath to admit that the shrieking lunacy of the summer . . . had much to do with race . . . . But Wilson’s shocking disrespect for the office of the president . . . convinced me: Some people just can’t believe a black man is president and will never accept it.
Well, then.
As you're probably realizing, Dowd's gravest error isn't her overwrought prose (though "shrieking lunacy" comes close). Instead, it's her willingness to affirm the consequent--creating a line of reasoning that reads something like this: If Joe Wilson were racist, he'd call Obama a liar. Wilson did call Obama a liar; thus, he must be racist.
The problem, as you know, is that one thing doesn't logically follow the other. And by suggesting that it does, Dowd discounts the possibility of legitimate disagreement (which must be answered, or at least explained away) in favor of illegitimate disagreement (which must be censored on the House floor). Simply put, Obama cannot be fairly opposed. His followers have removed that option.
Sadly, Dowd's silliness is a preview of what we can expect for the next few years. Anytime Obama stumbles--anytime his critics get too loud--we're going to hear the "r" word. It's the great American circus of racial politics. I can't get enough of it.
-GM
GM,
Over the past few days, I've seen numerous tweets (well, Facebook updates) disparaging Kanye West for some action that may or may not have been racist. I honestly had no idea what it was all about--or that it had anything to do with Taylor Swift or Beyonce. I only knew that Kanye's accusers (in my neck of the woods, at least) were themselves playing the race card on a guy who played it four years ago. Before I continue, let's make it clear that I've never once tweeted or intentionally listened to any of these artists, but I've at least heard of such nonsense.
For those who don't know, West (black) interrupted Swift's (white) award acceptance speech to say Beyonce (black) should have won the award, and many of my pop-culture-tolerant friends (white) deemed the act racist. There's an undeniable parallel here. They, like Dowd, viewed the offender's history, used some bad logic, and came to the conclusion that the act itself was racially motivated. After all, a racist person might perform such an action because of race. If I were one to bet on completely unprovable features such as racism, I would bet that West and Wilson are racists. But maybe, just maybe, West thought Beyonce should have won and Wilson thought Obama was lying. When Dowd wrote that she practically heard, "You lie, boy!"--"boy" being a word she added and used twice in the title--she was assuming that Wilson's outburst couldn't possibly be a legitimate thought. If I could sit down with her, I'd inform her that a white racist can assume poorly of a black person without using any prejudice. It's possible. And if he's a republican and the black man is a radically left president, it's likely.
What's more interesting is the side story that enabled me--rather, forced me--to learn all this pop stuff. Turns out that ABC News reporter Terry Moran tweeted Obama's off-the-record remark that Kanye West is a "jackass." Let's see.... A racist person might breach his or her journalistic duties to expose a black president's name-calling. So Moran is a racist, right?
-JW
If you weren't already convinced of the American Left's willingness to ignore logical soundness in pursuit of political ends, take a look at Maureen Dowd's recent excoriation of Joe Wilson and his now-famous interruption of what must have been Barack Obama's hundred-thousandth primetime address. Here's the pertinent section:
I’ve been loath to admit that the shrieking lunacy of the summer . . . had much to do with race . . . . But Wilson’s shocking disrespect for the office of the president . . . convinced me: Some people just can’t believe a black man is president and will never accept it.
Well, then.
As you're probably realizing, Dowd's gravest error isn't her overwrought prose (though "shrieking lunacy" comes close). Instead, it's her willingness to affirm the consequent--creating a line of reasoning that reads something like this: If Joe Wilson were racist, he'd call Obama a liar. Wilson did call Obama a liar; thus, he must be racist.
The problem, as you know, is that one thing doesn't logically follow the other. And by suggesting that it does, Dowd discounts the possibility of legitimate disagreement (which must be answered, or at least explained away) in favor of illegitimate disagreement (which must be censored on the House floor). Simply put, Obama cannot be fairly opposed. His followers have removed that option.
Sadly, Dowd's silliness is a preview of what we can expect for the next few years. Anytime Obama stumbles--anytime his critics get too loud--we're going to hear the "r" word. It's the great American circus of racial politics. I can't get enough of it.
-GM
GM,
Over the past few days, I've seen numerous tweets (well, Facebook updates) disparaging Kanye West for some action that may or may not have been racist. I honestly had no idea what it was all about--or that it had anything to do with Taylor Swift or Beyonce. I only knew that Kanye's accusers (in my neck of the woods, at least) were themselves playing the race card on a guy who played it four years ago. Before I continue, let's make it clear that I've never once tweeted or intentionally listened to any of these artists, but I've at least heard of such nonsense.
For those who don't know, West (black) interrupted Swift's (white) award acceptance speech to say Beyonce (black) should have won the award, and many of my pop-culture-tolerant friends (white) deemed the act racist. There's an undeniable parallel here. They, like Dowd, viewed the offender's history, used some bad logic, and came to the conclusion that the act itself was racially motivated. After all, a racist person might perform such an action because of race. If I were one to bet on completely unprovable features such as racism, I would bet that West and Wilson are racists. But maybe, just maybe, West thought Beyonce should have won and Wilson thought Obama was lying. When Dowd wrote that she practically heard, "You lie, boy!"--"boy" being a word she added and used twice in the title--she was assuming that Wilson's outburst couldn't possibly be a legitimate thought. If I could sit down with her, I'd inform her that a white racist can assume poorly of a black person without using any prejudice. It's possible. And if he's a republican and the black man is a radically left president, it's likely.
What's more interesting is the side story that enabled me--rather, forced me--to learn all this pop stuff. Turns out that ABC News reporter Terry Moran tweeted Obama's off-the-record remark that Kanye West is a "jackass." Let's see.... A racist person might breach his or her journalistic duties to expose a black president's name-calling. So Moran is a racist, right?
-JW
Monday, September 14, 2009
Monday Football Roundup: Smarter Than the Armchair Quarterbacks Y'all Are Used To
GM,
My emotion toward the possibility that all hell will break loose come bowl season in college football is nothing short of pure lust. Every year, I try to determine the scenario that would most likely make the college football presidents shout, "To hell with our obstinacy; we need a playoff!" Look, I don't want to go entirely into my well-polished rant about why a playoff is not only fairer but also more financially sensible. Let's just say that anyone who doesn't understand that a playoff or "plus-one system" (read: short playoff) would add to the number of meaningful games--even regular-season games (!)--shouldn't be reading this blog, talking about football, working in a non-sweatshop, or breathing the same sweet, free, American air that I breathe. Eight teams. Three weekends. Seven glorious, meaningful games between powerhouses. More ad revenue. More ticket revenue. Keep the bowls, and don't pretend like they've been devalued.
That said, I'm currently salivating over the thought of a Boise State/Brigham Young national championship, which might make some powerful people see things my way for the first time.
Now for some reactions to the Saturday (or, as it was pronounced where I'm from, "Sairdee") scoreboard...
USC 18, Ohio State 15: Does this mean USC's only seven points better than Navy?
Houston 45, Oklahoma State 35: College football parity strikes again, proving my point further. Are we sure Utah couldn't have beaten Florida last year?
Notre Dame 34, Michigan 38: I knew Michigan would win this game like I knew USC would cover -7, so why'd I only bet on USC? Notre Dame, you're an embarrassment to tradition, and those who continue to rate you highly are an embarrassment to youth and impartiality.
UCLA 19, Tennessee 15: How far the Vols have fallen. Even Vegas has caught on. Florida is giving 28.5 points this week.
-JW
JW,
On the scale of who should decide championships if the athletes themselves aren't allowed to do so, I've got the refs ranked slightly higher than sports journalists. That's why, while I watch and will occasionally complain about college football, my heart belongs to the professionals. Even though I was happy to read your college playoff rant (which, happily, nodded to the seldom-mentioned fact that bowl games are impossible to further devalue), I'll be talking about the big boys today.
I've been thinking over the last few days about how we might set ourselves apart from the dozens of Power Rankings that crop up after NFL Sundays and Mondays. My solution? "Flower" Rankings--a tiered sorting of teams based on their unwillingness to engage in violence of any sort. The delicate fellows atop my list often refuse to hit at all, composing defensive schemes reminiscent of the crowd during Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem. Detroit and Carolina lead the pack right now, but I fully expect Buffalo to shoot up the list early this evening, and Oakland, as you know, can never be counted out.
Or what about "Cower" Rankings, dedicated to those teams that have decided not to stray from the safety of their own territory. The St. Louis Rams, for example, haven't crossed the fifty-yard line since Super Bowl XXXVI, and their bulletin board goals for the week now include successfully boarding the team plane. Kansas City has a few scores to its name, I'm happy to say, but the last time they marched the full length of the field, Missouri was celebrating a newly-won statehood.
For particularly rank coaching decisions, I'm creating a "Sour" Rankings, and leading this field is Lovie Smith. I understand, of course, that asking highly-paid, professional game-managers to understand the nuances of scoring and time is a stretch, but Smith's third-quarter decision to kick an extra point and settle for a one-point deficit instead of going for two in a clear defensive battle was one for the ages. It didn't end up mattering, and no one will talk about it, but if your coach's logic includes any variant on "It's too early to worry about tying the game," you're probably in for a long season.
-GM
My emotion toward the possibility that all hell will break loose come bowl season in college football is nothing short of pure lust. Every year, I try to determine the scenario that would most likely make the college football presidents shout, "To hell with our obstinacy; we need a playoff!" Look, I don't want to go entirely into my well-polished rant about why a playoff is not only fairer but also more financially sensible. Let's just say that anyone who doesn't understand that a playoff or "plus-one system" (read: short playoff) would add to the number of meaningful games--even regular-season games (!)--shouldn't be reading this blog, talking about football, working in a non-sweatshop, or breathing the same sweet, free, American air that I breathe. Eight teams. Three weekends. Seven glorious, meaningful games between powerhouses. More ad revenue. More ticket revenue. Keep the bowls, and don't pretend like they've been devalued.
That said, I'm currently salivating over the thought of a Boise State/Brigham Young national championship, which might make some powerful people see things my way for the first time.
Now for some reactions to the Saturday (or, as it was pronounced where I'm from, "Sairdee") scoreboard...
USC 18, Ohio State 15: Does this mean USC's only seven points better than Navy?
Houston 45, Oklahoma State 35: College football parity strikes again, proving my point further. Are we sure Utah couldn't have beaten Florida last year?
Notre Dame 34, Michigan 38: I knew Michigan would win this game like I knew USC would cover -7, so why'd I only bet on USC? Notre Dame, you're an embarrassment to tradition, and those who continue to rate you highly are an embarrassment to youth and impartiality.
UCLA 19, Tennessee 15: How far the Vols have fallen. Even Vegas has caught on. Florida is giving 28.5 points this week.
-JW
JW,
On the scale of who should decide championships if the athletes themselves aren't allowed to do so, I've got the refs ranked slightly higher than sports journalists. That's why, while I watch and will occasionally complain about college football, my heart belongs to the professionals. Even though I was happy to read your college playoff rant (which, happily, nodded to the seldom-mentioned fact that bowl games are impossible to further devalue), I'll be talking about the big boys today.
I've been thinking over the last few days about how we might set ourselves apart from the dozens of Power Rankings that crop up after NFL Sundays and Mondays. My solution? "Flower" Rankings--a tiered sorting of teams based on their unwillingness to engage in violence of any sort. The delicate fellows atop my list often refuse to hit at all, composing defensive schemes reminiscent of the crowd during Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem. Detroit and Carolina lead the pack right now, but I fully expect Buffalo to shoot up the list early this evening, and Oakland, as you know, can never be counted out.
Or what about "Cower" Rankings, dedicated to those teams that have decided not to stray from the safety of their own territory. The St. Louis Rams, for example, haven't crossed the fifty-yard line since Super Bowl XXXVI, and their bulletin board goals for the week now include successfully boarding the team plane. Kansas City has a few scores to its name, I'm happy to say, but the last time they marched the full length of the field, Missouri was celebrating a newly-won statehood.
For particularly rank coaching decisions, I'm creating a "Sour" Rankings, and leading this field is Lovie Smith. I understand, of course, that asking highly-paid, professional game-managers to understand the nuances of scoring and time is a stretch, but Smith's third-quarter decision to kick an extra point and settle for a one-point deficit instead of going for two in a clear defensive battle was one for the ages. It didn't end up mattering, and no one will talk about it, but if your coach's logic includes any variant on "It's too early to worry about tying the game," you're probably in for a long season.
-GM
Friday, September 11, 2009
The NFL: Where the 2008 Election Goes to Learn About Predictability
JW,
When we're right, we're right, and when the NFL's at issue, we're damn right. I don't know about you, but I'm ready to demand a by-line after seeing yesterday's NFL script. Not only did we nail our pro-football complaints, but an email I sent to friends last night was so spot-on, I'm having myself tested for clairvoyance.
With 5:00 to go in the third quarter, I'm ready to say that [the Titans are] better than Pittsburgh but will probably still lose the game. I'm scared to death of Pittsburgh's two-minute offense. Their other fifty-eight minutes? Not so much.
Here's my question, then, after watching the 2009 Steelers crap all over both their history and the league's: Why, under any circumstances, should Pittsburgh ever again run or go into a huddle? I mean, ever.
After all, the team marching down the field at will during the game's three crucial drives--the end of the first half; the end of the second half (Hines Ward's fumble notwithstanding); and overtime--bore absolutely no resemblance to the going-nowhere, up-the-middle-for-two gang that might as well have spent quarters one and three working a crossword puzzle. If Pittsburgh wins the Super Bowl this year and gives New England legitimate competition for Team of the Decade, it will be because, like the Patriots, they mastered (to their shame) the rinky-dink, pass-our-way-to-victory bulls--t that renders the run game insignificant and can't be stopped if you've got a good line and a slot receiver worth his paycheck. Simply put, the old adage about running and championships just doesn't work anymore. The league is too fast, the rules too slanted in favor of offenses, and the O-Lines too big. One game into the season, I'm ready to bet my last dollar that this year's champion will be a high-completion, low-yardage passer with a fair-to-middling running game. Yes that's right, Minnesota. You've chosen poorly.
Here are some other notes and some well-deserved back-patting:
-Troy Polamalu's textbook hit on Chris Johnson and the flag that followed almost killed me. Johnson, one of the fastest guys in the league, was sprinting down the sideline. By the time he veered out of bounds, Polamalu was already in the air flying toward him. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if Johnson manipulated the entire situation. He's a world-class athlete. He can't time his run so that he leaves the playing field just as he's about to be hit?
-Not only was the first game of the season decided by an overtime in which only one team saw the ball (here's your take on that travesty), but the normally reliable Chris Collinsworth made the ridiculous argument that the NFL's system works because "the game could end on any play." Geez, Chris! Why not just toss out the clock and the whole four quarters thing and make the winner the first team to score?
-Predictably, Al Michaels' (and Collinsworth's) use of "Ben" instead of "Roethlisberger" bordered on self-parody. It crossed the border into homo-eroticism.
-Obviously, I'm not going to stop watching the NFL, but last night's game reminds me of why professional football isn't as flawless as its apologists would have us believe.
What did you see while watching?
-GM
GM,
I spent half of last night watching the Clemson-Georgia Tech game, to which I refused a free ticket partially because I love the NFL opener so much. I'm also low on time right now, so I'll only get at the heart of what's bothering me.
The Polamalu hit was not only a perfect, safe tackle, it might have saved a touchdown! Look at the video again. Assuming Johnson had the corner turned on William Gay (#22), Polamalu was the last line of defense. Johnson stepped out of bounds as a reaction to (!!!!!) Palamalu's dive. Just to be clear, here was the order of occurrences. Watch the video one more time and see if you don't agree.
1. Polamalu begins his diving undercut to take down Chris Johnson, who is still a foot away from the sideline.
2. Johnson sees the defender coming toward his legs and sidesteps out of bounds to avoid the brunt of the contact. His right foot lands out of bounds.
3. Less than a tenth of a second after that right foot hits, Polamalu's tackle connects, upending Johnson.
The NFL has decided that this is a 15-yard penalty, even though it's clear that Polamalu started his tackle while Johnson was still in bounds. Essentially, the league demands that linebackers and defensive backs have 4.4 speed and that they can stop on a dime, even in the mid air!!! Do you think Johnson let his guard down the split second his foot touched the chalk?! There is simply no point to that call.
GM, it's nice see that you've admitted what I've been screaming about the Patriots this whole millennium. New England won two of its three SuperBowls with Antowain Smith and Kevin Faulk splitting carries--and not that many. Brady made his living quickly finding slashing receivers in Bill Belichick's simplified, less defensible west-coast knock-off. Roethlisberger makes his living off pump-faking and backyard football. And the exhausted notion that running and defense wins football games is a complete farce. The NFL is decided on third down. Those who can convert (via pass) and get stops (typically against the pass) win championships.
-JW
When we're right, we're right, and when the NFL's at issue, we're damn right. I don't know about you, but I'm ready to demand a by-line after seeing yesterday's NFL script. Not only did we nail our pro-football complaints, but an email I sent to friends last night was so spot-on, I'm having myself tested for clairvoyance.
With 5:00 to go in the third quarter, I'm ready to say that [the Titans are] better than Pittsburgh but will probably still lose the game. I'm scared to death of Pittsburgh's two-minute offense. Their other fifty-eight minutes? Not so much.
Here's my question, then, after watching the 2009 Steelers crap all over both their history and the league's: Why, under any circumstances, should Pittsburgh ever again run or go into a huddle? I mean, ever.
After all, the team marching down the field at will during the game's three crucial drives--the end of the first half; the end of the second half (Hines Ward's fumble notwithstanding); and overtime--bore absolutely no resemblance to the going-nowhere, up-the-middle-for-two gang that might as well have spent quarters one and three working a crossword puzzle. If Pittsburgh wins the Super Bowl this year and gives New England legitimate competition for Team of the Decade, it will be because, like the Patriots, they mastered (to their shame) the rinky-dink, pass-our-way-to-victory bulls--t that renders the run game insignificant and can't be stopped if you've got a good line and a slot receiver worth his paycheck. Simply put, the old adage about running and championships just doesn't work anymore. The league is too fast, the rules too slanted in favor of offenses, and the O-Lines too big. One game into the season, I'm ready to bet my last dollar that this year's champion will be a high-completion, low-yardage passer with a fair-to-middling running game. Yes that's right, Minnesota. You've chosen poorly.
Here are some other notes and some well-deserved back-patting:
-Troy Polamalu's textbook hit on Chris Johnson and the flag that followed almost killed me. Johnson, one of the fastest guys in the league, was sprinting down the sideline. By the time he veered out of bounds, Polamalu was already in the air flying toward him. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if Johnson manipulated the entire situation. He's a world-class athlete. He can't time his run so that he leaves the playing field just as he's about to be hit?
-Not only was the first game of the season decided by an overtime in which only one team saw the ball (here's your take on that travesty), but the normally reliable Chris Collinsworth made the ridiculous argument that the NFL's system works because "the game could end on any play." Geez, Chris! Why not just toss out the clock and the whole four quarters thing and make the winner the first team to score?
-Predictably, Al Michaels' (and Collinsworth's) use of "Ben" instead of "Roethlisberger" bordered on self-parody. It crossed the border into homo-eroticism.
-Obviously, I'm not going to stop watching the NFL, but last night's game reminds me of why professional football isn't as flawless as its apologists would have us believe.
What did you see while watching?
-GM
GM,
I spent half of last night watching the Clemson-Georgia Tech game, to which I refused a free ticket partially because I love the NFL opener so much. I'm also low on time right now, so I'll only get at the heart of what's bothering me.
The Polamalu hit was not only a perfect, safe tackle, it might have saved a touchdown! Look at the video again. Assuming Johnson had the corner turned on William Gay (#22), Polamalu was the last line of defense. Johnson stepped out of bounds as a reaction to (!!!!!) Palamalu's dive. Just to be clear, here was the order of occurrences. Watch the video one more time and see if you don't agree.
1. Polamalu begins his diving undercut to take down Chris Johnson, who is still a foot away from the sideline.
2. Johnson sees the defender coming toward his legs and sidesteps out of bounds to avoid the brunt of the contact. His right foot lands out of bounds.
3. Less than a tenth of a second after that right foot hits, Polamalu's tackle connects, upending Johnson.
The NFL has decided that this is a 15-yard penalty, even though it's clear that Polamalu started his tackle while Johnson was still in bounds. Essentially, the league demands that linebackers and defensive backs have 4.4 speed and that they can stop on a dime, even in the mid air!!! Do you think Johnson let his guard down the split second his foot touched the chalk?! There is simply no point to that call.
GM, it's nice see that you've admitted what I've been screaming about the Patriots this whole millennium. New England won two of its three SuperBowls with Antowain Smith and Kevin Faulk splitting carries--and not that many. Brady made his living quickly finding slashing receivers in Bill Belichick's simplified, less defensible west-coast knock-off. Roethlisberger makes his living off pump-faking and backyard football. And the exhausted notion that running and defense wins football games is a complete farce. The NFL is decided on third down. Those who can convert (via pass) and get stops (typically against the pass) win championships.
-JW
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Making Our Wishes
GM,
Since 1990, there has been only one occurrence that I've dreamed about at the beginning of every season--the Dolphins winning the SuperBowl. Well, over the last decade, I've fantasized about the Patriots going 2-14, but even Tom Brady's lost season couldn't make that happen. During down years for Miami, it's the stories of controversy, betrayal, criminality, stupidity, and excess media zeal ("overzealousness" isn't a word) that keep me going. Since this may be one of those seasons, here's what I would love to see this wonderfully promising year.
1. Feuds between Donovan McNabb and Michael Vick, Terrell Owens and Trent Edwards, Terrell Owens and the coaching staff, Brian Urlacher and Jake Plummer, Tom Cable and the rest of the Raiders' staff, Tom Cable and Al Davis, Jerry Jones and Wade Phillips, and Brett Favre and the whole Vikings team.
2. Pansy, QB-protecting calls affecting the outcome of so many games that the league has to reconsider its rules.
3. Every sudden death only consisting of one possession so that the league has to reconsider its overtime policy. (In 2002, my Dolphins missed the playoffs because they were one of 11 teams that played an overtime game without seeing the ball. There were only 26 OT games that year. If 42 percent of your overtimes are completely one-sided, isn't it time to adjust?)
4. A 7-9 Chargers team hosting a playoff game so that the league has to reconsider its playoff structure.
5. The Cincinnati Bengals winning fewer than seven games. I don't know why... it's just very important to me.
-JW
JW,
I was sure your "betrayal" link was going to take me to footage of Peyton Manning bitch-slapping Tony Dungy during a team meeting. So I'm disappointed. Big time.
Still, I like your list, and I'll second your complaint about NFL overtimes. Sure, they're exciting, but so is your first prison shower. So is trying to escape from a concentration camp. Buffalo's ridiculous playoff comeback against the Houston Oilers back in '93 was exciting as hell, but Oilers fans probably could have done without it.
That said, here's my own 2009 wish list.
1) John Madden guest-announces Green Bay at Minnesota on October 5th. Brett Favre refuses the start because he's "too tired."
2) New evidence is found in the Ray Lewis case. Ray and Plaxico Burress arrange to serve their sentences as cellmates. A reality show chronicles their adventures.
3) Mike Tomlin's attempt to chest-bump a player is met with stony silence and a shaking head.
4) The Dallas Cowboys play a terrible first half in week one of the playoffs. Jerry Jones takes over for Wade Phillips at halftime and leads the Cowboys to a defeat even more shameful than anticipated.
5) Eli Manning cries during a game. Archie arranges to have him traded.
We're mere hours away, so I'll stop there. I can't remember the last time I was this excited!
-GM
Since 1990, there has been only one occurrence that I've dreamed about at the beginning of every season--the Dolphins winning the SuperBowl. Well, over the last decade, I've fantasized about the Patriots going 2-14, but even Tom Brady's lost season couldn't make that happen. During down years for Miami, it's the stories of controversy, betrayal, criminality, stupidity, and excess media zeal ("overzealousness" isn't a word) that keep me going. Since this may be one of those seasons, here's what I would love to see this wonderfully promising year.
1. Feuds between Donovan McNabb and Michael Vick, Terrell Owens and Trent Edwards, Terrell Owens and the coaching staff, Brian Urlacher and Jake Plummer, Tom Cable and the rest of the Raiders' staff, Tom Cable and Al Davis, Jerry Jones and Wade Phillips, and Brett Favre and the whole Vikings team.
2. Pansy, QB-protecting calls affecting the outcome of so many games that the league has to reconsider its rules.
3. Every sudden death only consisting of one possession so that the league has to reconsider its overtime policy. (In 2002, my Dolphins missed the playoffs because they were one of 11 teams that played an overtime game without seeing the ball. There were only 26 OT games that year. If 42 percent of your overtimes are completely one-sided, isn't it time to adjust?)
4. A 7-9 Chargers team hosting a playoff game so that the league has to reconsider its playoff structure.
5. The Cincinnati Bengals winning fewer than seven games. I don't know why... it's just very important to me.
-JW
JW,
I was sure your "betrayal" link was going to take me to footage of Peyton Manning bitch-slapping Tony Dungy during a team meeting. So I'm disappointed. Big time.
Still, I like your list, and I'll second your complaint about NFL overtimes. Sure, they're exciting, but so is your first prison shower. So is trying to escape from a concentration camp. Buffalo's ridiculous playoff comeback against the Houston Oilers back in '93 was exciting as hell, but Oilers fans probably could have done without it.
That said, here's my own 2009 wish list.
1) John Madden guest-announces Green Bay at Minnesota on October 5th. Brett Favre refuses the start because he's "too tired."
2) New evidence is found in the Ray Lewis case. Ray and Plaxico Burress arrange to serve their sentences as cellmates. A reality show chronicles their adventures.
3) Mike Tomlin's attempt to chest-bump a player is met with stony silence and a shaking head.
4) The Dallas Cowboys play a terrible first half in week one of the playoffs. Jerry Jones takes over for Wade Phillips at halftime and leads the Cowboys to a defeat even more shameful than anticipated.
5) Eli Manning cries during a game. Archie arranges to have him traded.
We're mere hours away, so I'll stop there. I can't remember the last time I was this excited!
-GM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
