There are several approaches the Broncos can take to hiring a new head coach. I've taken the liberty of outlining them.
The Big Name
Included in this category are ex-Steelers coach Bill Cowher, ex-Buccaneers coach Jon Gruden, ex-Colts coach Tony Dungy, ex-Ravens coach Brian Billick. All won Super Bowls with their former clubs, all are now working in television, and all have been out of coaching for at least two years. All are rumored as possibilities for every head coaching job that opens up.
A lot of people around here are clamoring for Gruden or Cowher to coach the Broncos. I don't see the Broncos being that interested in any of these candidates and vice versa. Mainly because they would require what Pat Bowlen can't give at this point - a lot of money and a lot of power.
And frankly, I'm glad. The idea of bringing in one of these guys to coach the Broncos reminds me of the move the Colorado Rockies made in 1999 when they brought in Jim Leyland as manager. He lasted one year with poor results as he technically didn't want to be here. Cowher, Gruden, and Dungy are all East Coast guys who probably wouldn't appreciate what is unique about Colorado and the Broncos and would be in it primarily for the money and/or their ego.
It's just as well for fans not to get their hopes up on anyone from this group. If these guys really wanted to be coaching, they already would be.
The College Guy
Names that have already come up from this category are Air Force coach Troy Calhoun, Stanford coach Jim Harbaugh, and former Florida coach Urban Meyer.
Calhoun was the front runner for about a day after McDaniels was fired, as he is a former Broncos assistant, but extended his contract with Air Force, so he's out of the running. Tebowmaniacs have thrown out Urban Meyer's name. The chances of that happening are slim and none.
The name that should be brought up is BYU coach Bronco Mendenhall. For obvious reasons.
I don't know much about the coaching aptitude of Jim Harbaugh, but the last time the Denver Broncos were in as bad shape as they are now was 1971. Back then, they hired their coach away from Stanford University - John Ralston. His keen talent evaluation essentially built the strong Broncos teams of the late 1970s.
Even then, I can't advocate hiring a college coach. It pretty much never works out, so let's not go there.
The Rebound
There's a chance the Broncos could hire a recently fired coach. Coaches who could be out at the end of this season include Marvin Lewis of the Bengals, John Fox of the Panthers, Gary Kubiak of the Texans, Eric Mangini of the Browns, Mike Singletary of the 49ers, and Jeff Fisher of the Titans. There is also Leslie Frazier, interim coach of the Vikings, who may or may not become the permanent head coach after the year.
I heard some advocating for Fisher on the radio the other day should he become available. I don't think it's likely or a very good idea - after 16 years as head coach of the Titans, he's got to be burned out to some degree.
Lewis and Singletary haven't exactly had much success in their current jobs, so I don't know what they would have to offer the Broncos. There's probably a less than zero percent chance that the Broncos would hire Mangini, given his genealogy.
John Fox is an intriguing possiblity. His background is on the defensive side of the ball, which is what the Broncos need. And he's had success in Carolina, nearly winning one Super Bowl and getting them to the playoffs in two other seasons.
Leslie Frazier was the supposed runner-up to Josh McDaniels the last time the Broncos were looking for a coach, so he's obviously a strong candidate and another guy with a defensive background.
And of course, Gary Kubiak would be a candidate should he get canned by the Houston Texans, for reasons that will be discussed further below.
The Hot Coordinator
To be perfectly honest, I'm not enough of a football fanatic at this point to really grasp what "assistant coaches on the rise" are out there. But I'm pretty sure the Broncos won't hire anyone who in the past has been affiliated with the New England Patriots.
And at this point, can the Broncos afford to take a chance on a young, unproven coach? They tried this approach last time and it blew up in their face.
The Promotion
Sometimes there's someone already on staff, ready to take the reins. The Broncos used this approach back in 1993 when they promoted Wade Phillips from defensive coordinator to head coach. And out of necessity, they are using it now with interim coach Eric Studesville.
The problem is I don't think the Broncos have anyone currently on staff who is even going to get an interview. Not Ben "Josh's brother" McDaniels. And certainly not defensive coordinator Wink Martindale - not with the way his defense has played this year. I couldn't tell you the names of any other Broncos assistants without looking them up.
Blast from the Past
The Redskins used this approach a few years ago when they rehired Joe Gibbs for a second tour of duty. Only Joe failed to recreate the Super Bowl magic. And CU pondered bringing back Bill McCartney a decade and a half after he stepped down as their coach.
Dan Reeves? Would the Broncos consider bringing back Dan Reeves? He's been out of coaching for a few years, but he's still only 66 years old. This probably would not happen, since it sounds like his archnemesis John Elway is going to be working in the front office.
The Family
I believe this is the approach the Broncos need to help. They've used it a couple of times with great success. In 1977, they hired Red Miller, who had been a Broncos assistant in the sixties, and he led them to Super Bowl XII. And then of course, in 1995, they brought Mike Shanahan back after he had a brief hiatus as the 49ers offensive coordinator.
Who's out there as a former Bronco assistant? There's Mike Nolan, who was an assistant under Dan Reeves and was the defensive coordinator under Josh McDaniels last year until they could no longer get along. He was the head coach of the 49ers for a few years and is currently the defensive coordinator of the Dolphins. Would he consider coming back to Denver a third time?
Chan Gailey was a Broncos assistant back in the eighties - but he's now coach of the Buffalo Bills, who seem to be rapidly improving.
There's Wade Phillips, but he's already had a turn.
Mike Heimerdinger was an assistant under Shanahan and is currently the offensive coordinator of the Tennessee Titans.
And of course, there's the aforementioned Gary Kubiak. But he's still employed currently as the head coach of the Texans. So he won't be available unless the Texans decide to fire him.
But what about Rick Dennison, who is currently Kubiak's offensive coordinator in Houston? You would be hard pressed to find a more credentialed Coloradan than Dennison to coach the Broncos. He attended Rocky Mountain High School in Fort Collins. Played football at CSU. He played for the Broncos in the eighties and was a longtime assistant coach under Shanahan coaching special teams and the offensive line before becoming the offensive coordinator in 2006 after Kubiak left for Houston. He was coaching in Denver as recently as last season under McDaniels, although he was demoted due to the all-encompassing offensive knowledge of his boss.
In conclusion, I think if the Texans make a change at coach, the Broncos should pursue Kubiak and Dennison as head coach and offensive coordinator. If Kubiak stays, I think the Broncos should pursue Dennison as head coach. Both of those guys know Denver, know the Broncos, know the fans, know Pat Bowlen, know John Elway. They can put things back the way they should be. And I think they should call up Wade Phillips and say, "Look, Wade, you're not getting another head coaching job. Come back to Denver and rebuild the defense, and we will promise to spend 90% of our draft picks on your side of the ball." And see what he says.
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Friday, December 17, 2010
Repeating History
We have heard throughout our lives that those who don't learn history are doomed to repeat it.
So who didn't learn history? Mike Shanahan.
Back in 1991, John Elway and the Broncos rebounded from a bad 1990 season and compiled a 12-4 regular season record. In their first playoff game, Elway engineered "The Drive II" to beat the Houston Oilers. Then the Broncos narrowly missed clinching their fourth Super Bowl appearance in six years, losing to Buffalo 10-7 in the AFC Championship game.
The outlook for 1992 must have seemed pretty good - two or three shrewd player transactions, and the Broncos would be right in the mix for the Super Bowl again. However, in the first round of the draft, Dan Reeves selected a quarterback, Tommy Maddox, to groom as Elway's successor. Never mind the fact that Elway was only 31 years old at the time and would go on to play 7 more NFL seasons. Reeves and Elway didn't like each other, and Reeves basically came out and shouted it from the rooftops. Elway didn't have his best season in 1991, but any outsider could see that quarterback was the one position where the Broncos were SET. So instead of making a pick to help shore up the defense or give Elway another offensive weapon, Reeves drafts his replacement.
And we all know how that story ended. The Broncos went into a mini-tailspin, missing the playoffs three out of the next four years, and losing their only playoff game in that stretch. Reeves was fired following the 1992 season. Maddox played just two seasons in Denver. Fortunately for Denver, Mike Shanahan revived the Broncos and Elway led the team back to the Super Bowl in 1997 and 1998.
But Shanahan did not learn from Reeves' mistake. In 2005, the Broncos rebounded from disappointing finishes to the 2003 and 2004 seasons to post a 13-3 regular season record and their first AFC West title in seven years. They were led by QB Jake Plummer, who had the best year of his career, compliling a passer rating of 90.2 and throwing 18 touchdowns against just 7 interceptions. Plummer was frequently mentioned as an MVP candidate during the season. The Broncos defeated the two-time defending champion New England Patriots in the playoffs and advanced to the AFC Championship game against the Pittsburgh Steelers. They lost to the Steelers, but the Broncos were finally Super Bowl contenders again.
In the 2006 NFL draft, Shanahan made numerous trades to move the Broncos up in the first round, where he selected Jay Cutler, a quarterback from Vanderbilt. People were excited about the pick, because everyone gets excited about quarterbacks. But was Jake Plummer not coming off his best season? And did he not lead the Broncos to the playoffs in each of his three seasons as the Broncos quarterback? Yes and yes. Yet Mike Shanahan drafted his replacement. Like Elway, Plummer was just 31 years old.
Plummer didn't play as well in 2006, and having Cutler looking over his shoulder probably contributed to that. He likely would have led the Broncos to a fourth consecutive playoff appearance, but was removed from the starting job with a 7-4 record and replaced by Cutler and his Elway-like arm. The Broncos went 2-3 the rest of the way with Cutler as the starter, and missed the playoffs.
How did that story end? Mike Shanahan was fired following the 2008 season. Jay Cutler was traded shortly thereafter. Jake Plummer decided to retire following the 2006 season and never played again. The Broncos record is 28-38 since Plummer was removed as the starter. This time there may not be a Shanahan waiting to restore them to glory.
People are wondering went wrong with the Broncos, who are perhaps the worst team in the NFL in 2010. I point to whenever it was - sometime between February and April of 2006 - that Shanahan decided that Plummer's best wasn't good enough. The franchise has been slowly eroding ever since that moment. And the current situation likely could have been avoided if Shanahan had learned from the mistake made by Dan Reeves 14 years earlier and put aside his differences with Jake Plummer and made moves to help him, rather than ruin his career.
So who didn't learn history? Mike Shanahan.
Back in 1991, John Elway and the Broncos rebounded from a bad 1990 season and compiled a 12-4 regular season record. In their first playoff game, Elway engineered "The Drive II" to beat the Houston Oilers. Then the Broncos narrowly missed clinching their fourth Super Bowl appearance in six years, losing to Buffalo 10-7 in the AFC Championship game.
The outlook for 1992 must have seemed pretty good - two or three shrewd player transactions, and the Broncos would be right in the mix for the Super Bowl again. However, in the first round of the draft, Dan Reeves selected a quarterback, Tommy Maddox, to groom as Elway's successor. Never mind the fact that Elway was only 31 years old at the time and would go on to play 7 more NFL seasons. Reeves and Elway didn't like each other, and Reeves basically came out and shouted it from the rooftops. Elway didn't have his best season in 1991, but any outsider could see that quarterback was the one position where the Broncos were SET. So instead of making a pick to help shore up the defense or give Elway another offensive weapon, Reeves drafts his replacement.
And we all know how that story ended. The Broncos went into a mini-tailspin, missing the playoffs three out of the next four years, and losing their only playoff game in that stretch. Reeves was fired following the 1992 season. Maddox played just two seasons in Denver. Fortunately for Denver, Mike Shanahan revived the Broncos and Elway led the team back to the Super Bowl in 1997 and 1998.
But Shanahan did not learn from Reeves' mistake. In 2005, the Broncos rebounded from disappointing finishes to the 2003 and 2004 seasons to post a 13-3 regular season record and their first AFC West title in seven years. They were led by QB Jake Plummer, who had the best year of his career, compliling a passer rating of 90.2 and throwing 18 touchdowns against just 7 interceptions. Plummer was frequently mentioned as an MVP candidate during the season. The Broncos defeated the two-time defending champion New England Patriots in the playoffs and advanced to the AFC Championship game against the Pittsburgh Steelers. They lost to the Steelers, but the Broncos were finally Super Bowl contenders again.
In the 2006 NFL draft, Shanahan made numerous trades to move the Broncos up in the first round, where he selected Jay Cutler, a quarterback from Vanderbilt. People were excited about the pick, because everyone gets excited about quarterbacks. But was Jake Plummer not coming off his best season? And did he not lead the Broncos to the playoffs in each of his three seasons as the Broncos quarterback? Yes and yes. Yet Mike Shanahan drafted his replacement. Like Elway, Plummer was just 31 years old.
Plummer didn't play as well in 2006, and having Cutler looking over his shoulder probably contributed to that. He likely would have led the Broncos to a fourth consecutive playoff appearance, but was removed from the starting job with a 7-4 record and replaced by Cutler and his Elway-like arm. The Broncos went 2-3 the rest of the way with Cutler as the starter, and missed the playoffs.
How did that story end? Mike Shanahan was fired following the 2008 season. Jay Cutler was traded shortly thereafter. Jake Plummer decided to retire following the 2006 season and never played again. The Broncos record is 28-38 since Plummer was removed as the starter. This time there may not be a Shanahan waiting to restore them to glory.
People are wondering went wrong with the Broncos, who are perhaps the worst team in the NFL in 2010. I point to whenever it was - sometime between February and April of 2006 - that Shanahan decided that Plummer's best wasn't good enough. The franchise has been slowly eroding ever since that moment. And the current situation likely could have been avoided if Shanahan had learned from the mistake made by Dan Reeves 14 years earlier and put aside his differences with Jake Plummer and made moves to help him, rather than ruin his career.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Are We Getting Close to the Last Straw?
I have a lot of thoughts on the Denver Broncos. Thankfully, for you, the reader of this blog, I have not been sharing these as frequently. But now it's time to start expressing some of my thoughts, frustrations, concerns, ideas, and opinions
The Broncos fired Mike Shanahan in nearly two years ago and began a coaching search. At the time, I really liked the idea of hiring a defensive oriented head coach, such as Steve Spagnuolo, who is now coaching the St. Louis Rams. When I heard the news that they had hired Josh McDaniels, I was not excited. He was the one candidate I did not want. His previous job was with the Patriots, who I did not like. And he was younger than me.
But I decided to give him a chance. After all, I was not invited to interview any of the candidates. Maybe he was the guy to turn around the franchise. And my willingness to accept the new guy was validated when the Broncos started the 2009 season on a six-game winning streak.
But now the Broncos have lost 16 of their last 21 games and are officially a bad team. I've been following the Broncos since 1984, and I can say that this is the worst edition of a Broncos team I've witnessed. There have been other bad seasons in that time, but there was always the hope that the team would bounce back the next year. And they usually did. After going 5-11 in 1990, they went to the AFC Championship Game the next season. After going 6-10 in 1999, they made the playoffs in 2000. But I don't really think that there will be that much improvement in 2011 or 2012. I don't know how long it will take them to dig out of the hole they are in.
So there is a lot of talk in Denver about Josh McDaniels' job status. The consensus seems to be that he probably won't be fired because Pat Bowlen probably doesn't want to pay Mike Shanahan, Josh McDaniels, and a new coach all at the same time. But I'm kind of at the point where I'm starting to count straws and wonder how many he has left.
Straw #1 - The Jay Cutler fiasco. You can argue that the Broncos came out ahead in the short term in this deal, but I'm still kind of wondering about the long term.
Straw #2 - Presiding over his first draft, Josh drafts running back Knowshon Moreno with the #12 overall pick when the clear need is for talent on the defensive line. Moreno has been unspectacular. Meanwhile, Brian Orakpo, a defensive lineman picked #13 overall in the same draft, went to the Pro Bowl as a rookie and has 18.5 career quarterback sacks in less than two full seasons.
Straw #3 - Also in his first draft, Josh trades the Broncos' 2010 first round draft choice for a 2009 second round draft choice. He selects Alphonso Smith, a defensive back from Wake Forest. Smith has one disappointing year with the Broncos and then is traded to Detroit before the start of this season for a backup tight end. The pick the Broncos traded winds up being the #14 overall pick. So he used a top 15 draft choice on a reserve tight end.
Straw #4 - After the fast start to 2009, the team completely falls to pieces in the second half of the season and fails to even make the playoffs.
Straw #5 - Probably the best draft the Broncos had in the last 10 years was the 2006 haul, when they selected Jay Cutler, Tony Sheffler, Brandon Marshall, and Elvis Dumervil. Having run off Cutler already, Josh also has a falling out with Sheffler and Marshall at the end of the 2009 season, and both are traded away.
Straw #6 - In keeping with the annual Broncos tradition, Josh parts ways with defensive coordinator Mike Nolan after one season, even though the Broncos showed great improvement defensively in 2009.
Straw #7 - I've made light of Bronco fan's fascination of Peyton Hillis before. Josh basically benched Hillis for the entire 2009 season, and then traded him along with a couple of draft picks to Cleveland for QB Brady Quinn. But apparently there is something to the guy. Hillis already has 13 touchdowns this season for the Browns and is headed for a 1,000-yard rushing year. Meanwhile, the Broncos have struggled to run the ball all season, and Quinn is their third-string quarterback. Oops.
Straw #8 - Josh does tons of trading down and up and all around in the 2010 draft, and winds up drafting WR Demaryius Thomas and QB Tim Tebow in the first round. No one really knows right now if these guys are going to be great players or not. But my point, once again, is that the Broncos need talent on the defensive and offensive lines. They can't afford to spend picks on skill-position players right now.
Straw #9 - Josh cuts off negotiations with Champ Bailey for a contract extension, which likely means that the future Hall of Famer will be somewhere else next season.
Straw #10 - Oakland Raiders 59, Denver Broncos 14.
Straw #11 - And now, the news coming out over the weekend that a Broncos employee secretly taped an opponents practice - supposedly without anyone else's knowledge or consent, but still. It's lucky that the NFL didn't dock the Broncos a draft pick and settled for fining the Broncos and Josh a total of $100,000.
The good news is that at this point, the Broncos are in the running for one of the top five selections in next year's collegiate draft. The bad news is that Josh McDaniels may be in charge of making that pick. Someone stop him before he trades it to the Cowboys for Tony Romo.
The Broncos fired Mike Shanahan in nearly two years ago and began a coaching search. At the time, I really liked the idea of hiring a defensive oriented head coach, such as Steve Spagnuolo, who is now coaching the St. Louis Rams. When I heard the news that they had hired Josh McDaniels, I was not excited. He was the one candidate I did not want. His previous job was with the Patriots, who I did not like. And he was younger than me.
But I decided to give him a chance. After all, I was not invited to interview any of the candidates. Maybe he was the guy to turn around the franchise. And my willingness to accept the new guy was validated when the Broncos started the 2009 season on a six-game winning streak.
But now the Broncos have lost 16 of their last 21 games and are officially a bad team. I've been following the Broncos since 1984, and I can say that this is the worst edition of a Broncos team I've witnessed. There have been other bad seasons in that time, but there was always the hope that the team would bounce back the next year. And they usually did. After going 5-11 in 1990, they went to the AFC Championship Game the next season. After going 6-10 in 1999, they made the playoffs in 2000. But I don't really think that there will be that much improvement in 2011 or 2012. I don't know how long it will take them to dig out of the hole they are in.
So there is a lot of talk in Denver about Josh McDaniels' job status. The consensus seems to be that he probably won't be fired because Pat Bowlen probably doesn't want to pay Mike Shanahan, Josh McDaniels, and a new coach all at the same time. But I'm kind of at the point where I'm starting to count straws and wonder how many he has left.
Straw #1 - The Jay Cutler fiasco. You can argue that the Broncos came out ahead in the short term in this deal, but I'm still kind of wondering about the long term.
Straw #2 - Presiding over his first draft, Josh drafts running back Knowshon Moreno with the #12 overall pick when the clear need is for talent on the defensive line. Moreno has been unspectacular. Meanwhile, Brian Orakpo, a defensive lineman picked #13 overall in the same draft, went to the Pro Bowl as a rookie and has 18.5 career quarterback sacks in less than two full seasons.
Straw #3 - Also in his first draft, Josh trades the Broncos' 2010 first round draft choice for a 2009 second round draft choice. He selects Alphonso Smith, a defensive back from Wake Forest. Smith has one disappointing year with the Broncos and then is traded to Detroit before the start of this season for a backup tight end. The pick the Broncos traded winds up being the #14 overall pick. So he used a top 15 draft choice on a reserve tight end.
Straw #4 - After the fast start to 2009, the team completely falls to pieces in the second half of the season and fails to even make the playoffs.
Straw #5 - Probably the best draft the Broncos had in the last 10 years was the 2006 haul, when they selected Jay Cutler, Tony Sheffler, Brandon Marshall, and Elvis Dumervil. Having run off Cutler already, Josh also has a falling out with Sheffler and Marshall at the end of the 2009 season, and both are traded away.
Straw #6 - In keeping with the annual Broncos tradition, Josh parts ways with defensive coordinator Mike Nolan after one season, even though the Broncos showed great improvement defensively in 2009.
Straw #7 - I've made light of Bronco fan's fascination of Peyton Hillis before. Josh basically benched Hillis for the entire 2009 season, and then traded him along with a couple of draft picks to Cleveland for QB Brady Quinn. But apparently there is something to the guy. Hillis already has 13 touchdowns this season for the Browns and is headed for a 1,000-yard rushing year. Meanwhile, the Broncos have struggled to run the ball all season, and Quinn is their third-string quarterback. Oops.
Straw #8 - Josh does tons of trading down and up and all around in the 2010 draft, and winds up drafting WR Demaryius Thomas and QB Tim Tebow in the first round. No one really knows right now if these guys are going to be great players or not. But my point, once again, is that the Broncos need talent on the defensive and offensive lines. They can't afford to spend picks on skill-position players right now.
Straw #9 - Josh cuts off negotiations with Champ Bailey for a contract extension, which likely means that the future Hall of Famer will be somewhere else next season.
Straw #10 - Oakland Raiders 59, Denver Broncos 14.
Straw #11 - And now, the news coming out over the weekend that a Broncos employee secretly taped an opponents practice - supposedly without anyone else's knowledge or consent, but still. It's lucky that the NFL didn't dock the Broncos a draft pick and settled for fining the Broncos and Josh a total of $100,000.
The good news is that at this point, the Broncos are in the running for one of the top five selections in next year's collegiate draft. The bad news is that Josh McDaniels may be in charge of making that pick. Someone stop him before he trades it to the Cowboys for Tony Romo.
Friday, October 29, 2010
Frown
There's only one network that always has something on worth watching. And that network is DIY.
About a month ago, it mysteriously appeared on our Dish. Hey! I didn't know we got this! We've been enjoying watching House Crashers, Bath Crashers, I Hate My Kitchen, Rehab Addict, etc. It's kind of annoying sometimes because they make everything seem so easy, and they like to install those sinks that are basically a big bowl sitting on top of the vanity, which I don't really like. But it's great viewing. HGTV just isn't the same.
This week, DIY mysteriously disappeared from our subscription, as mysteriously as it appeared. I'm totally bummed. No more channel to fall back on. I guess they were just giving us a free preview and trying to tempt us to upgrade to a pricier package or something. They do the same thing with the Tennis channel - it's available during majors such as Wimbledon or the US Open, but otherwise not.
The Dish giveth, and the Dish taketh away.
About a month ago, it mysteriously appeared on our Dish. Hey! I didn't know we got this! We've been enjoying watching House Crashers, Bath Crashers, I Hate My Kitchen, Rehab Addict, etc. It's kind of annoying sometimes because they make everything seem so easy, and they like to install those sinks that are basically a big bowl sitting on top of the vanity, which I don't really like. But it's great viewing. HGTV just isn't the same.
This week, DIY mysteriously disappeared from our subscription, as mysteriously as it appeared. I'm totally bummed. No more channel to fall back on. I guess they were just giving us a free preview and trying to tempt us to upgrade to a pricier package or something. They do the same thing with the Tennis channel - it's available during majors such as Wimbledon or the US Open, but otherwise not.
The Dish giveth, and the Dish taketh away.
Monday, October 25, 2010
I Hate Politicians, or JUST SELECT ONE, DANG IT!!!
So the Denver Post ran this thing in yesterday's paper where they asked the Colorado candidates for governor a list of cutesie questions such as "What was the last book you read?"
Which is just fine and pretty boring until you get down to the bottom where the questions are not open-ended but specified as "Select one."
The first one was (select one) Sandra Bullock or Angelina Jolie?
Dan Maes and Tom Tancredo both said Sandra. But John Hickenlooper took the high road and said Helen Thorpe (his wife).
Another question was (select one) Leno, Letterman, or Oprah?
Maes picked Leno, Hick picked Oprah, and Tancredo said "None of the above." Not that hard Tommy Boy - they're just TV shows.
Then it was (select one) Paris or Vegas?
Maes said Paris. Tancredo, the smart aleck, said "Paris Hotel in Las Vegas", and Hick said Durango. What an idiot.
Finally, it was (select one) American Idol or CSI?
Maes said CSI. Tancredo said "Neither." Apparently he's not much of a TV watcher. Hick said, "Flip a coin. Usually a Rockies game." That answer makes even less sense than "Durango."
Sigh. I was considering a vote for Hick since he's going to win anyways. But not after those stupid answers he rolled out in the paper. I think I'll vote for Maes. At least he answered all the questions. That's what I like in a politican.
Oh, and by the way, they did the same think for the senatorial candidates. To the question American Idol or CSI, Michael Bennet answered, "Entourage." Thanks, doofus. Did you write in answers to multiple choice tests in school?
And Ken Buck and Bennet both dodged the Sandra v. Angelina question. Buck said, my wife Perry Buck. And Bennet said, "My wife Susan wouldn't let me choose." Notice that he didn't dodge it by picking his wife. He just blamed it on her that he wasn't going to answer the question.
I can't stand Michael Bennet, so there's no way I would vote for him, even if Ken Buck answered, "Angelina every day of the week and twice on Sunday."
So how can we count on these guys to face the tough issues like Obamacare and taxes when they can't even answer a simple question about which Hollywood actress they like better? I don't think the Post was asking who you wanted to go to bed with, guys. Take a chill pill.
My answers:
Letterman
Vegas
American Idol
Sandra
And if that prevents me from someday being elected to public office, so be it.
Which is just fine and pretty boring until you get down to the bottom where the questions are not open-ended but specified as "Select one."
The first one was (select one) Sandra Bullock or Angelina Jolie?
Dan Maes and Tom Tancredo both said Sandra. But John Hickenlooper took the high road and said Helen Thorpe (his wife).
Another question was (select one) Leno, Letterman, or Oprah?
Maes picked Leno, Hick picked Oprah, and Tancredo said "None of the above." Not that hard Tommy Boy - they're just TV shows.
Then it was (select one) Paris or Vegas?
Maes said Paris. Tancredo, the smart aleck, said "Paris Hotel in Las Vegas", and Hick said Durango. What an idiot.
Finally, it was (select one) American Idol or CSI?
Maes said CSI. Tancredo said "Neither." Apparently he's not much of a TV watcher. Hick said, "Flip a coin. Usually a Rockies game." That answer makes even less sense than "Durango."
Sigh. I was considering a vote for Hick since he's going to win anyways. But not after those stupid answers he rolled out in the paper. I think I'll vote for Maes. At least he answered all the questions. That's what I like in a politican.
Oh, and by the way, they did the same think for the senatorial candidates. To the question American Idol or CSI, Michael Bennet answered, "Entourage." Thanks, doofus. Did you write in answers to multiple choice tests in school?
And Ken Buck and Bennet both dodged the Sandra v. Angelina question. Buck said, my wife Perry Buck. And Bennet said, "My wife Susan wouldn't let me choose." Notice that he didn't dodge it by picking his wife. He just blamed it on her that he wasn't going to answer the question.
I can't stand Michael Bennet, so there's no way I would vote for him, even if Ken Buck answered, "Angelina every day of the week and twice on Sunday."
So how can we count on these guys to face the tough issues like Obamacare and taxes when they can't even answer a simple question about which Hollywood actress they like better? I don't think the Post was asking who you wanted to go to bed with, guys. Take a chill pill.
My answers:
Letterman
Vegas
American Idol
Sandra
And if that prevents me from someday being elected to public office, so be it.
"Mayor, who should start at QB for the Broncos, Orton, Tebow, or Quinn?"
"John Elway."
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Congratulations, Texas Rangers
I haven't watched hardly any baseball this year. But I did tune in for some of Game 6 of the ALCS on Friday night, just in time for the fifth inning. That's when the Yankees walked Josh Hamilton with two outs in order to pitch to Vlad Guerrero. Only Vlad Guerrero doubled into the gap to score both runners to put the Rangers up 3-1. And then Nelson Cruz homered to score two more runs, and the Yankees' goose was cooked. The camera shot of Yankee manager Joe Girardi standing in the dugout after the home run made my day. He was probably thinking, "Great, so tonight I will be visited by the ghost of George Steinbrenner."
Normally I would not congratulate the City of Dallas on anything. The Dallas Cowboys might be the only pro sports franchise I find to be more yucky than the Yankees. And I don't care for the Dallas Mavericks either.
But the Rangers - they are okay in my book. Back in the eighties, my aunt and uncle would take us to Rangers games whenever we would visit them in Dallas. They were an average team back then and I still remember many of their players - Pete O'Brien, Scott Fletcher, Steve Buechele, Oddibe McDowell, Pete Incaviglia, and Charlie Hough. So the Rangers always had "second-favorite team" status for me (after the Reds) and I became sort of a Nolan Ryan fan in later years when he showed up and started throwing no-hitters in his forties. My aunt would sometimes send me Nolan Ryan clippings from the Dallas papers.
So I felt like I could share a little bit of the Texas joy the other night as they celebrated the first World Series appearance in nearly 50 years of franchise history. I wonder if the old Texas Rangers hat I got at Cap Night in 1986 is still floating around somewhere back home. . .
Normally I would not congratulate the City of Dallas on anything. The Dallas Cowboys might be the only pro sports franchise I find to be more yucky than the Yankees. And I don't care for the Dallas Mavericks either.
But the Rangers - they are okay in my book. Back in the eighties, my aunt and uncle would take us to Rangers games whenever we would visit them in Dallas. They were an average team back then and I still remember many of their players - Pete O'Brien, Scott Fletcher, Steve Buechele, Oddibe McDowell, Pete Incaviglia, and Charlie Hough. So the Rangers always had "second-favorite team" status for me (after the Reds) and I became sort of a Nolan Ryan fan in later years when he showed up and started throwing no-hitters in his forties. My aunt would sometimes send me Nolan Ryan clippings from the Dallas papers.
So I felt like I could share a little bit of the Texas joy the other night as they celebrated the first World Series appearance in nearly 50 years of franchise history. I wonder if the old Texas Rangers hat I got at Cap Night in 1986 is still floating around somewhere back home. . .
Friday, October 15, 2010
Top 10 TV Dads
I've wanted to count down the best TV dads for some time now. It's hard to do since some of the shows I haven't seen in years. So how can I properly assess their fatherhood skills? The answer is that I can't, so I'm kind of shooting from the hip.
This will only include shows that I've actually watched, so Howard Cunningham, Andy Taylor, and Charles Ingalls are off the table.
10. Ward Cleaver (Leave it to Beaver) - The standard package.
9. Dan Conner (Roseanne) - You'll see Homer Simpson on best TV dad lists, but not Roseanne's husband? You usually don't get the middle-america dads on TV, so he's kind of a rare bird.
8. Danny Tanner (Full House) - Single father, kept a tidy house while raising three girls. He did need reinforcements from Jesse and Joey in order to pull it off, so does he get penalized a bit?
7. Tony Micelli (Who's the Boss?) - I think Tony slips into the top 10. Another single dad, putting his ego aside to work as a housekeeper for a woman.
6. Mike Brady (The Brady Bunch) - He has to be on this list, representing TV dads of the Seventies. He gets a lot of credit for meshing this blended family together. But it kind of bugged me that he had that huge den downstairs while the kids were crammed three to a room upstairs.
5. Philip Drummond (Different Strokes) - I started him out at #9 and keep moving him up. You never see him get props in the 'best dad' race. But an older, single, rich father adopts a couple of black kids and moves them into his penthouse with his hottie teenage daughter and keeps it all together? My hat is off to you, Mr. Drummond.
4. Sandy Cohen (The OC) - He doesn't like living in Orange County, he has to live in a house owned by his wife's family, his father-in-law doesn't like him, and his wife - well, she's not exactly June Cleaver. And Sandy decided that not only was he going to deal with all the drama, but he would also take in a troubled teenager and raise him like a son.
3. Cliff Huxtable (The Cosby Show) - I think it's illegal to have a best dad list that doesn't include the venerable Dr. Huxtable. One of my enduring memories was when he humorously lectured Theo about standing in front of the refrigerator with the door open.
2. Keith Mars (Veronica Mars) - This list is filled with single dads. In his case, his wife flaked out after he lost his job as sheriff and left him to raise their teenage daughter. Performed the ultimate parental sacrifice when he risked his life to venture into a blazing fire to rescue Veronica.
1. Jason Seaver (Growing Pains) - A stay-at-home dad who also ran a psychiactric practice out of the home. He saw troublemaking Mike and intellectually gifted Carol through to adulthood. He had to take a backseat to his wife when she took a job doing TV news and became Maggie Malone. Plus, I believe he is the only one on this list who fathered a new child during the show's run. Jason handled all this with great aplomb.
This will only include shows that I've actually watched, so Howard Cunningham, Andy Taylor, and Charles Ingalls are off the table.
10. Ward Cleaver (Leave it to Beaver) - The standard package.
9. Dan Conner (Roseanne) - You'll see Homer Simpson on best TV dad lists, but not Roseanne's husband? You usually don't get the middle-america dads on TV, so he's kind of a rare bird.
8. Danny Tanner (Full House) - Single father, kept a tidy house while raising three girls. He did need reinforcements from Jesse and Joey in order to pull it off, so does he get penalized a bit?
7. Tony Micelli (Who's the Boss?) - I think Tony slips into the top 10. Another single dad, putting his ego aside to work as a housekeeper for a woman.
6. Mike Brady (The Brady Bunch) - He has to be on this list, representing TV dads of the Seventies. He gets a lot of credit for meshing this blended family together. But it kind of bugged me that he had that huge den downstairs while the kids were crammed three to a room upstairs.
5. Philip Drummond (Different Strokes) - I started him out at #9 and keep moving him up. You never see him get props in the 'best dad' race. But an older, single, rich father adopts a couple of black kids and moves them into his penthouse with his hottie teenage daughter and keeps it all together? My hat is off to you, Mr. Drummond.
4. Sandy Cohen (The OC) - He doesn't like living in Orange County, he has to live in a house owned by his wife's family, his father-in-law doesn't like him, and his wife - well, she's not exactly June Cleaver. And Sandy decided that not only was he going to deal with all the drama, but he would also take in a troubled teenager and raise him like a son.
3. Cliff Huxtable (The Cosby Show) - I think it's illegal to have a best dad list that doesn't include the venerable Dr. Huxtable. One of my enduring memories was when he humorously lectured Theo about standing in front of the refrigerator with the door open.
2. Keith Mars (Veronica Mars) - This list is filled with single dads. In his case, his wife flaked out after he lost his job as sheriff and left him to raise their teenage daughter. Performed the ultimate parental sacrifice when he risked his life to venture into a blazing fire to rescue Veronica.
1. Jason Seaver (Growing Pains) - A stay-at-home dad who also ran a psychiactric practice out of the home. He saw troublemaking Mike and intellectually gifted Carol through to adulthood. He had to take a backseat to his wife when she took a job doing TV news and became Maggie Malone. Plus, I believe he is the only one on this list who fathered a new child during the show's run. Jason handled all this with great aplomb.
"Gee, dad, I thought you'd do better than number 10!"
My Top Five
I like to rank things, but I'm not very good at it. In an ideal world, I would count down things post-by-post, giving you my explanation for each ranking. It's a bit ambitious, considering that hardly anyone reads this blog. So I don't do it - as evidenced by the fact that I never finished ranking my personal top songs of the Nineties. Part of the reason was that I was having trouble coming up with the right songs for 6 thru 9, and then I realized that Nineties music wasn't half as good as Eighties music. Anyways, this is my top five of the Nineties. If I ever get 6 thru 9 figured out, I'll let you know.
5. Gonna Make You Sweat - C+C Music Factory
4. Nothing Compares 2 U - Sinead O'Connor
3. Ironic - Alanis Morrisette
2. Everything I Do (I Do it For You) - Bryan Adams
1. U Can't Touch This - MC Hammer
5. Gonna Make You Sweat - C+C Music Factory
4. Nothing Compares 2 U - Sinead O'Connor
3. Ironic - Alanis Morrisette
2. Everything I Do (I Do it For You) - Bryan Adams
1. U Can't Touch This - MC Hammer
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Sponge Bob: Still Going Strong
I thought this was interesting. Of the top 15 cable programs last week (Sep. 20-26), episodes of SpongeBob SquarePants held 6 of the slots, including #4 and #5. I kind of thought he had peaked about six years ago, but apparently he still has massive appeal.
1. NFL Football: New Orleans vs. San Francisco (Monday, 8:30 p.m.), ESPN, 10.9 million homes, 15.12 million viewers.
2. "Jersey Shore 2" (Thursday, 10 p.m.), MTV, 4.33 million homes, 5.95 million viewers.
3. "Pawn Stars" (Monday, 10:30 p.m.), History, 3.41 million homes, 4.67 million viewers.
4. "SpongeBob SquarePants" (Saturday, 11 a.m.), Nickelodeon, 3.29 million homes, 4.73 million viewers.
5. "SpongeBob SquarePants" (Saturday, 9:30 a.m.), Nickelodeon, 3.28 million homes, 4.5 million viewers.
6. "ICarly," (Saturday, 8 p.m.), Nickelodeon, 3.24 million homes, 5.2 million viewers.
7. "Sportscenter" (Monday, 11:58 p.m.), ESPN, 3.227 million homes, 3.93 million viewers.
8. "SpongeBob SquarePants" (Saturday, 11:30 a.m.), Nickelodeon, 3.221 million homes, 4.59 million viewers.
9. "Pawn Stars" (Monday, 10 p.m.), History, 3.19 million homes, 4.28 million viewers.
10. "SpongeBob SquarePants" (Saturday, 9 a.m.), Nickelodeon, 3.13 million homes, 4.16 million viewers.
11. "SpongeBob SquarePants" (Saturday, 10:30 a.m.), Nickelodeon, 3.117 million homes, 4.49 million viewers.
12. "SpongeBob SquarePants" (Saturday, 10 a.m.), Nickelodeon, 3.112 million homes, 4.34 million viewers.
13. "WWE Raw" (Monday, 10 p.m.), USA, 2.81 million homes, 3.94 million viewers.
14. Auto Racing: NASCAR Sprint Cup, Dover (Sunday, 1 p.m.), ESPN, 2.8 million homes, 3.96 million viewers.
15. "WWE Raw" (Monday, 9 p.m.), USA, 2.76 million homes, 3.9 million viewers.
1. NFL Football: New Orleans vs. San Francisco (Monday, 8:30 p.m.), ESPN, 10.9 million homes, 15.12 million viewers.
2. "Jersey Shore 2" (Thursday, 10 p.m.), MTV, 4.33 million homes, 5.95 million viewers.
3. "Pawn Stars" (Monday, 10:30 p.m.), History, 3.41 million homes, 4.67 million viewers.
4. "SpongeBob SquarePants" (Saturday, 11 a.m.), Nickelodeon, 3.29 million homes, 4.73 million viewers.
5. "SpongeBob SquarePants" (Saturday, 9:30 a.m.), Nickelodeon, 3.28 million homes, 4.5 million viewers.
6. "ICarly," (Saturday, 8 p.m.), Nickelodeon, 3.24 million homes, 5.2 million viewers.
7. "Sportscenter" (Monday, 11:58 p.m.), ESPN, 3.227 million homes, 3.93 million viewers.
8. "SpongeBob SquarePants" (Saturday, 11:30 a.m.), Nickelodeon, 3.221 million homes, 4.59 million viewers.
9. "Pawn Stars" (Monday, 10 p.m.), History, 3.19 million homes, 4.28 million viewers.
10. "SpongeBob SquarePants" (Saturday, 9 a.m.), Nickelodeon, 3.13 million homes, 4.16 million viewers.
11. "SpongeBob SquarePants" (Saturday, 10:30 a.m.), Nickelodeon, 3.117 million homes, 4.49 million viewers.
12. "SpongeBob SquarePants" (Saturday, 10 a.m.), Nickelodeon, 3.112 million homes, 4.34 million viewers.
13. "WWE Raw" (Monday, 10 p.m.), USA, 2.81 million homes, 3.94 million viewers.
14. Auto Racing: NASCAR Sprint Cup, Dover (Sunday, 1 p.m.), ESPN, 2.8 million homes, 3.96 million viewers.
15. "WWE Raw" (Monday, 9 p.m.), USA, 2.76 million homes, 3.9 million viewers.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Who's To Blame?
So the number one sports story in Denver these days is Carmelo Anthony. The Nuggets offered him a 3 year, $65 million contract extension back in June, which he so far has not signed. He insists that he has not requested a trade, but by refusing to sign the extension, he is saying that he is not staying in Denver beyond the 2010-11 season, so the Nuggets had better get something for him while they can lest they end up like the Cleveland Cavaliers. Carmelo has enormous leverage, because the Nuggets can't get fair compensation in a trade unless Carmelo signs the extension first - no team is going to give the Nuggets much if they are only guaranteed one year of Carmelo.
Everyone pretty much seems to agree that the motivation for Carmelo to leave town is that he wants to play in a bigger market so he can make more cash off endorsements. He also has this wife La La Vasquez, who is apparently a super famous TV star - I've never heard of her in a non-Carmelo context, so she can't be that great. Anyways, the word is that she also wants him playing somewhere other than Denver.
So everyone is kind of peeved about Carmelo dissing the great state of Colorado. As for me, I don't really care that much. It would have been nice to see him stick around and strive to obtain a John Elway-like celebrity here, but if that's not what he wants, then whatever. Basketball careers don't last that long.
The angle that no one seems to be exploring is that the Nuggets really haven't done crap to make it enticing for him to stick around, other than offering $65 million.
Stan Kroenke, the owner of the Nuggets, has seemed more concerned with owning a franchise in every sports league in the world than improving the teams he currently owns. The Nuggets have been operating under financial constraints for awhile because Stan doesn't want to pay the NBA luxury tax incurred when teams exceed the salary cap. So the Nuggets haven't been aggressive in recent years in adding the pricier talent to their roster.
"If my in-laws got rich selling cheap crap in their stores, then I can get even more rich selling cheap crap to fans, right?"
Operating on a budget is great, but if your net worth is $1.8 million and your sugar daddy is Wal-Mart, is that a valid reason? Not really, considering poor old Stan managed to scrape up enough change to buy the remaining 60% interest in the NFL's St. Louis Rams.
Also, ownership decided not to extend the contract of general manager Mark Warkentien over the summer. He was only the NBA Executive of the Year in 2009. The Nuggets have replaced him with somebody named Masai Ujiri, who I'm sure no one but the most passionate of NBA insiders had ever heard of before. And to top it all off, Stan has to turn over the car keys to his son, Josh Kroenke, as a result of his ownership of the Rams. I think Josh is younger than me.
So I can't say I totally blame Carmelo for wanting to move on. I mean, if the team owner isn't that interested in the team, why should you be?
Everyone pretty much seems to agree that the motivation for Carmelo to leave town is that he wants to play in a bigger market so he can make more cash off endorsements. He also has this wife La La Vasquez, who is apparently a super famous TV star - I've never heard of her in a non-Carmelo context, so she can't be that great. Anyways, the word is that she also wants him playing somewhere other than Denver.
So everyone is kind of peeved about Carmelo dissing the great state of Colorado. As for me, I don't really care that much. It would have been nice to see him stick around and strive to obtain a John Elway-like celebrity here, but if that's not what he wants, then whatever. Basketball careers don't last that long.
The angle that no one seems to be exploring is that the Nuggets really haven't done crap to make it enticing for him to stick around, other than offering $65 million.
Stan Kroenke, the owner of the Nuggets, has seemed more concerned with owning a franchise in every sports league in the world than improving the teams he currently owns. The Nuggets have been operating under financial constraints for awhile because Stan doesn't want to pay the NBA luxury tax incurred when teams exceed the salary cap. So the Nuggets haven't been aggressive in recent years in adding the pricier talent to their roster.
"If my in-laws got rich selling cheap crap in their stores, then I can get even more rich selling cheap crap to fans, right?"
Operating on a budget is great, but if your net worth is $1.8 million and your sugar daddy is Wal-Mart, is that a valid reason? Not really, considering poor old Stan managed to scrape up enough change to buy the remaining 60% interest in the NFL's St. Louis Rams.
Also, ownership decided not to extend the contract of general manager Mark Warkentien over the summer. He was only the NBA Executive of the Year in 2009. The Nuggets have replaced him with somebody named Masai Ujiri, who I'm sure no one but the most passionate of NBA insiders had ever heard of before. And to top it all off, Stan has to turn over the car keys to his son, Josh Kroenke, as a result of his ownership of the Rams. I think Josh is younger than me.
So I can't say I totally blame Carmelo for wanting to move on. I mean, if the team owner isn't that interested in the team, why should you be?
Friday, September 24, 2010
My Top 10 Songs of the Nineties #10
So I recently offered my critique of VH1's Top 100 Songs of the Nineties. And it wouldn't really be fair to criticize unless I could come up with a list of my own, right?
I won't be listing of my top 100, but I will do my top 10. And they may not necessarily be what I think were the ten best songs of the nineties. These will be the songs, which sort of defined the nineties for me personally. If any of them were erased from existence, the Nineties would not be quite the same for me.
First up - Whitney Houston's performance of our National Anthem prior to Super Bowl 25 in Tampa, Florida in January 1991 at the height of Gulf War tensions. I just watched it twice, and it still holds up. It's impossible to watch or listen without experiencing a little emotion. I think it remains as the standard by which all other performances of The Star-Spangled Banner are judged. Absolutely a perfect 10.
And it's not cheaters to put this as #10 on my list - if I remember right, this was actually released as a single, although I have no idea if it landed anywhere on the Billboard charts.
Also, Whitney Houston was recently ranked by VH1 at number 60 on the 100 Greatest Artists of All Time. My reaction was this: There's no way. She has to be in the top 25.
PS I'm apparently too lame to be able to embed stuff in my blog so you can actually watch it, but here's the link for now.
I won't be listing of my top 100, but I will do my top 10. And they may not necessarily be what I think were the ten best songs of the nineties. These will be the songs, which sort of defined the nineties for me personally. If any of them were erased from existence, the Nineties would not be quite the same for me.
First up - Whitney Houston's performance of our National Anthem prior to Super Bowl 25 in Tampa, Florida in January 1991 at the height of Gulf War tensions. I just watched it twice, and it still holds up. It's impossible to watch or listen without experiencing a little emotion. I think it remains as the standard by which all other performances of The Star-Spangled Banner are judged. Absolutely a perfect 10.
And it's not cheaters to put this as #10 on my list - if I remember right, this was actually released as a single, although I have no idea if it landed anywhere on the Billboard charts.
Also, Whitney Houston was recently ranked by VH1 at number 60 on the 100 Greatest Artists of All Time. My reaction was this: There's no way. She has to be in the top 25.
PS I'm apparently too lame to be able to embed stuff in my blog so you can actually watch it, but here's the link for now.
Friday, September 17, 2010
Survivor Twist I
I'm sort of a big Survivor fan. What I mean is that I'm sure there are bigger fans. I didn't jump into Survivor until season 2. I took off seasons 5 and 7, and then the first Survivor All-Stars lured me back for season 8. I took off season 14, but then jumped back in for 15 and 16. After season 16, I decided I was quitting Survivor. That lasted three seasons, but when I heard that season 20 was going to be another All-Stars edition called "Heroes vs. Villans", I could not resist.
My point is that CBS can lose me as a viewer at any point - they have to keep me intrigued. And so far I'm on board for season 21, maybe because they are tempting me with something I've wanted for awhile - the first nationally recognized celebrity to appear on Survivor - former college and NFL head coach Jimmy Johnson.
A full-blown Celebrity Survivor is one of the things I most want to see on television. I'm not sure why they haven't gone there before. It could be that Survivor pretty much has created its own line of celebrities - Elisabeth Hasselbeck, Richard Hatch, Boston Rob & Amber, and so on. It could also be that Jeff Probst is the real star of the show and his ego wouldn't be able to handle anyone outshining his presence.
We'd need a few athletes. I would love to see Barry Bonds play Survivor. The combination of his steroid-tainted past and his sourpuss attitude would be ratings gold. Since Allen Iverson is having trouble finding work in the NBA, he would definitely be available.
"No practice on the island? I'm so in!"
We'd need some blasts from the past, such as Bo Jackson. After winning his first immunity challenges, he could yell, "Bo knows Survivor!"
Also, I'd like to see Martina Navratilova and Mary Lou Retton. Can you imagine those two out in the jungle with A.I., trying to work out the details of an alliance? American Idol be danged, Survivor would be back at the top of the ratings.
The Rod Blagojevich appearance on Celebrity Apprentice worked so well, I'd like to see if Survivor could get a scandalized politican of their own, such as John Edwards or Eliot Spitzer.
The only problem would be coming up with an incentive. Some of these celebs could probably use a $1 million prize, others probably are rich enough. Would they play for charity? Then the problem is if you could come up with enough celebrities who were philantrophic and entertaining at the same time.
Anyways, it's fun to think about. Who would you add?
My point is that CBS can lose me as a viewer at any point - they have to keep me intrigued. And so far I'm on board for season 21, maybe because they are tempting me with something I've wanted for awhile - the first nationally recognized celebrity to appear on Survivor - former college and NFL head coach Jimmy Johnson.
A full-blown Celebrity Survivor is one of the things I most want to see on television. I'm not sure why they haven't gone there before. It could be that Survivor pretty much has created its own line of celebrities - Elisabeth Hasselbeck, Richard Hatch, Boston Rob & Amber, and so on. It could also be that Jeff Probst is the real star of the show and his ego wouldn't be able to handle anyone outshining his presence.
We'd need a few athletes. I would love to see Barry Bonds play Survivor. The combination of his steroid-tainted past and his sourpuss attitude would be ratings gold. Since Allen Iverson is having trouble finding work in the NBA, he would definitely be available.
"No practice on the island? I'm so in!"
We'd need some blasts from the past, such as Bo Jackson. After winning his first immunity challenges, he could yell, "Bo knows Survivor!"
Also, I'd like to see Martina Navratilova and Mary Lou Retton. Can you imagine those two out in the jungle with A.I., trying to work out the details of an alliance? American Idol be danged, Survivor would be back at the top of the ratings.
To top off the athlete sector, I'd add a former Olympian, such as Summer Sanders or Nancy Kerrigan.
I'd add Rachael Ray, to see what kind of dishes she can whip up on the island. And we would need either MC Hammer or Vanilla Ice, take your pick. I don't think you could or should do it without Paris Hilton.
Dr. Phil. Definitely. I'm not watching it if he's not on. Also, Bob Vila seems like an obvious choice. Would they get rid of him as soon as the shelter was built?
I'd add Rachael Ray, to see what kind of dishes she can whip up on the island. And we would need either MC Hammer or Vanilla Ice, take your pick. I don't think you could or should do it without Paris Hilton.
Dr. Phil. Definitely. I'm not watching it if he's not on. Also, Bob Vila seems like an obvious choice. Would they get rid of him as soon as the shelter was built?
"Oh, sure, I'll build a shelter. But I'm building an alliance first."
Let's throw in former Miss California Carrie Prejean. And since he doesn't seem busy, do you think we could get Billy Joel? If he's not busy on some other reality show, David Hasselhoff seems game for whatever comes up.
And I don't know if she would do it, but I think we also would need former First Lady Laura Bush.
And I don't know if she would do it, but I think we also would need former First Lady Laura Bush.
"You know you've been waiting to see me rock a bikini on a desert island."
The Rod Blagojevich appearance on Celebrity Apprentice worked so well, I'd like to see if Survivor could get a scandalized politican of their own, such as John Edwards or Eliot Spitzer.
The only problem would be coming up with an incentive. Some of these celebs could probably use a $1 million prize, others probably are rich enough. Would they play for charity? Then the problem is if you could come up with enough celebrities who were philantrophic and entertaining at the same time.
Anyways, it's fun to think about. Who would you add?
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
The Most Boring NFL Preview
I'm not that excited for football season. I don't want to play fantasy football. Maybe it's because I can't imagine that the Broncos are going to be any good. I mean, I usually always look at the world through orange-colored glasses. But this year? It just seems like too many injuries already. I have the Broncos pegged for a 7-9 record. But what do I know? They'll probably start 7-0.
As for the NFL, I am already so sick of hearing about how awesome the following teams are going to be this year: Jets, Dolphins, Ravens, Cowboys, Packers. Plus a lot of people think the Chiefs will be good.
No one is talking about the Colts. Give me the Colts in the AFC. They'll probably go 14-2.
In the NFC, everyone was talking about how great the Vikings were going to be if only Brett Favre would come back for one more season. And then he did come back, and now everyone is all, yeah, I don't think the Vikings will be as good this year. So give me the Vikings in the NFC.
Colts win the Super Bowl.
As for the NFL, I am already so sick of hearing about how awesome the following teams are going to be this year: Jets, Dolphins, Ravens, Cowboys, Packers. Plus a lot of people think the Chiefs will be good.
No one is talking about the Colts. Give me the Colts in the AFC. They'll probably go 14-2.
In the NFC, everyone was talking about how great the Vikings were going to be if only Brett Favre would come back for one more season. And then he did come back, and now everyone is all, yeah, I don't think the Vikings will be as good this year. So give me the Vikings in the NFC.
Colts win the Super Bowl.
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Count This Down
You may know that I am a BIG fan of countdown shows.
Recently VHI re-aired the five-hour "100 Greatest Songs of the 90's". I am so thankful for DVRs.
It was unclear what the criteria was for determining inclusion in this list. It was clear that an artist could not have more than one song in the top 100.
They made a point to fill us in on what a lot of these long-forgotten musicians have been doing since they hit it big - and it seems that almost all of them recently put out a CD or are working on a CD or are touring (probably for free). The one noteable exception was the guys from Kris Kross, who were the little kid rappers who wore their clothes backwards. Remember them? VH1 was all, yeah, no one has heard from these guys since 1996. We don't know where they are or what they're doing.
But that's not the main point of this article. The main point is to mention a few of the glaring exceptions.
1. Everything I Do (I Do it For You) by Bryan Adams - I can't believe this didn't make the cut. So maybe it's not a masterpiece, but if the criteria was "Popularity Among rural Coloradan teenageers in 1992" - this is the #1 song on the list, Nirvana be danged.
2. Nothing by Boyz II Men was on the list. I wasn't necessarily a big fan, so I don't have a recommendation as to which of their songs should be on the list. But how can you make a 5-hour production on music in the nineties and not mention these harmonizing wizards? It's even a bigger slap in the face when you consider that Color Me Badd, which was pretty much a poor man's version of Boys II Men, had a song in the top 40 of this list.
3. No Aerosmith? I guess that's not a huge surprise considering they didn't have any gigantic hits. But it seems like VH1 wouldn't have wanted to miss a chance to talk about the iconic videos starring a pre-Clueless Alicia Silverstone. Aerosmith's album Get A Grip was quite popular when I was a senior in high school, but again, I kind of doubt VH1 asked anyone from the Valley their opinion on the top songs of the nineties.
4. Don't Speak by No Doubt. How does this not make it?
5. Michael Bolton. I don't know if VH1 is being entirely honest with themselves. Or maybe they made a conscious decision to exclude the entire genre of easy listening.
6. Amy Grant. It seems like revisionist history or selective memory. People make fun of Amy Grant now, but in 1992, everyone loved Amy Grant. I loved Amy Grant. You loved Amy Grant. Don't deny it. And yes, that was my Amy Grant VHS tape. Baby, baby. . .
7. Okay, I was sort of kidding on those last two. But how about this one: neither "More Than Words" by Extreme or "To Be With You" by Mr. Big made the list. The whole acoustic bad-boy heartbreak genre really needed some representation in the top 100.
8. If the criteria is "Most Popular Among Rural Coloradan Youth Dance DJs" I really think "Joyride" by Roxette makes it. Also, both the long and short version of "(Everything I Do) I Do it For You" are in there as well.
9. BTW, file that last one under "kidding".
10. Rules are rules, but it seems like a travesty that Mariah Carey is limited to one song in the top 100. Realistically, she would have at least three.
I guess that's all for now and I better save this before Blogger loses it. But I think there will be a Part II discussing specifically the top 10 of this list.
Recently VHI re-aired the five-hour "100 Greatest Songs of the 90's". I am so thankful for DVRs.
It was unclear what the criteria was for determining inclusion in this list. It was clear that an artist could not have more than one song in the top 100.
They made a point to fill us in on what a lot of these long-forgotten musicians have been doing since they hit it big - and it seems that almost all of them recently put out a CD or are working on a CD or are touring (probably for free). The one noteable exception was the guys from Kris Kross, who were the little kid rappers who wore their clothes backwards. Remember them? VH1 was all, yeah, no one has heard from these guys since 1996. We don't know where they are or what they're doing.
But that's not the main point of this article. The main point is to mention a few of the glaring exceptions.
1. Everything I Do (I Do it For You) by Bryan Adams - I can't believe this didn't make the cut. So maybe it's not a masterpiece, but if the criteria was "Popularity Among rural Coloradan teenageers in 1992" - this is the #1 song on the list, Nirvana be danged.
2. Nothing by Boyz II Men was on the list. I wasn't necessarily a big fan, so I don't have a recommendation as to which of their songs should be on the list. But how can you make a 5-hour production on music in the nineties and not mention these harmonizing wizards? It's even a bigger slap in the face when you consider that Color Me Badd, which was pretty much a poor man's version of Boys II Men, had a song in the top 40 of this list.
3. No Aerosmith? I guess that's not a huge surprise considering they didn't have any gigantic hits. But it seems like VH1 wouldn't have wanted to miss a chance to talk about the iconic videos starring a pre-Clueless Alicia Silverstone. Aerosmith's album Get A Grip was quite popular when I was a senior in high school, but again, I kind of doubt VH1 asked anyone from the Valley their opinion on the top songs of the nineties.
4. Don't Speak by No Doubt. How does this not make it?
5. Michael Bolton. I don't know if VH1 is being entirely honest with themselves. Or maybe they made a conscious decision to exclude the entire genre of easy listening.
6. Amy Grant. It seems like revisionist history or selective memory. People make fun of Amy Grant now, but in 1992, everyone loved Amy Grant. I loved Amy Grant. You loved Amy Grant. Don't deny it. And yes, that was my Amy Grant VHS tape. Baby, baby. . .
7. Okay, I was sort of kidding on those last two. But how about this one: neither "More Than Words" by Extreme or "To Be With You" by Mr. Big made the list. The whole acoustic bad-boy heartbreak genre really needed some representation in the top 100.
8. If the criteria is "Most Popular Among Rural Coloradan Youth Dance DJs" I really think "Joyride" by Roxette makes it. Also, both the long and short version of "(Everything I Do) I Do it For You" are in there as well.
9. BTW, file that last one under "kidding".
10. Rules are rules, but it seems like a travesty that Mariah Carey is limited to one song in the top 100. Realistically, she would have at least three.
I guess that's all for now and I better save this before Blogger loses it. But I think there will be a Part II discussing specifically the top 10 of this list.
Monday, August 30, 2010
Blogger Kind of Sucks
This has happened a couple of times. I've started a post, then come back to it later to make revisions. Then when it is finally perfected, I go to post it, and it doesn't post, and the last saved version is pre-revisions. I guess I should stop trusting that it is autosaving.
Oh, well. Due to this malfunction, you have missed out on my thoughts on college football conference realignment and my take on VH1's 100 Greatest Songs of the 90's.
Your loss.
Oh, well. Due to this malfunction, you have missed out on my thoughts on college football conference realignment and my take on VH1's 100 Greatest Songs of the 90's.
Your loss.
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Launched
Today I finally launched the self-reliance class I have been pondering and working on since last March. The Bishop and I came up with this as an additional offering in Sunday School. We identified six basic principles of self-reliance - finances, education, employment, home storage, health, and spiritual strength.
We started with finances. I developed a simple lesson covering four basic principles: paying tithing, saving/building a reserve, avoiding/eliminating debt, and self-discipline in day-to-day money decisions. I went ahead and taught the class, given my financial education and experience.
I was most worried about getting the word out. I've been doing fliers and having them announce in sacrament meeting, but if people are anything like me their church memory sometimes only lasts about five days. So when they didn't include it in the sacrament meeting announcements this morning, I started to get worried that no one would come. So I actually had to take a note up to the counselor before the last talk asking him to do a quick reminder of the class before closing the meeting.
And the turnout was good! I think we had about 12 attendees and the participation was good. So I'll teach the same class for three more weeks and then we'll move on to the next topic after stake conference.
I'm hoping to be somewhat less involved in the lesson development and teaching with the next topics than I was with finances. Honestly, I haven't even really started to think about the next one.
But I am excited to finally have this thing off the ground.
We started with finances. I developed a simple lesson covering four basic principles: paying tithing, saving/building a reserve, avoiding/eliminating debt, and self-discipline in day-to-day money decisions. I went ahead and taught the class, given my financial education and experience.
I was most worried about getting the word out. I've been doing fliers and having them announce in sacrament meeting, but if people are anything like me their church memory sometimes only lasts about five days. So when they didn't include it in the sacrament meeting announcements this morning, I started to get worried that no one would come. So I actually had to take a note up to the counselor before the last talk asking him to do a quick reminder of the class before closing the meeting.
And the turnout was good! I think we had about 12 attendees and the participation was good. So I'll teach the same class for three more weeks and then we'll move on to the next topic after stake conference.
I'm hoping to be somewhat less involved in the lesson development and teaching with the next topics than I was with finances. Honestly, I haven't even really started to think about the next one.
But I am excited to finally have this thing off the ground.
Friday, August 20, 2010
Seems Familiar
Okay, so let me get this straight. Word came out this week that BYU is looking to follow Utah out of the MWC, become an independent in football ala Notre Dame, and rejoin the WAC in all non-football sports. This would make two conferences that BYU and Utah have deserted.
The classic WAC of my youth consisted of BYU, Utah, CSU, Air Force, Wyoming, New Mexico, UTEP, San Diego State, and Hawaii.
In the early-to-mid nineties, the WAC got caught up in the expansion craze and added three more west coast schools (Fresno State, San Jose State, and UNLV) as well as four southwestern schools (Rice, SMU, TCU, and Tulsa). After three years of this mega-conference, a few of the classic WAC schools got to thinking that a conference that stretched from Honolulu to Tulsa maybe wasn't such a great idea.
So the classic WAC schools ditched the schools that they had just invited to join, along with distant Hawaii, and conveniently replaced the El Paso school with the Las Vegas school, and formed a brand-new conference, the Mountain West, aka WAC 2.0.
The WAC 1.0 has evolved a little bit over the past decade or so. The five southwestern schools all eventually left the conference, and were replaced with more intermountain-y schools - Nevada, Idaho, Boise State, Utah State, and New Mexico State. Also Louisiana Tech joined, which made sense geographically when they had all the Texas schools, but doesn't anymore.
Meanwhile, the MWC stayed lean and mean for the first few years of membership, with the eight schools. Then in 2005, they decided to add TCU. I thought this was a little odd at the time, because didn't you guys just up and ditch TCU six years ago?
More recently, the MWC added Boise State ostensibly as a 10th member, but really it was to replace Utah, who left for the Pac-10 a couple of days later. And now comes news that the MWC has raided the WAC for Nevada and Fresno State, supposedly as additional members, but really to either replace BYU or persuade them to stay. Does any of this sound familiar? How long before we get word that Rice, SMU, and UTEP are joining the Mountain West as well?
So the reason the Mountain West came to be in the first place was that they wanted a more tidy geography, which was accomplished pretty well in a neat little triangle extending from San Diego to Laramie to Albuquerque.
But now the triangle has doubled in size - San Diego to Boise to Dallas.
And so now BYU might become the big brother in a conference that includes Louisiana Tech, New Mexico State, Utah State, San Jose State, Hawaii, and Idaho.
Definitely a step down in competition.
I think I might see where this is going. BYU does this Independent/WAC hybrid thing for awhile, realizes they still can't get in the BCS. So the presidents of BYU, CSU, Wyoming, Air Force, New Mexico, San Diego State, and maybe Utah State get together and decide to form a new conference that is more suited to their needs and feels more like how things were back in the WAC's heydey of the eighties. They'll probably call it the Mountain Athletic Conference or something.
The classic WAC of my youth consisted of BYU, Utah, CSU, Air Force, Wyoming, New Mexico, UTEP, San Diego State, and Hawaii.
In the early-to-mid nineties, the WAC got caught up in the expansion craze and added three more west coast schools (Fresno State, San Jose State, and UNLV) as well as four southwestern schools (Rice, SMU, TCU, and Tulsa). After three years of this mega-conference, a few of the classic WAC schools got to thinking that a conference that stretched from Honolulu to Tulsa maybe wasn't such a great idea.
So the classic WAC schools ditched the schools that they had just invited to join, along with distant Hawaii, and conveniently replaced the El Paso school with the Las Vegas school, and formed a brand-new conference, the Mountain West, aka WAC 2.0.
The WAC 1.0 has evolved a little bit over the past decade or so. The five southwestern schools all eventually left the conference, and were replaced with more intermountain-y schools - Nevada, Idaho, Boise State, Utah State, and New Mexico State. Also Louisiana Tech joined, which made sense geographically when they had all the Texas schools, but doesn't anymore.
Meanwhile, the MWC stayed lean and mean for the first few years of membership, with the eight schools. Then in 2005, they decided to add TCU. I thought this was a little odd at the time, because didn't you guys just up and ditch TCU six years ago?
More recently, the MWC added Boise State ostensibly as a 10th member, but really it was to replace Utah, who left for the Pac-10 a couple of days later. And now comes news that the MWC has raided the WAC for Nevada and Fresno State, supposedly as additional members, but really to either replace BYU or persuade them to stay. Does any of this sound familiar? How long before we get word that Rice, SMU, and UTEP are joining the Mountain West as well?
So the reason the Mountain West came to be in the first place was that they wanted a more tidy geography, which was accomplished pretty well in a neat little triangle extending from San Diego to Laramie to Albuquerque.
But now the triangle has doubled in size - San Diego to Boise to Dallas.
And so now BYU might become the big brother in a conference that includes Louisiana Tech, New Mexico State, Utah State, San Jose State, Hawaii, and Idaho.
Definitely a step down in competition.
I think I might see where this is going. BYU does this Independent/WAC hybrid thing for awhile, realizes they still can't get in the BCS. So the presidents of BYU, CSU, Wyoming, Air Force, New Mexico, San Diego State, and maybe Utah State get together and decide to form a new conference that is more suited to their needs and feels more like how things were back in the WAC's heydey of the eighties. They'll probably call it the Mountain Athletic Conference or something.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Things I Would Buy. . . If Only They Were Legally Available
I'm sure everyone has sort of a list like this in their head - of things they would immediately purchase if only such a thing actually existed.
Here's a few of mine:
Seasons 2 thru 5 of Growing Pains on DVD. So far, only one season of the highly underrated 80's sitcom has been released on DVD - and that was five years ago. I guess it didn't sell very well, so it may be highly underrated only from my perspective. I prefer it to either The Cosby Show or Family Ties. You can catch a few old episodes on WB.com and I have a few more on VHS, but that is a far cry from having the full set! Notice that I'm not even asking for seasons 6 or 7 (which took place even though the series had run out of steam by then) - however, I don't have much hope that we will see any further seasons released.
Teen Angel on DVD with commentary and deleted scenes. I'm talking about the 1989 "miniseries" which ran during episodes of the Mickey Mouse Club on the Disney Channel. Never heard of it? Not surprised. However, it is a television classic about a misfit kid who loves the fifties, and needs help from his James Dean-eque guardian angel to get the attention of a girl at school. If you're not already convinced, maybe I should mention that the guardian angel is played by Jason Priestley. Yes, THAT Jason Priestley. Pre-90210 Jason Priestley. Before he was Jason Priestley. Plus, the girl is played by Renee O'Connor, who I think went on to become the sidekick of Xena Warrior Princess. It's the bomb!
Adventures in Babysitting Soundtrack. I actually thought of it this morning and did a quick search. I believe there is some sort of an underground version that someone has created, but a legitimate one was never produced. Still - that movie had some good music:
Babysitting Blues - Then He Kissed Me - Expressway to your Heart - Future in your Eyes - Twenty Five Miles - Evil (Is Going On) - The Brady Bunch Theme - What Does It Take (To Win Your Love?) - Just Can't Stop - Albert's Smokin' Ice - Gimme Shelter -Real Wild Child - Blues had a Baby and they Named it Rock-N-Roll -Bring it on Home to Me
Here's a few of mine:
Seasons 2 thru 5 of Growing Pains on DVD. So far, only one season of the highly underrated 80's sitcom has been released on DVD - and that was five years ago. I guess it didn't sell very well, so it may be highly underrated only from my perspective. I prefer it to either The Cosby Show or Family Ties. You can catch a few old episodes on WB.com and I have a few more on VHS, but that is a far cry from having the full set! Notice that I'm not even asking for seasons 6 or 7 (which took place even though the series had run out of steam by then) - however, I don't have much hope that we will see any further seasons released.
Teen Angel on DVD with commentary and deleted scenes. I'm talking about the 1989 "miniseries" which ran during episodes of the Mickey Mouse Club on the Disney Channel. Never heard of it? Not surprised. However, it is a television classic about a misfit kid who loves the fifties, and needs help from his James Dean-eque guardian angel to get the attention of a girl at school. If you're not already convinced, maybe I should mention that the guardian angel is played by Jason Priestley. Yes, THAT Jason Priestley. Pre-90210 Jason Priestley. Before he was Jason Priestley. Plus, the girl is played by Renee O'Connor, who I think went on to become the sidekick of Xena Warrior Princess. It's the bomb!
Adventures in Babysitting Soundtrack. I actually thought of it this morning and did a quick search. I believe there is some sort of an underground version that someone has created, but a legitimate one was never produced. Still - that movie had some good music:
Babysitting Blues - Then He Kissed Me - Expressway to your Heart - Future in your Eyes - Twenty Five Miles - Evil (Is Going On) - The Brady Bunch Theme - What Does It Take (To Win Your Love?) - Just Can't Stop - Albert's Smokin' Ice - Gimme Shelter -Real Wild Child - Blues had a Baby and they Named it Rock-N-Roll -Bring it on Home to Me
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Lou Brown (1940-2010)
Lost in all the hubbub over the death of Yankees owner George Steinbrenner last week was the fact that another legendary baseball figure also passed away - actor James Gammon, who portrayed Lou Brown, the manager of the Cleveland Indians in the movie "Major League".
Brown was famously managing a tire shop when he got the unsolicited job offer. But instead of leading the Indians to a dead-last finish as hoped by team management, he masterfully melded the talents of Willie "Mays" Hayes, Roger Dorn, Pedro Cerrano and Rick "Wild Thing" Vaughn and led them past the Yankees to the AL East title.
The gravelly-voiced actor uttered such unforgettable lines as "Give 'em the heater!" and "We're out of towels!" and will live on in our memories. I haven't seen the edited-for-TV version of Major League playing on USA or TBS lately. Fortunately, I have it taped. You would be wise to avoid the non-edited version due to some other unforgettable lines.
Monday, July 19, 2010
30 for 30 on ESPN
ESPN celebrated their 30-year anniversary in 2009. One of the things they did to commemorate the occassion was to kick off a series of documentaries. Filmmakers were commissioned to produce 30 films on different topics of the past 30 years. This was a win-win for me as I like sports and also like history.
Unfortunately, ESPN has not been very generous with actually putting these on the air. They are really hard to catch unless you have a DVR and they are frequently pre-empted if boxing or baseball or whatever run over the allotted time.
I have enjoyed several of these that I have been able to watch:
Small Potatoes: Who Killed the USFL? Involves a lot of reminiscing about the short-lived spring football league which played from 1983 to 1985, as well as an examination of the guy who killed it by forcing a move to a fall schedule - Donald Trump.
The U Talks about the University of Miami football dynasty of the 1980s and the fact that they weren't exactly choirboys, even by college football standards.
Winnning Time: Reggie Miller vs. The New York Knicks One of my favorite sports moments of the nineties was a 1994 playoff game at Madison Square Garden when Reggie Miller scored 25 points in the fourth quarter to lead the Indiana Pacers to victory - while talking trash to Knicks fan Spike Lee, who was sitting courtside. It was fun to relive that series of events.
Guru of Go Tells the story of basketball coach Paul Westhead, who brought his run and gun style to Loyola Marymount University in the late eighties and shattered scoring records before the tragic death of star player Hank Gathers.
I've seen a few others that have been slightly boring - one about Wayne Gretzky, one about the Balitmore Colts marching band, one about Len Bias. One that recently came out is "The Two Escobars" which deals with the convergence of the Columbian national soccer team and the drug trade. It is interesting, but uses a lot of subtitles, so it is somewhat tedious and we haven't finished it yet.
I have so far missed a few that I wanted to see - one about Jimmy the Greek, another about the invention of Rotisserie Baseball, and one about O.J.'s ride in the white Bronco. Plus there are several which have yet to premiere which look interesting.
Fortunately, Elizabeth is usually willing to watch these with me because as she says, "I always love a documentary."
So I think these are really good even if you aren't necessarily a sports fan. But then, I wouldn't know because I am a sports fan.
Unfortunately, ESPN has not been very generous with actually putting these on the air. They are really hard to catch unless you have a DVR and they are frequently pre-empted if boxing or baseball or whatever run over the allotted time.
I have enjoyed several of these that I have been able to watch:
Small Potatoes: Who Killed the USFL? Involves a lot of reminiscing about the short-lived spring football league which played from 1983 to 1985, as well as an examination of the guy who killed it by forcing a move to a fall schedule - Donald Trump.
The U Talks about the University of Miami football dynasty of the 1980s and the fact that they weren't exactly choirboys, even by college football standards.
Winnning Time: Reggie Miller vs. The New York Knicks One of my favorite sports moments of the nineties was a 1994 playoff game at Madison Square Garden when Reggie Miller scored 25 points in the fourth quarter to lead the Indiana Pacers to victory - while talking trash to Knicks fan Spike Lee, who was sitting courtside. It was fun to relive that series of events.
Guru of Go Tells the story of basketball coach Paul Westhead, who brought his run and gun style to Loyola Marymount University in the late eighties and shattered scoring records before the tragic death of star player Hank Gathers.
I've seen a few others that have been slightly boring - one about Wayne Gretzky, one about the Balitmore Colts marching band, one about Len Bias. One that recently came out is "The Two Escobars" which deals with the convergence of the Columbian national soccer team and the drug trade. It is interesting, but uses a lot of subtitles, so it is somewhat tedious and we haven't finished it yet.
I have so far missed a few that I wanted to see - one about Jimmy the Greek, another about the invention of Rotisserie Baseball, and one about O.J.'s ride in the white Bronco. Plus there are several which have yet to premiere which look interesting.
Fortunately, Elizabeth is usually willing to watch these with me because as she says, "I always love a documentary."
So I think these are really good even if you aren't necessarily a sports fan. But then, I wouldn't know because I am a sports fan.
Something New
I decided that after two years it was about time to try out a new blog template. This one is called "picture window" or something. I hope all five of you enjoy it.
I hope that my previous post didn't come off as favoring LeBron too much. Just to clarify, I don't like him at all and probably wouldn't show up to watch him if he were playing at Grandview High School. It's mainly the media that is so ridiculous - build someone up, and then when the time is right, tear them to pieces. For another example see Spears, Britney.
I hope that my previous post didn't come off as favoring LeBron too much. Just to clarify, I don't like him at all and probably wouldn't show up to watch him if he were playing at Grandview High School. It's mainly the media that is so ridiculous - build someone up, and then when the time is right, tear them to pieces. For another example see Spears, Britney.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
My Personal LBJ Take
Another day cannot pass without my take on LeBron James aka "King James". If you haven't been following this story or if you just returned from a two-month vacation to the third moon of Jupiter, here is a quick recap.
LeBron is the greatest active NBA player. Except for on the days when it is Kobe Bryant. A better way to say it is that people want him to be the greatest NBA player of all time - sort of a cross between Magic Johnson and Michael Jordan. Only better. He's not quite there yet - only 25. But the big deal is that he was in the last year of his contract with the Cleveland Cavaliers, and was set on testing the free agent market. He could go anywhere - New York, Chicago, Los Angeles. And pretty much anywhere would be happy to have him. And pay him. Lots and lots of money.
Anyways, the media has been talking this to death for weeks. It was practically a bigger story than the NBA playoffs, while they were still going on. Where was LeBron going to go? And then it got worse after the playoffs ended. Radio, TV, print - no one could ask the question enough times or come up with enough answers and theories on what was going to happen.
Finally, LeBron said that he was going to announce his decision via a one-hour special on ESPN and donate the advertising proceeds to the Boys and Girls Club. This escalated the nonstop LeBron coverage. I think ESPN had two hours of preview coverage for the one-hour special. I did not watch it on TV but listened to some of it in the car. The special itself was more asking the golden question. Where is LeBron going to go?
Finally, he announced that he was "taking his talents to South Beach" to play for the Miami Heat.
Since then, everyone (meaning the media) has been in an outrage about LeBron. "I can't believe he would go on national TV and break Cleveland's heart. . . LeBron is such a narcissist. . . LeBron got some terrible PR advice. . . what was he thinking, having an hour long special. . . This is because LeBron doesn't have a strong father figure. . . this is the end of professional sports as we know it. . . why did he have to announce it this way. . ."
And yet, I don't remember anyone in the media whining about the TV special beforehand. Of course not, because they practically asked for it! It seemed to be the only fitting end for weeks of breathless coverage - just like the only fitting end for months of speculation about the NCAA tournament is a one-hour special where they reveal the brackets. Just like the only fitting end for months of speculation about the NFL draft is to top it off with a few dozen hours of live coverage where NFL teams reveal who they picked!
Don't mistake me for a LeBron fan. In fact, don't mistake me for a basketball fan. I can barely stand to watch the sport anymore. I watched maybe three hours of NBA action during the 2009-2010 season. And so if you can choose pretty much anywhere in the US to work, and sucker ESPN into donating millions to a charity of your choice in the process, why wouldn't you?
And if it was so uncool to do the one-hour special where he "stabbed Cleveland in the back", then why didn't somebody at ESPN pull him aside and say, "Yo, LeBron, this isn't cool. We don't want to be a part of this, and you're getting some bad PR advice."
But they didn't do that. Probably because then the special would have been on another sucker cable network.
Still, being a sports fan, I can understand that people can get upset. People love to be upset. And the sports media love to stir the pot, because more upset people mean they are buying more papers, listening to more talk shows, and lighting up more websites.
But you guys wanted this! You know you did! You know you wanted it to be a live one-hour special broadcast around the world! Because he's King James! You created him!
And no controversy about a black person is complete without Jesse Jackson weighing in. . . he accused the Cavaliers owner of having a slave owner mentality. Sigh. Really, Jesse? You know you are basically a caricature of yourself at this point, right?
But I'm not getting in to that today. . .
LeBron is the greatest active NBA player. Except for on the days when it is Kobe Bryant. A better way to say it is that people want him to be the greatest NBA player of all time - sort of a cross between Magic Johnson and Michael Jordan. Only better. He's not quite there yet - only 25. But the big deal is that he was in the last year of his contract with the Cleveland Cavaliers, and was set on testing the free agent market. He could go anywhere - New York, Chicago, Los Angeles. And pretty much anywhere would be happy to have him. And pay him. Lots and lots of money.
Anyways, the media has been talking this to death for weeks. It was practically a bigger story than the NBA playoffs, while they were still going on. Where was LeBron going to go? And then it got worse after the playoffs ended. Radio, TV, print - no one could ask the question enough times or come up with enough answers and theories on what was going to happen.
Finally, LeBron said that he was going to announce his decision via a one-hour special on ESPN and donate the advertising proceeds to the Boys and Girls Club. This escalated the nonstop LeBron coverage. I think ESPN had two hours of preview coverage for the one-hour special. I did not watch it on TV but listened to some of it in the car. The special itself was more asking the golden question. Where is LeBron going to go?
Finally, he announced that he was "taking his talents to South Beach" to play for the Miami Heat.
Since then, everyone (meaning the media) has been in an outrage about LeBron. "I can't believe he would go on national TV and break Cleveland's heart. . . LeBron is such a narcissist. . . LeBron got some terrible PR advice. . . what was he thinking, having an hour long special. . . This is because LeBron doesn't have a strong father figure. . . this is the end of professional sports as we know it. . . why did he have to announce it this way. . ."
And yet, I don't remember anyone in the media whining about the TV special beforehand. Of course not, because they practically asked for it! It seemed to be the only fitting end for weeks of breathless coverage - just like the only fitting end for months of speculation about the NCAA tournament is a one-hour special where they reveal the brackets. Just like the only fitting end for months of speculation about the NFL draft is to top it off with a few dozen hours of live coverage where NFL teams reveal who they picked!
Don't mistake me for a LeBron fan. In fact, don't mistake me for a basketball fan. I can barely stand to watch the sport anymore. I watched maybe three hours of NBA action during the 2009-2010 season. And so if you can choose pretty much anywhere in the US to work, and sucker ESPN into donating millions to a charity of your choice in the process, why wouldn't you?
And if it was so uncool to do the one-hour special where he "stabbed Cleveland in the back", then why didn't somebody at ESPN pull him aside and say, "Yo, LeBron, this isn't cool. We don't want to be a part of this, and you're getting some bad PR advice."
But they didn't do that. Probably because then the special would have been on another sucker cable network.
Still, being a sports fan, I can understand that people can get upset. People love to be upset. And the sports media love to stir the pot, because more upset people mean they are buying more papers, listening to more talk shows, and lighting up more websites.
But you guys wanted this! You know you did! You know you wanted it to be a live one-hour special broadcast around the world! Because he's King James! You created him!
And no controversy about a black person is complete without Jesse Jackson weighing in. . . he accused the Cavaliers owner of having a slave owner mentality. Sigh. Really, Jesse? You know you are basically a caricature of yourself at this point, right?
But I'm not getting in to that today. . .
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
What's the Big Deal? #2
So I started this "series" a while back and I had a couple of ideas but I haven't exactly followed through by writing about them.
This one is sports-related, from a couple of months ago. So you've probably all heard of Ken Griffey, Jr., one of the greatest baseball players of our time. So anyways, he went back to Seattle to finish his career with the Mariners, the team he started with over 20 years ago.
So the Mariners lost a tight game earlier this year and the manager was asked why Griffey hadn't been available to pinch-hit, and I think the manager sort of dodged the question. Anyways, a story later came out saying that Griffey had gone back to the clubhouse to get a jacket in the middle of game and never came back. And so a couple of players had gone back and found him asleep in a chair in front of his locker. And so that's why he wasn't available to pinch-hit.
And then the whole thing blew up all over the place. Everyone vehemently denied that Griffey had been sleeping during the game. One of the Mariners wanted a piece of whoever had been the team "source" on the story. And the whole team refused to speak with anyone from the Tacoma News-Tribune, which I believe had published or somehow facilitated the story.
I actually thought it was hilarious that "Nap-Gate" caused such an uproar. Let's think about this for a second. First of all, it's baseball. It's not like they were fighting in Iraq or something. Second of all, it's Ken Griffey Jr. If you have over 600 career home runs, you should probably be able to walk around the dugout with no pants on without anyone batting an eye. If he was just a rookie - then there might be a controversy. Finally, he's 40 years old! Some of those games last well past 10 PM - that's late for an old guy.
But anyways, for some reason there were some serious debates going on in the media about this whole episode. I think it's mainly a product of the 24/7 media. If this happened in 1990, I kind of doubt anyone outside of King County ever hears about it.
I guess Junior took the hint, because he has retired from baseball since the controversy.
This one is sports-related, from a couple of months ago. So you've probably all heard of Ken Griffey, Jr., one of the greatest baseball players of our time. So anyways, he went back to Seattle to finish his career with the Mariners, the team he started with over 20 years ago.
So the Mariners lost a tight game earlier this year and the manager was asked why Griffey hadn't been available to pinch-hit, and I think the manager sort of dodged the question. Anyways, a story later came out saying that Griffey had gone back to the clubhouse to get a jacket in the middle of game and never came back. And so a couple of players had gone back and found him asleep in a chair in front of his locker. And so that's why he wasn't available to pinch-hit.
And then the whole thing blew up all over the place. Everyone vehemently denied that Griffey had been sleeping during the game. One of the Mariners wanted a piece of whoever had been the team "source" on the story. And the whole team refused to speak with anyone from the Tacoma News-Tribune, which I believe had published or somehow facilitated the story.
I actually thought it was hilarious that "Nap-Gate" caused such an uproar. Let's think about this for a second. First of all, it's baseball. It's not like they were fighting in Iraq or something. Second of all, it's Ken Griffey Jr. If you have over 600 career home runs, you should probably be able to walk around the dugout with no pants on without anyone batting an eye. If he was just a rookie - then there might be a controversy. Finally, he's 40 years old! Some of those games last well past 10 PM - that's late for an old guy.
But anyways, for some reason there were some serious debates going on in the media about this whole episode. I think it's mainly a product of the 24/7 media. If this happened in 1990, I kind of doubt anyone outside of King County ever hears about it.
I guess Junior took the hint, because he has retired from baseball since the controversy.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Things That Bug Lately
1. That everyone is disappointed about the USA losing to Ghana and thus not making it to the quarterfinals or the semifinals of the World Cup, and that everyone has to now try and figure out why the USA is not the world's best at soccer. Guess what? They did fine. Did you really think they were going to make it all the way to the end? Let the other nations of the world have some fun.
2. That I've heard several journalist types refer to soccer as a "beautiful game." I'm not exactly sure why it bugs me. I guess things about the game could be beautiful, such as "that was a beautiful kick" or "what a beautiful stadium" - but really - is any game beautiful? They can be fun or hard or entertaining or competitive or challenging - but beautiful? I don't know about that.
3. I want to start making a list of words that bug me. Only I can't possibly think of them all right now. One is the word "vet", when it is used in the context of "checking somebody or something out" - for example, Mr. So and So Political Candidate is going through the vetting process. I don't know, vet/vetted/vetting is just like nails on a chalkboard to me. Hate it. The only thing that should be vetted is your sick cat or your lame horse.
4. Some cutesie made up words and phrases also bug me. Being a CPA, I get lots of emails about continuing education opportunities. The word "webinar" - if it can be called a word - makes me want to punch whoever thought of it in the mouth. Also, the phrase "Lunch and Learn." Despise it. Don't you dare suggest that I use my lunch for learning. Because I'm using it to write this post instead.
2. That I've heard several journalist types refer to soccer as a "beautiful game." I'm not exactly sure why it bugs me. I guess things about the game could be beautiful, such as "that was a beautiful kick" or "what a beautiful stadium" - but really - is any game beautiful? They can be fun or hard or entertaining or competitive or challenging - but beautiful? I don't know about that.
3. I want to start making a list of words that bug me. Only I can't possibly think of them all right now. One is the word "vet", when it is used in the context of "checking somebody or something out" - for example, Mr. So and So Political Candidate is going through the vetting process. I don't know, vet/vetted/vetting is just like nails on a chalkboard to me. Hate it. The only thing that should be vetted is your sick cat or your lame horse.
4. Some cutesie made up words and phrases also bug me. Being a CPA, I get lots of emails about continuing education opportunities. The word "webinar" - if it can be called a word - makes me want to punch whoever thought of it in the mouth. Also, the phrase "Lunch and Learn." Despise it. Don't you dare suggest that I use my lunch for learning. Because I'm using it to write this post instead.
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Sonic Happy Hour
I spent all day outside yesterday during our 99 degree scorcher yesterday. That's according to the temp at DIA - however, the van was saying it was as high as 102 on our way home. The solution for my hot day was exactly as it has been on so many other hot days in recent memory - a trip to the local Sonic.
If you didn't already know, every day between 2 and 4 is Happy Hour at Sonic. All drinks and slushes are 1/2 price. So, for instance, if you purchase a Route 44 size Cherry Limeade - which is basically Sonic's Super Size - the regular price is $2.19, but if you show up during happy hour that big boy is yours for just $1.10. And if the 44 ouncer is just too much for you, you can go with a smaller size and your drink will probably be less than a buck.
The limeades are really good - my preference is Cherry, while the wife prefers the Cranberry. Icy, syrupy, delight with a couple of real lime wedges found at the bottom of your foam cup. It pretty much makes a hot sweaty day worth it.
If you didn't already know, every day between 2 and 4 is Happy Hour at Sonic. All drinks and slushes are 1/2 price. So, for instance, if you purchase a Route 44 size Cherry Limeade - which is basically Sonic's Super Size - the regular price is $2.19, but if you show up during happy hour that big boy is yours for just $1.10. And if the 44 ouncer is just too much for you, you can go with a smaller size and your drink will probably be less than a buck.
The limeades are really good - my preference is Cherry, while the wife prefers the Cranberry. Icy, syrupy, delight with a couple of real lime wedges found at the bottom of your foam cup. It pretty much makes a hot sweaty day worth it.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Favorite Shows of Yesteryear #1
I've been trying to think of ways to get back into writing here. And this is what I came up with. I'll start with an easy one - ALF. You know, the one about the alien from the planet Melmac who crash-lands into a family's garage, they take him in, and hilarity ensues?
I haven't seen an episode of ALF in a long, long time. I don't really remember that many episodes - which you must be so thankful for. I mainly remember being in sixth grade and getting together with my friend Freddie the day after a new ALF aired to review the most hilarious sequences.
I do still have one episode taped on VHS cassette. Thankfully, it is the quintessential episode of ALF. It's the one where ALF is going to soak in the hot tub, only the Tanners didn't have a hot tub, so he has to rig one up, and gives himself an electro-shock. He was reading a life insurance brochure in the tub, so a delusional ALF thinks he is not an alien, but an insurance salesman - specifically Wayne Schlagel of Michigan Life & Casualty. And the Tanners spend the two-part episode trying to cure ALF of his amnesia, so we are treated to a nice helping of flashbacks from previous episodes - for example, when ALF tried to hypnotize Lucky, the family cat, into believing that he is a bagel. Or when ALF did his best "Tom Cruise in Risky Business" impersonation. And all this is intertwined with ALF believing that he is the victim of a bad sales call and is being held hostage. Is it any wonder this was my favorite show when I was 12?
I was so affected by that episode that I made it my seventh-grade Halloween costume. It's really the only costume concept that I've come up with that I've ever been satisfied with. I wore a blazer and carried around a briefcase and printed up some business cards indicating that I was Wayne Schlagel of Micigan Life & Casualty.
ALF was fairly popular back in the day, but virtually none of the Tanner family - Willie, Kate, Lynne, or Brian, were ever seen on television again. However, ALF is still seen from time to time on commercials and stuff.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
What's the Big Deal #1
Today I am starting a series of posts called, "What's the Big Deal?" Because lately it seems that people have been getting ants in their pants over trivial things.
For example, I recently read an article in The Denver Post. Apparently, in Colorado you are allowed to sell shares in your dairy farm whereby you can then distribute fresh raw cow milk to the shareholders.
But there are some people who want to shut down these farms. People might get sick. We're so worried that someone will be harmed by this non-pasteurized milk. So we better shut these farms down. Right now.
I'm sure that anyone who has laid down money to buy shares in one of these farms has taken the the time to properly weigh the risks of drinking raw milk with whatever they perceive to be the nutritional benefits. I'll acknowledge that most people probably should not drink raw milk. But do they really think there is going to be some sort of RAW MILK REVOLUTION? I kind of doubt it. Most people are worried about cost and convenience when trying to fulfill their dairy needs, neither of which is really offered by raw milk.
I'd be willing to bet that what the commercial dairy industry is mostly worried about is how it could potentially affect their bank account.
So I say let them drink and drink and drink until they are sick - not from bacteria, but because they are so full of its rich, fatty goodness.
It's kind of like with cigarettes. It's not like any smoker in our day and age suddenly realizes, "Hey, I had no idea that there are potential health consequences of sucking down this burning tobacco!" (I realize some may say they didn't know, but come on. You're really pinning your lung cancer on a cartoon camel?)
As for me, I don't really have a dog (cow?) in the fight. I drank raw milk once. I didn't get sick. But I'm happy with my milk from the grocery.
Should raw milk be sold at the Safeways? Nope. Should raw milk be served at the school cafeteria? Absolutely not. But if people want to drink non-pasteurized milk in the privacy of their own homes, I think that is perfectly okay.
For example, I recently read an article in The Denver Post. Apparently, in Colorado you are allowed to sell shares in your dairy farm whereby you can then distribute fresh raw cow milk to the shareholders.
But there are some people who want to shut down these farms. People might get sick. We're so worried that someone will be harmed by this non-pasteurized milk. So we better shut these farms down. Right now.
I'm sure that anyone who has laid down money to buy shares in one of these farms has taken the the time to properly weigh the risks of drinking raw milk with whatever they perceive to be the nutritional benefits. I'll acknowledge that most people probably should not drink raw milk. But do they really think there is going to be some sort of RAW MILK REVOLUTION? I kind of doubt it. Most people are worried about cost and convenience when trying to fulfill their dairy needs, neither of which is really offered by raw milk.
I'd be willing to bet that what the commercial dairy industry is mostly worried about is how it could potentially affect their bank account.
So I say let them drink and drink and drink until they are sick - not from bacteria, but because they are so full of its rich, fatty goodness.
It's kind of like with cigarettes. It's not like any smoker in our day and age suddenly realizes, "Hey, I had no idea that there are potential health consequences of sucking down this burning tobacco!" (I realize some may say they didn't know, but come on. You're really pinning your lung cancer on a cartoon camel?)
As for me, I don't really have a dog (cow?) in the fight. I drank raw milk once. I didn't get sick. But I'm happy with my milk from the grocery.
Should raw milk be sold at the Safeways? Nope. Should raw milk be served at the school cafeteria? Absolutely not. But if people want to drink non-pasteurized milk in the privacy of their own homes, I think that is perfectly okay.
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Big Idea
I love TV shows that look back to the past and sometimes attempt to countdown/rank the best or worst of some thing. I don't know if that last sentence made a bit of sense, so here's a couple of examples: the VH1 series "I Love the '80s" and the E! network series "E! True Hollywood Story". These were pretty huge 7-10 years ago but have pretty much died out thanks to the onslaught of stupid "reality" shows. I am so ready for the "reality TV" phenomenon to end. It is going to end, right?
Anyways, I missed a lot of these shows as we did not have cable or satellite TV for much of that time. Although I have "I Love the '80s" preserved on videotape, I totally missed "I Love the 70s" and "I Love the 90s". I could only envy people who were able to watch "Top 100 One-Hit Wonders" or whatever other fine programming might have been on.
Occassionally, VHI will throw me a bone and rerun something old like "Top 100 Metal Songs" but they broadcast it at random times, like 5:00 on a Friday, which isn't really my prime viewing time. For example, I was about to head off to bed one night a couple of weeks ago when I noticed that VHI was running a program called "Top 20 Soft Rock Hits" or something like that. YES! The only problem was that it was 11:00 PM when this program kicked off. I was tired and had to work the next day. And VH1 didn't give me advance notice that they were running this little gem, so I didn't have time to properly set the VCR (don't make fun, but yes, that is still my recording mechanism!) so that I could enjoy at a more convenient time. So I enjoyed for a very few minutes as I was told wonderful tales of Captain and Tenille, Michael Bolton, Juice Newton, and Toto. And then I had to turn it off before they got to Lionel Richie and Air Supply. Oh well.
For a few weeks, I've been talking about my idea for a Countdown Network. A channel that does nothing but count stuff down. Imagine the possibilities. Top 50 Songs of the Seventies. Top 10 John Hughes Films. Top 50 Politicians of the 20th Century. Top 20 Hollywood Starlets of the Sixties. Top 25 White Collar Criminals. Top 25 Sitcoms. I could go on and on. Tell me you wouldn't want to watch any of those shows.
And then I had another thought while watching the end of "Glee" on Fox, which is a terrible show, but I wasn't controlling the remote, so whatever. They did some sort of a remake of Madonna's "Vogue" video. I wondered, "What happened to all those vintage music videos from the 80s? Why don't they show those anymore? Maybe I could start another cable network called the Vintage Music Video Channel?
Or better, I could roll that into my Countdown Network! I'd have tons of programming!
It would be called the Nostalgia Network. I could also run classic episodes of TV shows and maybe throw in replays of classic sporting events if I needed to fill some time.
So you might be wondering, that is a great idea! I wish I had thought of it! I would so do it, but I don't want to steal his idea.
Please do! Please steal my idea! I don't know how to start a network and certainly don't have the capital. So if you do it, then I can just sit home and watch it, even if I might be the only person in America watching.
Come on! Do it! I promise that I will buy from your advertisers.
I also have an idea for an Accounting Channel, but I'll save that for another post.
Anyways, I missed a lot of these shows as we did not have cable or satellite TV for much of that time. Although I have "I Love the '80s" preserved on videotape, I totally missed "I Love the 70s" and "I Love the 90s". I could only envy people who were able to watch "Top 100 One-Hit Wonders" or whatever other fine programming might have been on.
Occassionally, VHI will throw me a bone and rerun something old like "Top 100 Metal Songs" but they broadcast it at random times, like 5:00 on a Friday, which isn't really my prime viewing time. For example, I was about to head off to bed one night a couple of weeks ago when I noticed that VHI was running a program called "Top 20 Soft Rock Hits" or something like that. YES! The only problem was that it was 11:00 PM when this program kicked off. I was tired and had to work the next day. And VH1 didn't give me advance notice that they were running this little gem, so I didn't have time to properly set the VCR (don't make fun, but yes, that is still my recording mechanism!) so that I could enjoy at a more convenient time. So I enjoyed for a very few minutes as I was told wonderful tales of Captain and Tenille, Michael Bolton, Juice Newton, and Toto. And then I had to turn it off before they got to Lionel Richie and Air Supply. Oh well.
For a few weeks, I've been talking about my idea for a Countdown Network. A channel that does nothing but count stuff down. Imagine the possibilities. Top 50 Songs of the Seventies. Top 10 John Hughes Films. Top 50 Politicians of the 20th Century. Top 20 Hollywood Starlets of the Sixties. Top 25 White Collar Criminals. Top 25 Sitcoms. I could go on and on. Tell me you wouldn't want to watch any of those shows.
And then I had another thought while watching the end of "Glee" on Fox, which is a terrible show, but I wasn't controlling the remote, so whatever. They did some sort of a remake of Madonna's "Vogue" video. I wondered, "What happened to all those vintage music videos from the 80s? Why don't they show those anymore? Maybe I could start another cable network called the Vintage Music Video Channel?
Or better, I could roll that into my Countdown Network! I'd have tons of programming!
It would be called the Nostalgia Network. I could also run classic episodes of TV shows and maybe throw in replays of classic sporting events if I needed to fill some time.
So you might be wondering, that is a great idea! I wish I had thought of it! I would so do it, but I don't want to steal his idea.
Please do! Please steal my idea! I don't know how to start a network and certainly don't have the capital. So if you do it, then I can just sit home and watch it, even if I might be the only person in America watching.
Come on! Do it! I promise that I will buy from your advertisers.
I also have an idea for an Accounting Channel, but I'll save that for another post.
Friday, April 16, 2010
It's Over
After 10 years, we have finally divested ourselves of our Sam's Club membership and joined the Costco Revolution. We signed up for Sam's while at BYU and have carried our membership from Utah to North Carolina and back to Colorado. I guess we were about ready for a change. Elizabeth has been talking it up for a few months after making several visits with Natalie. I'm not sure if it was the prices or selection or the fact that they sell Izze sodas by the case that convinced her. Our Sam's membership didn't expire until the end of March, so we didn't pull the trigger until today.
We'll see how it goes, I guess. The two clubs are pretty similar. Costco is more red, Sam's Club is blue. Mainly we just want to put less of our money into Wal-Mart's pocket. Surely we won't topple the Walton Empire by taking away the $1,000 a year we probably spent there, but it feels kinda good to stick it to them however we can.
Besides, as Sam's Club began proclaiming several years ago, "We're in business for small business."
That statement always sounded to me like, "We're not in business for you. But I guess we'll let you in."
Of course, Costco was a zoo at 1:00 in the afternoon. If it's always like that, I don't know if I will enjoy it quite as much.
We'll see how it goes, I guess. The two clubs are pretty similar. Costco is more red, Sam's Club is blue. Mainly we just want to put less of our money into Wal-Mart's pocket. Surely we won't topple the Walton Empire by taking away the $1,000 a year we probably spent there, but it feels kinda good to stick it to them however we can.
Besides, as Sam's Club began proclaiming several years ago, "We're in business for small business."
That statement always sounded to me like, "We're not in business for you. But I guess we'll let you in."
Of course, Costco was a zoo at 1:00 in the afternoon. If it's always like that, I don't know if I will enjoy it quite as much.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Wolves are Apparently the Bomb
Some newspaper articles make me go hmmmm - maybe not the story itself but the way it was written. There was one in today's Denver Post about the possibility that wolves have returned to Colorado. I didn't know this, but there are apparently have been no wolves in Colorado for 70 years or something.
I love the phrase "wolf advocate" used in the article. How would you like to be known as a wolf advocate? Do wolves need an advocate? I can imagine being handed a business card reading, JOHN B. LUNDQUIST, WOLF ADVOCATE.
The wolf advocates believe there are wolves in Colorado becuase they found "wolf scat" in northwestern Colorado. I love that the author took the time to call it scat. Not dung, not droppings, not excrement, but scat. What a great word - although it doesn't seem much different than the biologist saying, "Yeah, we found a pile of wolf crap and we're sending it to the lab." My only question is this: if you found a pile of feline poo, would you call it "cat scat"?
The line, "visitors flock to Yellowstone National Park to try to spot the animals" was a bit of a head scratcher for me. Maybe it's just me, but I never thought of wolves as being the primary attraction of Yellowstone. I thought it was the geological wonders, the scenery, or maybe the bears or buffalo. I've never heard anyone say, "Yeah, I'm taking two weeks vacation to head up to Wyoming. It's my lifelong dream to get a glimpse of a real wolf!"
I'll skip comment on the idea that there are labs that run DNA tests on wolf scat.
And then there was the part of the article that stated that there were 319 wolves in Wyoming. Is this true? Really? They have it down to the exact wolf? Will there be a separate 2010 census for the wolves? I can imagine Mr. and Mrs. Wolf getting the census form in their wolf mailbox, and they have to fill out how many wolves are in their wolfpack and their estimated annual number of kills. Is it 1-30? 31-50? 51-100? Or more than 100?
So I'm kind of weirded out. I never knew people were so into wolves. And I went to NC State University! You'd think I would understand about wolfpacks!
I love the phrase "wolf advocate" used in the article. How would you like to be known as a wolf advocate? Do wolves need an advocate? I can imagine being handed a business card reading, JOHN B. LUNDQUIST, WOLF ADVOCATE.
The wolf advocates believe there are wolves in Colorado becuase they found "wolf scat" in northwestern Colorado. I love that the author took the time to call it scat. Not dung, not droppings, not excrement, but scat. What a great word - although it doesn't seem much different than the biologist saying, "Yeah, we found a pile of wolf crap and we're sending it to the lab." My only question is this: if you found a pile of feline poo, would you call it "cat scat"?
The line, "visitors flock to Yellowstone National Park to try to spot the animals" was a bit of a head scratcher for me. Maybe it's just me, but I never thought of wolves as being the primary attraction of Yellowstone. I thought it was the geological wonders, the scenery, or maybe the bears or buffalo. I've never heard anyone say, "Yeah, I'm taking two weeks vacation to head up to Wyoming. It's my lifelong dream to get a glimpse of a real wolf!"
I'll skip comment on the idea that there are labs that run DNA tests on wolf scat.
And then there was the part of the article that stated that there were 319 wolves in Wyoming. Is this true? Really? They have it down to the exact wolf? Will there be a separate 2010 census for the wolves? I can imagine Mr. and Mrs. Wolf getting the census form in their wolf mailbox, and they have to fill out how many wolves are in their wolfpack and their estimated annual number of kills. Is it 1-30? 31-50? 51-100? Or more than 100?
So I'm kind of weirded out. I never knew people were so into wolves. And I went to NC State University! You'd think I would understand about wolfpacks!
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Hoarders
.jpg)
I recently discovered "Hoarders" on A&E. Fascinating.
Each episode features the story of two different hoarders. Different, yet the same, because of their compulsion to accumulate possessions. Their houses are piled high with stuff. Usually the stuff is causing other problems: health, safety, or family tension. So these people know that they have a problem and they need help, so they allow A&E to come in and film while psychologists and professional organizers try to help them let go of their junk.
It's clearly a psychological disorder. This was apparent in the first episode that I saw where the lady insisted on sorting through each and every bag of trash before she would allow it to be taken away. Meanwhile, guys waited outside with nearly empty trucks and nothing to do.
It's also interesting how upset the children are that their parent is unable to change. Mother and teenage son were really butting heads on the issue in another episode I saw.
It seems to be more of a female problem, but there was a guy featured on one episode. He was a firefighter and would get really jumpy about the idea of someone throwing out something behind his back.
We identified a Mormon family on one episode through several context clues: family home evening chart, red-robed Jesus picture, Ensign magazine in a box, and a copy of the Friend which was cause for one scene of contention.
I'm not sure what A&E does helps these people, but hey, I'm not the psychologist. They basically have the help for two days and then they are on their own. Some of these folks seem like they need a lot more help than can be given in 48 hours.
It's a little bit scary becuase I think there is a little bit of "hoarder" in all of us. It wouldn't take much to become prisoner to your things.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Home Field Go Bye-bye?
No, I don't have anything else to write about besides the Broncos, even though the season is over. But I had a thought while reading the paper today. One of the columnists claimed that the Broncos have given up much of their home-field advantage since moving to Invesco Field from old Mile High nine years ago. The theory is that the Broncos have priced out many of the die-hard fans in favor of the wine-and-cheese crowd. Plus the old place was much noisier thanks to the old-school construction.
So I thought, I'd like to test that theory! Has the home field advantage truly taken a hit over the past decade?
I'll be comparing two eras - The Invesco Era (2001-2009) and the Old Mile High Era (1977-2000).
The Broncos averaged 5.9 wins per season at home during the Old Mile High Era (and that's including the strike-shortened 1982 season), and have so far averaged just 5.3 home victories per season during the Invesco Era.
During the Old Mile High Era, the Broncos finished either 7-1 or 8-0 at home a total of nine times. That's rougly once every three seasons. Since the Invesco Era began, the Broncos have finished with at least 7 home victories only once - during the 2005 season, when they were 8-0.
The Broncos also had some nice stretches at home in the Old Mile High Era. They went 24-0 at home between 1996 and 1998. And between 1983 and 1989, they went 45-11 at home, an 80% winning percentage. The best stretch in the Invesco Era was a 31-9 record at home between 2001 and 2005.
I figured it would probably be more accurate to look at what percentage of the Broncos' victories came on their home field - so that I can be sure I'm measuring home-field advantage without having it skewed by the fact that the Broncos were more successful overall in the eighties and nineties. It's an imperfect measurement, but I'm not writing a scientific paper. I'm just curious.
The Broncos won 48 games at home during the Invesco Era. They won 82 games overall during that period. So that calculates to 59% of their victories coming on their home field.
I then looked at every other 9 year period during the Old Mile High Era. I calculated 1977 to 1985, 1978 to 1986, 1979 to 1987, and so on. Thank goodness for computerized spreadsheet packages.
The Broncos exceeded the 59% Invesco Era mark in every nine year period during the Old Mile High Era, except one, which was also 59% (1977 to 1985). The Broncos also exceeded 48 home victories in each nine year period during the Old Mile High Era.
The high mark was 67% between 1987 and 1995. During that time, the Broncos finished 8-8 in 1988 and 1992, but still went a combined 13-3 at home during those years. The Broncos are also a very average 32-32 over the past four years, and yet were just a combined 17-15 at home.
So I think this amateurish analysis supports the theory that the home field advantage has diminished with the new stadium.
There is one interesting stat from the Invesco Era - Jake Plummer was 22-5 at home as the starting quarterback. But he wasn't good enough for Mikey Shanahan. Oh well.
So I thought, I'd like to test that theory! Has the home field advantage truly taken a hit over the past decade?
I'll be comparing two eras - The Invesco Era (2001-2009) and the Old Mile High Era (1977-2000).
The Broncos averaged 5.9 wins per season at home during the Old Mile High Era (and that's including the strike-shortened 1982 season), and have so far averaged just 5.3 home victories per season during the Invesco Era.
During the Old Mile High Era, the Broncos finished either 7-1 or 8-0 at home a total of nine times. That's rougly once every three seasons. Since the Invesco Era began, the Broncos have finished with at least 7 home victories only once - during the 2005 season, when they were 8-0.
The Broncos also had some nice stretches at home in the Old Mile High Era. They went 24-0 at home between 1996 and 1998. And between 1983 and 1989, they went 45-11 at home, an 80% winning percentage. The best stretch in the Invesco Era was a 31-9 record at home between 2001 and 2005.
I figured it would probably be more accurate to look at what percentage of the Broncos' victories came on their home field - so that I can be sure I'm measuring home-field advantage without having it skewed by the fact that the Broncos were more successful overall in the eighties and nineties. It's an imperfect measurement, but I'm not writing a scientific paper. I'm just curious.
The Broncos won 48 games at home during the Invesco Era. They won 82 games overall during that period. So that calculates to 59% of their victories coming on their home field.
I then looked at every other 9 year period during the Old Mile High Era. I calculated 1977 to 1985, 1978 to 1986, 1979 to 1987, and so on. Thank goodness for computerized spreadsheet packages.
The Broncos exceeded the 59% Invesco Era mark in every nine year period during the Old Mile High Era, except one, which was also 59% (1977 to 1985). The Broncos also exceeded 48 home victories in each nine year period during the Old Mile High Era.
The high mark was 67% between 1987 and 1995. During that time, the Broncos finished 8-8 in 1988 and 1992, but still went a combined 13-3 at home during those years. The Broncos are also a very average 32-32 over the past four years, and yet were just a combined 17-15 at home.
So I think this amateurish analysis supports the theory that the home field advantage has diminished with the new stadium.
There is one interesting stat from the Invesco Era - Jake Plummer was 22-5 at home as the starting quarterback. But he wasn't good enough for Mikey Shanahan. Oh well.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Super Long Time
So I'm totally into the NFL playoffs! I watched the second half of NY Jets/Cincinnati and the whole two minutes of overtime between Green Bay & Arizona last weekend. This weekend I listened to some of Arizona/New Orleans on the radio, and had Indy/Baltimore on the TV although I wasn't paying attention. And then I watched the last two minutes of San Diego/NY Jets. So maybe I'm not really into it this year.
What is interesting about the coming weekend of AFC and NFC Championship games is that the games involve three teams who haven't been seen in a Super Bowl anytime in the last three decades. At least one starved fan base (winner of New Orleans-Minnesota) and maybe two (if Jets win against Indy) will be rewarded.
The New Orleans Saints have never been to the Super Bowl in their 40+ years of existence. The Minnesota Vikings have not been since 1977. And the Jets have not appeared in the Super Bowl since 1969. I have updated my list of NFL teams and how long it has been since their last Super Bowl appearance and included it below.
NEVER BEEN
Houston Texans
Jacksonville Jaguars
Cleveland Browns
Detroit Lions - never made it, never will
New Orleans Saints
SURE HAS BEEN A LONG TIME
New York Jets (40 years - will go to 41 if they lose on Sunday)
Kansas City Chiefs (40 years) - ha ha
Minnesota Vikings (32 years - will go to 33 if they lose on Sunday)
Miami Dolphis (25 years)
Cincinnati Bengals (21 years)
STARTING TO GET IMPATIENT
Washington Redskins (18 years)- will Mikey Shanahan fix this?
Buffalo Bills (16 years)
San Diego Chargers (15 years)- choked away their chance this year
San Francisco 49ers (15 years)- Joe? Steve? Where are you?
Dallas Cowboys (14 years)- this is okay by me
Green Bay Packers (12 years)
Denver Broncos (11 years)- Yikes
Atlanta Falcons (11 years)
Tennessee Titans (10 years)
NO CAUSE FOR COMPLAINT
Baltimore Ravens (9 years)
St. Louis Rams (8 years)
Tampa Bay Buccaneers (7 years)
Oakland Raiders (7 years)- and what a hard 7 years it's been
Carolina Panthers (6 years)
Philadelphia Eagles (5 years)
Seattle Seahawks (4 years)
Chicago Bears (3 years)- Jay Cutler sucks!
Indianapolis Colts (2 years, will go to 3 if they lose on Sunday)
New York Giants (2 years)
New England Patriots (2 years)- Blah
Pittsburgh Steelers (1 year)
Arizona Cardinals (1 year)
What is interesting about the coming weekend of AFC and NFC Championship games is that the games involve three teams who haven't been seen in a Super Bowl anytime in the last three decades. At least one starved fan base (winner of New Orleans-Minnesota) and maybe two (if Jets win against Indy) will be rewarded.
The New Orleans Saints have never been to the Super Bowl in their 40+ years of existence. The Minnesota Vikings have not been since 1977. And the Jets have not appeared in the Super Bowl since 1969. I have updated my list of NFL teams and how long it has been since their last Super Bowl appearance and included it below.
NEVER BEEN
Houston Texans
Jacksonville Jaguars
Cleveland Browns
Detroit Lions - never made it, never will
New Orleans Saints
SURE HAS BEEN A LONG TIME
New York Jets (40 years - will go to 41 if they lose on Sunday)
Kansas City Chiefs (40 years) - ha ha
Minnesota Vikings (32 years - will go to 33 if they lose on Sunday)
Miami Dolphis (25 years)
Cincinnati Bengals (21 years)
STARTING TO GET IMPATIENT
Washington Redskins (18 years)- will Mikey Shanahan fix this?
Buffalo Bills (16 years)
San Diego Chargers (15 years)- choked away their chance this year
San Francisco 49ers (15 years)- Joe? Steve? Where are you?
Dallas Cowboys (14 years)- this is okay by me
Green Bay Packers (12 years)
Denver Broncos (11 years)- Yikes
Atlanta Falcons (11 years)
Tennessee Titans (10 years)
NO CAUSE FOR COMPLAINT
Baltimore Ravens (9 years)
St. Louis Rams (8 years)
Tampa Bay Buccaneers (7 years)
Oakland Raiders (7 years)- and what a hard 7 years it's been
Carolina Panthers (6 years)
Philadelphia Eagles (5 years)
Seattle Seahawks (4 years)
Chicago Bears (3 years)- Jay Cutler sucks!
Indianapolis Colts (2 years, will go to 3 if they lose on Sunday)
New York Giants (2 years)
New England Patriots (2 years)- Blah
Pittsburgh Steelers (1 year)
Arizona Cardinals (1 year)
Monday, January 4, 2010
Mediocre
Well, the Broncos finished their year yesterday by getting blown away at home by one of the worst teams in the NFL, the KC Chiefs. They finished the year 8-8, which is precisely the record I expected before their unexpected 6-0 start.
8-8 is a very average record. It's 50 percent. It's neither a winning record nor a losing record.
Being so mediocre is one thing, but the Broncos have taken it to a whole new level. A few stats for your consumption: the Broncos were 4-4 at home, and 4-4 on the road. They were 6-6 against AFC teams, and 2-2 against NFC teams. They were 3-3 against teams in their division, the AFC West. They were 1-1 against San Diego, 1-1 against Oakland, and 1-1 against Kansas City. They were 2-2 against the AFC Central. Over the past four seasons of not making the playoffs, they are 32-32.
Now that's mediocre!
BTW - The last time the Broncos went four straight seasons without making the playoffs was 1976.
8-8 is a very average record. It's 50 percent. It's neither a winning record nor a losing record.
Being so mediocre is one thing, but the Broncos have taken it to a whole new level. A few stats for your consumption: the Broncos were 4-4 at home, and 4-4 on the road. They were 6-6 against AFC teams, and 2-2 against NFC teams. They were 3-3 against teams in their division, the AFC West. They were 1-1 against San Diego, 1-1 against Oakland, and 1-1 against Kansas City. They were 2-2 against the AFC Central. Over the past four seasons of not making the playoffs, they are 32-32.
Now that's mediocre!
BTW - The last time the Broncos went four straight seasons without making the playoffs was 1976.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)