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.

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.

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!

Hoarders

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.

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.

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)

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.