Ground & Pound & Wound Up
Mar 26, 2009 in Spurts
Usually, 2 hours at Krav Maga gets me nice and calm. (Granted, I don't usually need help being calm. But bear with me here.) An hour of self-defense plus an hour of cardio/weights/bag work will take the edge off... But last night I left class raring for some excitement. 'Cause last class I was reminded of how much I like ground work. Read on...
These Krav Students Walk Into a MMA Fight...
Feb 8, 2009 in Spurts
Call me bloodthirsty. Some years ago -- back in junior high and high school -- I took Tae Kwon Do, and sparred regularly. It was a way of driving off the introvert shyness, and learning action and control. When I started taking Krav Maga; and, for that matter, when I see the UFC or something on TV -- that makes me miss fighting. When the Krav studio I go to announced that, henceforth, graduates of the Fight class would fight in front of an audience, well, I sure wanted to be part of that audience, as did the AIG. So, towards Santa Monica with us! Read on... (plus 1 Comments)
How to Pass Your Krav Maga Yellow Belt Test
Mar 17, 2008 in Spurts
Well, I feel like I was run over by a truck or two. But, after six hours of being pounded on during a sunny Sunday afternoon, I now have my Krav Maga yellow belt! The AIG and I have been taking Krav classes since October -- first once a week, and now three mornings a week -- and let me say we're hooked. It's great exercise, great fun, and a great chance to clobber some poor unsuspecting person. Read on... (plus 5 Comments)
Gah!
Dec 16, 2007 in Spurts
The 0-13 Dolphins are now 1-13 -- they beat my hapless Ravens. And my Broncos, the most inconsistent team in the NFL (see Variance) got whomped again, this time by the heretofore-hapless Texans. Gah. Good thing, I guess, I rarely get Baltimore or Denver games here in LA! But the Dolphins? The Dolphins? That's just embarrassing. Possibly good news that Troy Smith seems to have some level of competence at the Quarterback position, at least.... Read on...
The Longest Week
Sep 29, 2007 in Spurts
It's fall, and that means that long weeks stretch from Monday evening to Saturday morning. No, it's not work, it's football, and there are four long days without it every week during the winter. With early evenings, darkness, and the cool autumn air, that leaves a profound longing. Read on...
For The Birds
Aug 22, 2007 in Spurts
I suppose it's no secret that I haven't followed the Orioles closely in years. And it's no secret why -- they don't make it to Anaheim often, and Chavez Ravine even less; they're almost never on TV over here; and, of course too many losses, too little in the way of positive changes. But the O's1 are my team, and I love them. I love them even though they lost their last game 30-3, becoming the first team to give up 30 runs in 110 years. Actually, I think I love them even more now.
Read on...
At Least Eli Still Sucks
Feb 6, 2007 in Spurts
Darn. Well, the Colts won. Evil has triumphed in the world, not least because good appears to have been incompetent. What else is new? Thanks to the magic of gin and barbecue, I was able to make it through all three-and-some hours of depressing football, interspersed with remarkably mediocre ads1. It'll be ok. Actually, the whole Super Bowl experience kind of showed me where I need to set my expectations and plans in life. Read on...
Go Bears!
Feb 4, 2007 in Spurts
Well, today's the big day. We have the forces of evil against the forces of... Chicago. We all know what side I come down on! I'll be rooting hard the whole game, and I believe that Da Bears! can win. I do! They've got the tough defense, and Manning crumbled against Baltimore's D. They've also got the tough running attack, with a good up-the-middle runner and a competent edge runner too, which Baltimore didn't have. It'll be a tough game, but the Bears will win in the end. We all need to get on the bandwagon and root for good over evil, and I know just the thing to get you there: Read on...
Fuck.
Jan 21, 2007 in Spurts, True Life Stories
The Colts won the AFC Championship. They're going to the Super Bowl.
The Colts are going to the Super Bowl.
This is fucking awful. Goddamn it. Read on... (plus 7 Comments)
De-Feat! De-Feat!
Dec 2, 2006 in Spurts
So my Trojans just lost to our cross-town rival UCLA Bruins. And, you know what, I'm okay with that. Sure, call me a bad homer1, but sometimes there's such a thing as a good loss.
Read on... (plus 1 Comments)
Just Go Ahead and Pay the Freakin Football Players!
Aug 10, 2006 in Spurts
College football season's on its way, which means, naturally, that the sports pages are full of stories of NCAA violations. Some, such as Oklahoma quarterback Rhett Bomar's accepting money for a job he didn't do are relatively serious. Others, such as USC reciever Dale Jarrett's roommate's father paying for a luxury apartment are simply a sign that the existing system, which effectively prohibits most Division I scholar-athletes from holding any useful job, is badly broken and needs to be fixed. Specifically, it needs to be possible for Division I schools to pay their athletes for playing sports. Read on... (plus 1 Comments)
2006 NFL Draft Recap
May 1, 2006 in Spurts
As everyone knows, the NFL draft is step 1 on the path to the really important football event of the year, the fantasy draft. Oh, and said draft makes a big difference as I watch my beloved Broncos and Ravens all season long. Will they win? Lose? And how will this year's crop of Trojans perform? Read on... (plus 2 Comments)
Official Super Bowl XL Entry Sponsored by the NFL and Aspercreme
Feb 4, 2006 in Spurts
Like many Americans, I suffer from repetitive stress injuries, and it is only because of these that I'm not today a professional football coach or, with my stature, safety. However, also like many Americans, I certainly know as much about football as any coach or safety (although perhaps not as much as an offensive lineman), and therefore I plan to hold forth on exactly whom I pick to win tomorrow's big game. Read on... (plus 2 Comments)
Well, That's a Relief.
Jan 15, 2006 in Spurts
I guess I can put that aside. I was all worried we'd get to see a third consecutive year of the Colts physically and morally dominating the Broncos; instead, the Steelers, who I'd completely written off (as had all the other handicappers), showed the Colts the door. So, next week, I get to root for the Brocs with no regrets, and, hey, if the Steelers win it, I can't help but feel good for a bunch of 3-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust scrappers from a big industrial town back East. OK, maybe I'd be a little pissed if my Broncs don't win. And I'll root for the Seahawks, too, 'cause I think they're meat for the Broncos in Super Bowl Xtra Large; the Panthers would make a tougher opponent. Think of that, Broncos over Seahawks for their first Lombardi Trophy since the Elway era? Makes me excited but also sad, Jake the Snake is great but he's no John Elway. May they both win NFL Championships anyway. Ding-dong, the Colts have lost, the wicked Colts have lost.... Read on...
Serious Worries
Jan 14, 2006 in Spurts
I'm a Broncos fan from way back, so you'd think I'd be excited that they beat the Patriots in the playoffs today. No dice. It was a painful game to watch, really, not because it was bad -- it wasn't -- but because my heart wanted my Broncs to win but my head knew only the Pats could beat the hated Indianapolis Colts. I fear seeing the Colts in the Super Bowl this year, because I believe they can win, and it would be just awful if the people who betrayed my beloved hometown in 1984 were to meet with any kind of success at all. Yes, us Baltimorons have long memories. But I don't even need a long memory to recall that the Colts shellacked my Broncos during the last two years' playoffs. So next week, it's down to heartbreaking defeat. I need a drink already.... Read on...
Back on Top
Oct 19, 2005 in B-School, Food, Spurts
I got back on track tonight with a win in the cooking competition. My Thai Beef Noodles turned out tasty -- I believe the flavor was described by one of my competitors as "very smooth." Read on...
2-3, 2-3, and Now 3-1
Oct 13, 2005 in B-School, Food, Spurts
I love to compete, so it's no surprise that I'm in two Fantasy Football leagues and one weekly cooking competition; I like to win, too, which is why it's a little bit surprising that I'm 2-3 in both leagues and, now, have dropped from 3-0 to 3-1 in the cooking competition. Read on... (plus 1 Comments)
Poor Terrell
Jul 26, 2005 in Spurts
The beauty of blogging is that, over a period of years, a dedicated writer can develop an audience of up to several, gain the trust of this audience, and thus have a stage upon which to stand when he shouts out that one absolutely, completely, and preposterously crazy truth that only he knows. Now is that time for me. Now is my time to say, I feel bad for Terrell Owens, I know where he's coming from, I understand why he's holding out and I'm down with it. Read on... (plus 1 Comments)
Superstar Workout
Feb 18, 2005 in Spurts
Yesterday, while doing 45° overhead presses with my trainer, NFL Hall-of-Famer Bubba Smith started barking advice my way. Keep my head down! Step forward with your right foot! Back straight as a board! It was intimidating. Read on...
The 15-Point Solution
Nov 23, 2004 in Spurts
As I mentioned, my fantasy football season has included a lot more getting my butt kicked than I had anticipated. Well, it's one thing to lose, and it's another thing to lose without a plan. And that's what I was doing: losing without a plan! At least with a plan I'd have, ya know, at a minimum the plan itself. So, what plan could I possibly have? Well, of the five games I lost, four were lost by more than 10 but less than 15 points (the other was lost by about 0.75 points, which translates to about 15 yards of offense, for those who are counting -- bad, but one of my friends lost a game by 0.2 points which is even worse!). So, the obvious question was, how could I get an average of 15 points a game? Thus, the 15-point solution. The 15-point solution had three phases: Upgrade my defense Stop starting Tom Brady, who's a good QB but is reliable, as opposed to stellar Trade for a quality #2 reciever to replace my #3, Keary Colbert, and a reliable producer of a tight end Step 1 was fulfilled when I upgraded from Seattle to free-agent Cincinatti, which both has a weaker schedule and seems to be hitting its stride. Step 2 consisted of picking Drew Brees up out of free agency, to complement the other QB I drafted, Jake Plummer. Step 3 was the complicated one. But, fortunately, one of the other teams in my league desperately needed a real quarterback (going all the way with Matt Hasselbeck? Nope.) and, with Priest Holmes, needed my backup RB Derrick Blaylock as a backup. I didn't need Blaylock or Brady, so this was a no-downside trade for me (unless the other team beats me in the playoffs, I guess). In return, I got TE stud Alge Crumpler and reliable WR Derrick Mason. So what's the upside for me? Well, this last week I won by about 10.5 points. If I hadn't had Crumpler and Mason, I would have lost by 3. That's a win already from this trade! And the numbers look good for the future. Over the last 4 weeks: Cincinatti is almost +3 points/game Crumpler is more than +1 point/game (and better than that over the whole season) Mason is almost +16 points/game Brees is about +1.5 points/game (and better than that over the whole season) So, on average, the 15-point solution wil bring me 21.5 points/week. That's sure to bring me some wins. Or, at least, give me the comfort of having a plan. And the plan itself.... Read on...
At This Point, The Only Fantasy Left Is Winning
Nov 8, 2004 in Spurts
There's two minutes to go, the evil Colts have the ball, and my only hope for a win is that the Vikings' tight end Jermaine Wiggins scores two touchdowns. My fantasy Fantasy season has turned into a weekly sob story. It's not that I drafted badly; and given that I only had five minutes to prepare for my draft, that's quite a surprise. It's that I bench the wrong players. After a four-game winning streak, I've now lost five in a row. Four out of those five games, including this week's, I've had enough points to win sitting on the bench. And it's not the same person on the bench either; This week I would have won had I started Jake Plummer over Tom Brady, but, three weeks ago, I lost by starting Plummer over Brady. I lost one game because I thought Quentin Griffin would pull out one last start before giving over to Reuben Droughns. This week, I really thought I could win it. After two weeks I finally had Jamal Lewis back. I finally had a reliable tight end. I finally actually had three working wide recievers. And it turned out well! I've got the second-highest point total for the week in my league and I think that'll keep through the night. Sadly, I managed to go up against the guy with the highest point total for the week. Next week had been a gimme, against a guy who was 1-6 but lately he's turned that into 3-6 and is looking strong. Sadly I've got some key players off next week so, since he's turned it around, I'm almost guaranteed to lose next week, bringing me to 4-6. Can I run the table to make it to the playoffs? Probably not. How do I pick better starters? Could I have had a more sure thing than Jake Plummer vs. the Bengals? Tom Brady vs. the Rams' non-existent secondary? Should I have not benched Plummer vs. the Falcons' (then) league-leading pass defense? The answer is clear: sure things suck. You don't win with sure things. And that's how I drafted, too, so I should know this lesson already. I drafted for the players' upside, which is how I ended up with Terrell Owens, Jamal Lewis, Quentin Griffin, and Reuben Droughns. And, yes, how I ended up with the suddenly ultra-productive Plummer. I need to play that way every week. I've been playing to minimize variance, which has led to me starting ol' reliable Tom Brady when I should have been taking a chance on Plummer or Brees. So there's the answer: variance up, risk up, rewards up. Let's see where it takes me. And next year it's all about Excel and statistical models anyway.... Read on...
Fantasy Football Mania
Sep 15, 2004 in Spurts
While there are many important and pressing political issues and I'm a very political individual with a lot of political views, this blog is, most of all, about things that are important to me. And, right now, Fantasy Football is inappropriately important to me. Scary important to me. Like, I get antsy in class if I haven't checked some more stats to see if there's another reciever I should pick up since the ones I drafted suck or are holding out. This is why I only played fantasy football once before! This is why I wasn't going to play fantasy football this year. But what was I to do? I was just sitting in the courtyard and they said "we've lost one of our fantasy players, does anybody out there like football?" So, with about two minutes of preparation, I drafted. Drafted sixth out of twelve, specifically. And not bad for such little time to think about it! I got Tom Brady and Jake Plummer and T.O. and Jamal Lewis and Quentin Griffin and Adam Vinatieri and I very nearly laid 100 points on my opposition this week so it started out well. But I get to carry 3 recievers and my second draft -- I said I only had about two minutes to prepare, remember -- was Keenan McCardell. The holdout wasn't a pissing match yet then but now it's a penis-measuring contest which means my supposed #2 reciever ain't starting for the Bucs this year. But I don't want to drop him because he might get traded and then I'd have a real #2 reciever. So I picked up Ashley Lelie to go with my Rod Smith -- I figure half of that matched pair will become Plummer's go-to guy and get me some real points -- and Bobby Engram, because maybe Hasselbeck ain't too bad, and Az Hakim, because Joey Harrington aind the Lions dont't suck quite so badly anymore. Hopefully one of those will get me enough weekly points that I don't need to trade someone (Rich Gannon [bench] + one of my recievers + Willie Green [bench]?) for a real reciever. Until then, it's check the stats and the matchups and espn.com about six times a day. Oh, who am I kidding -- it's about twelve times.... Read on...
Ladies And Gentlemen... Your Baltimore Blast!
Aug 23, 2004 in Spurts
One afternoon I made the -- apparently fairly serious -- error of hanging out in the courtyard at Popovich (the b-school building here). Somehow I ended up participating in the draft for our local fantasy football league here. I drafted 6 of 12, so I got crappy picks but not so crappy I got to have two picks in a row like lucky 12. This was the smallest draft (ok, only of two) that I'd participated in, so I fear I drafted too much for value and too little for impact, but we'll see. I feel good about a lot of my starters, even though I only had about two minutes to prepare my board. Named after my hometown football (ok, box soccer) team, my Baltimore Blast (my second choice was the Baltimore Thunder) consists of: QBs Tom Brady, Jake Plummer, and Rich Gannon WRs Terrell Owens, Rod Smith, Keenan McCardell and Drew Bennett RBs Jamal Lewis, Quentin Griffin, and Justin Fargas TEs Todd Heap and Bubba Franks K Adam Vinatieri Seattle D This week's starters are: Jake Plummer T.O. Keenan McCardell Drew Bennett Jamal Lewis Todd Heap Vinatieri And, of course, the Seattle D It's already a bad thing; I got up this morning second-guessing that line-up. Will Brady do better against the Indy D than Plummer vs. KC? If I believe in Plummer, should I start Rod Smith as well, therefore putting my eggs all in one basket? Or do I distribute my risk and start the tremendously underrated Bennett? And this is interfering with my productivity! Yay excuse to be non-productive!... Read on... (plus 1 Comments)
Now That's A Trade I Don't Care For At All
Jul 15, 2004 in Spurts
Shaq's off to Miami. I don't approve of that trade at all; it was an awful idea. The right idea was to keep waiting. Maybe, as the season got closer, some other players could have been shook loose for Shaq. Maybe Kobe could have been convinced that the ol' purple and yellow would trade Shaq as soon as they got a fair offer that would put good players around the youngster. Maybe Rudy T. could reconcile Kobe and Shaq within a new system. At the very least, doing nothing would mean the big pair wasn't broken up. Trading Shaq was always a real challenge. He's got a rich, rich contract for which it's almost impossible to get equal value (as the NBA requires). Also, he's a perennial All-Star who's likely to head back to the big game for another year or two, and he will remain one of the best centers in the game until he retires, regardless of how much his skills and, especially, his health decline. How do you get true equal value for that? The answer is, as we see in this trade, you don't get equal value. So, then, why make the trade? Can it possibly be worse to have unhappy Shaq than it is to have Brian Grant as your center in the West? No. Hold onto the players and trust in Rudy T. to work things out, or don't hire Rudy T. in the first place. You don't have a disaster team; you have an NBA Finals-losing team. #2 team in the whole league. And you break that up for Brian Grant and Caron Butler? At least get a Jermane O'Neal or a Dirk Nowitzki. This is a bad trade, but don't blame Kupchack; when Dr. Buss says "Move Shaq", the Big Albino has got to do what he's told.... Read on...
Kupchak Plays The Waiting Game
Jul 9, 2004 in Spurts
Lakers GM Mitch Kupchak has gotten a lot of heat in the press lately for doing nothing. But, sometimes, nothing is the best thing to do. Like, specifically, when your Most Dominant Ever center wants to leave, your superstar guard is about to leave, your future Hall-of-Fame lock power forward may retire, and you've not yet signed a contract with a new coach. Waiting can lead to many good things: Shaq is changeable; time may lead him to relent on his trade demand Kobe may leave at any moment; if he runs to the Clippers, Shaq may relent on his trade demand Rudy T is somebody who will be respected by both Shaq and Kobe, and may be able to mend fences after he is signed If Shaq can't be kept, better he stay out-of-shape and disgruntled, and better his trade be delayed until the last moment so that he has the minimum possible amount of time to get used to his new teammates and system Taking action now, while Jerry West-like, has some negative ramifications: Trade Shaq, but then maybe Kobe leaves? Trade Kobe, but then maybe Shaq leaves? Players are unloaded, then The Mailman retires? It might have been great for Kupchak to do something decisive, if he'd really been in charge. But Buss specified keeping Kobe, so the GM was not in charge. You only got what you got to work with. Given the universe of options, I like what they're doing, and predict a good outcome.... Read on...
Obligatory Lakers Entry
Jun 21, 2004 in Spurts
As an Angeleno, if only transplanted, I feel obligated to say something about this whole break-up-the-Lakers thing. This entry will consider three things: Whether the Lakers are being broken up in the right way, or, should Shaq or Kobe have gone? What kind of long-term deals the Lakers should be looking for What this means about basketball, Jerry West, and Mitch Kupchak Fortunately, as an occasional observer of Lakers basketball, primarily in its televised form, I am entirely and uniquely qualified to weigh in on these matters. Shaq, Kobe, or Phil: Pick One, Maybe Two After a fiasco like the finals, who goes? Phil was let go, and I'm sure that they made the right decision on that. He will coach elsewhere, and win, but he'd lost interest in the Lakers. No coach with his mind on the game would turn in the Finals performance that Phil did. And, frankly, a pet peeve of mine throughout the season was that he didn't make even the smallest changes to his system to accommodate Malone or Payton -- the sign of a tired mind. Time for him to go indeed. Picking Kobe or Shaq to stay is a harder question. Shaq only has three more years in him -- but those years most likely include two championships for whoever he's playing for. If he goes, that means the Lakers don't need to win now. Keeping Kobe means the Lakers want to win later, to build a dynasty again after a couple of years off. Assuming that Kobe stays out of jail. Assuming that Kobe decides to stay. That's a lot to assume -- seems to me a bad risk. I'd have let Kobe go, maybe in a sign-and-trade; his numbers are lower than Shaq's, he could be more easily packaged. I'm obviously in favor of letting Kobe go, but, equally obviously, they've decided not to do that. Which brings us to the question: Who should the Lakers get out there? Well, now, my whole plan was that they'd do a sign-and-trade of Kobe, bringing Laker Of The Future Tracy McGrady out here. Affordable for all, if the Magic threw in Grant Hill. But Buss and Kupchak just blew that, so we've got to find an alternative plan. The problem is, there's really no big man to replace Shaq. That's not a fatal problem, but it is a difficulty, especially if the Lakers are forced to trade the man within the Western conference. So the best solution to the "where to trade Shaq?" question is... ... Hire a coach that Shaq and Kobe can agree on! There's some out there. Rudy Tomjanovich is the early pick, and a good one! He might keep the team together. Failing that, Shaq needs to be traded East. It's a pity that a team can't pay the salaries of players it's traded, as in football or baseball, otherwise Shaq could be traded for a good player and his cap number simply carried for a season, an investment in rebuilding the team. In many ways, the best move would be to trade ol' Aristotle to a crap team, like the Hawks or Wizards, and take some stiffs in return; Shaq will sell tickets for a moribund franchise and stiffs can be traded or, more likely, kept for just... Read on...
Bill Belichick I Ain't
Apr 25, 2004 in Spurts
Apparently there's a reason I'm not an NFL General Manager. My draft predictions were, well, worth every penny you paid for them. Denver took a linebacker in the first, then an RB and WR in the second, and a DB in the third. I had predicted a TE in the first, then a DB in the second, and WR in late second and third; reverse the DB and WR and I guess I wasn't too far off. Baltimore took a tackle in the second and a WR in the third; I expected said tackle in the third and a packaging of second- and fifth-round picks to move up to the first round to get a big time receiver. But, with the top three receivers all gone by pick #9, perhaps there was no possibility to move up and get real value. In retrospect, I wouldn't have expected Baltimore would give up any picks, given how short they are this year. And Denver is always a sucker for running backs. Better luck next year!... Read on...
Belated Draft Predictions
Apr 24, 2004 in Spurts
Now, I love football. And I have draft predictions! Now, I know the draft has already started, but I have been at the Marshall admitted student weekend and haven't seen any of the news. So I'm in the dark as to draft picks at this point. I love football, but I really only care about two teams: Baltimore and Denver. OK, I care about Indianapolis too, but only that they lose. So here is my analysis of Baltimore and Denver picks. Denver first. Denver has three main needs: corners, wide receivers and a tight end. Denver could also use a good run-stuffing lineman, but, unless they get a real upgrade to their secondary, they're stopping the run by allowing the pass. A lot of draft projections have Denver taking a running back, maybe Stephen Jackson, with their first-rounder, but Shanahan has a real history of finding value in running backs taken in the 3rd and 4th rounds, and I'd expect him to do the same this year, especially after picking up Garrison Hearst and with an RB he likes and a halfback who once rushed for over 1,000 yards in a season already on the team. I'd expect Denver to take a tight end in the second round, get a real strong player who can learn from Shannon Sharpe like Todd Heap did in Baltimore a few years ago. There are a couple of good corners who are fair value for a late first-round pick. This draft is so deep at wide receiver that Denver will likely pick up a second or third receiver in the second or third round. Baltimore has a big hole at receiver, and no first-round pick to fill it with. Ozzie Newsome has a great history of finding real value wherever he picks, and there are many good receivers who will be available in the second round (P.K. Sam is a great example often connected with the team). But the Ravens have also been clear that they expect to be in the Super Bowl in the next two to three years, and that takes a primary receiver, not a good #2. Expect Newsome to package the supplemental fifth-rounder the Ravens got with their second-rounder to move up into the first half of the draft and take one of the top three receivers, then pick up a lineman in the third round. Now I'm going to switch on ESPN and see how awful an NFL GM I'd make.... Read on...
Super Bowl XXXVIII: Not Too Far Off!
Feb 1, 2004 in Spurts
Well, at least I picked the winner. I honestly didn't expect as many touchdowns; 26-20 only works with lots of field goals. I also didn't expect New England to successfully run the ball, or the Panthers to be able to throw long passes. This is probably why I'm not an NFL coach. While it was nice that Tom Brady got another MVP award, the true MVPs were the Pats offensive linemen. For the QB to get out unsacked and Faulk and Smith to be able to run the ball at all, well, that was quite a feat. Sadly, linemen will never get recognition like that; I couldn't even vote for the o-line on http://superbowl.com. It was a pretty good game, all in all, and I enjoyed watching it. Especially -- unlike everybody else -- the first 20 minutes and the defensive clinic put on by both teams. I could have watched another 40 minutes of that. I was surprised by the simplicity of the Patriots' defense; they didn't run any of their exotic blitzes (and the blitzes they ran didn't work). I was also surprised by the simplicity of the Patriots' offense, which was missing lots of the slants and screens. After beating the Rams in the Super Bowl two years ago, Belichick made his entire system more complicated, mimicking the difficult-to-beat methods of Martz; after winning this year using simpler methods, like the Panthers', will Belichick make things simpler next year?... Read on...
Super Bowl XXXVIII Prediction: Pats Over Cats
Jan 31, 2004 in Spurts
I'm a football addict. Someday, my poor wife will have to deal with losing me for, oh, a good 12 Sundays every autumn and winter. It's not that bad, though; I'm actually good at office football pools. I took my Wonderful Girlfriend out to a nice dinner after I won one a few weeks ago. If I can pick the scores weekly and win, or come close to it, every time, then I must be able to pick the Super Bowl winner, right? Right? Usually I like the underdog. I think that comes from being a Broncos fan through the '80s and most of the '90s; all those lost Super Bowls will get to ya after a while. But, strangely, we seem to have two underdogs this year. Those scrappy Panthers are definitely underdogs. But so are those no-name Patriots. Both teams played well throughout the season, but they were expected to be knocked out by bigger teams like the Colts and Rams and Chiefs and Eagles. So there's really no underdog to root for here. Were I an NFL team owner, I'd want to own a team like with an offense like the Panthers'. I just love the 3-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust approach. But I also love the exotic and confusing blitzes the Pats run; that's the kind of defense I'd love to see. Financially, I like the way the Patriots run their organization, spending on a few key leaders and bringing in role players elsewhere. It's rare these days that a team can reach the Super Bowl without entering salary cap hell" but the boys from Foxboro have pulled it off. Sentimentally, thus, it's a Patriots pick for me. But how about the matchups? The Patriots' offense should do tolerably well against the Panthers' defense. The Cats are great at stopping teams, but the Pats just depend on quick four-yard slants that don't give defenses time to react. The Panthers can force third and three or four, but the Patriots' offense is built around working with that. When the Pats do get stopped, Vinatieri is a clutch kicker who can score from real distances. On the other side of the field, I have serious worries about the Panthers' offense. Delhomme has dealt well with the complex safety and corner blitzes you see a lot in the NFC, but those mostly come out of distinct formations while the Patriots use one formation for both cover and blitz plays, and throw a lot of delays in to mix things up. This kind of new approach is a good way to rattle an inexperienced quarterback, and Delhomme has thrown a fair number of interceptions. Kasay has better numbers during the year than Vinatieri but is not as proven a clutch performer and is in the twilight of his career, so the Panthers can't rely on field goals to win it. Thus the Patriots can score, if not a lot, and the Panthers will have a lot of trouble. Perhaps in the fourth quarter the smaller New England lines will tire out, but I believe the Patriots will have built up a substantial lead by then. While Carolina will mount a couple of good late-game drives, they'll still lose. Patriots 26, Panthers 20. We'll see how I did tomorrow.... Read on...
Well, That Could Have Been Worse
Oct 19, 2003 in Spurts
I watched episode one of that World Series thing, and it wasn't so bad. I mean, at least the Yankees lost a game, right? Means that, this year, they'll give us a little hope before shooting us down with the inevitable Steinbrenner-financed victory. I have to admit, I was entirely crushed when the Marlins and Yanks ended up in this year's Fall Classic. There was so much potential, and all lost! Who wouldn't have loved a Cubs-Red Sox World Series? Americans are all about sentimental favorites. The ratings would've been through the roof, every game would've been sold out with passionate fans who cared about baseball, and somebody's string of bad luck would've been broken. Hearts across the country would've been warmed. Instead, fans of the Great Statan Of The New York Metropolitan Area get to see their team in yet another World Series. And the Marlins? Who watches the Marlins? Does anybody in south Florida actually care, or are they too busy plotting to overthrow Castro? We all know it's the latter. I feel bad for Chicogoans, sure, but they're used to it after 50 years of utter futility. The Red Sox made it to the Series just a couple of decades ago but, let's face it, Sox fans are numb to the futility of it. So, while it's a sad story, I don't feel sorry for Bostonians either. No, the people I really feel sorry for are the folks at Fox Broadcasting. They're stuck with this dud of a series when we could've had a historic good time. Now that's just uncapitalistic! Where's the folks fixing the games when you need 'em?... Read on...
Rush Says Things That Are Entirely Not Surprising
Oct 2, 2003 in Spurts
Rush Limbaugh has quit ESPN over the flap caused by his controversial statements Sunday about Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb. There's been a lot of talk this season about why the Eagles, who played in the NFC championship game last season (that's one game away from the Super Bowl) lost their first two games this year quite badly. A lot of speculation has centered around the abilities of McNabb and if he's really the great quarterback that's long been held to be. Rush stirred the pot by saying: "I think what we've had here is a little social concern in the NFL. The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well. There is a little hope invested in McNabb, and he got a lot of credit for the performance of this team that he didn't deserve. The defense carried this team." A lot of people felt that this statement was both racist and wrong, and so Rush was forced to resign. The questions, of course, are: Was the statement racist? Is McNabb overrated? Has McNabb's race advanced his career? Should Rush have resigned? Let's start with queston #1. Was this a racist statement? Limbaugh's co-hosts (two of whom are black) didn't call him on what he said, and one, Chris Berman, has stated that "[a]s cut and dry as it seems in print, I didn't think so when it went by my ears." So, it's possible that this is a non-racist opinion on an issue involving race. To evaluate this option, we need to know more about the person who said it. Well, in this case, we know all we need to about Rush. A spokesman for the new Right, he's often talked about issues of race and specifically of the victimization of whites by Affirmative Action. His record is clear. Racist men make racist statements. #1: Yes, it was a racist statement. Is McNabb overrated? That's a hard question. Last season, he led his team to the NFC championship, and he's been in the Pro Bowl for both of the last two years. These are pretty good signs of a competent, talented quarterback; why then, tree games into the season, has he played eight thoroughly awful quarters and only four fine ones? Some will blame McNabb, and a lot of hay has been made from the changes in his form from this season to the last. Apparently he's both failing to progress and improve in general and he's overthinking his play this year. It's clear he's not being the player he can be, but the player he could be was certainly one of the best in the NFL ever. McNabb also has a weak supporting class. The Eagles' running game has disappeared and the team does not exactly have a stellar corps of receivers; a quarterback can't win without anybody to give the ball to. Where does this leave us? #2: McNabb may not be brilliant, but he's at least an average quarterback, and probably well above average. Has his career been advanced by the color of his skin? Well, in the '80s, there weren't many black quarterbacks. But great players like Super Bowl-winner and MVP Doug Williams, Warren Moon and the Eagles' own megastar Randall Cunningham became big NFL stars and showed that African-Americans can successfully... Read on... (plus 1 Comments)
Oscar Wuz Robbed!
Sep 15, 2003 in Spurts
I watched the De La Hoya fight, I've seen many of the highlights on TV, I've read the commentators explaining why Sugar Shane got the belts, but I still think Oscar won. Maybe I watched a different fight from everybody else (or maybe I was taken in by the HBO commentators, who were all pro-De La Hoya, their money boy), but here's what I saw: Oscar dictated the pace of the fight for at least eight rounds Oscar dictated the nature of the fight for all 12 rounds Oscar threw more punches Oscar landed more punches Oscar's jab controled Mosley for at least six rounds Power punches were about equal Mosley landed almost no combinations Oscar mostly landed jabs but got in combinations of his own from time to time Oscar never hurt Mosley Mosley hurt Oscar, very briefly, twice This adds up to one conclusion: perhaps Sugar Shane was the better fighter, but he was outboxed by Oscar. And isn't that the game? Commentators seem to think different. The LA Times's Bill Plaschke says that Mosley won because he drew blood, but that blood came from an unintentional head-butt, so if any judge took sanguescence into account in his or her scoring, that was simply an act of incompetence. The AP says that Mosley was more active and that was why he won, but the CompuBox punch tracker shows that Oscar threw 100 more punches, landed 100 more punches, and completely dominated with his jab. He also ran in circles around Mosley for all but the last round, so how could Sugar Shane have been the more active fighter? Now, boxing is a game of rounds; one fighter must get ten points each round, the other most often gets nine. De La Hoya-Mosley II was a close fight, whoever you thought won, so I could see judges scoring many rounds for one fighter or another. This focus on small quanta (for instance, a flurry of aggression by Mosley) could hide trends that were strongly present through the whole fight but completely dominant at no single time, like De La Hoya's control of the pace of the fight. So, I'm not saying that the fix was in here, I'm just saying that, in a Mosley win, you saw a few individual rounds being scored, not a whole fight. So what ought Oscar have done to win? Well, the obvious answer is that he had to hurt Mosley at some point. Boxing is a violent sport, and the causation of pain is an appropriate metric for judges to use, but let's be clear here, Mosley never really hurt Oscar either. What else? Well, let's make a list of what Oscar didn't do, and assume that doing some of these would have allowed him to win: Hurt Mosley Punch for power Stand and fight That's pretty much it, right? And what's the list above? Well, that's what a brawler does. That's what a guy who comes in and goes toe-to-toe with his opponent for twelve rounds does. That's not boxing. So, to win, De La Hoya had to be a fighter, a brawler, not a boxer. Is this what the great sport of boxing has come to? Having bought a good number of fights in the last few years, I've come to... Read on... (plus 1 Comments)