Bowl Season and other things

A few thoughts on what's taken place in bowl season so far:

BYU beating Oregon 38-8 was a surprise to me. I think Oregon has a talent advantage over BYU, but it's obviously not as big a gap as I thought. You come out and smack somebody around by 30, and that can't be explained by gameplanning and lack of effort alone. Aside from the margin of victory, I think the fact that Oregon scored only 8 points is the biggest shocker for me. They've got some good players on offense, and they had a month to pick apart the Cougar defense on film. It looks really bad to score only 8 points.

Hawaii beat Arizona State in the Hawaii Bowl. It seems that the instant Hawaii becomes bowl eligible, they get an invite from the Hawaii Bowl. I wonder if they'd ever take another bid if somebody else offered. Hawaii is fun to watch, and they hit really hard on defense if nothing else. The crowd is fun to look at. I love those people.

Florida State beat UCLA 44-27 in the Emerald Bowl. That means that even without the blocked punt and interception returns for touchdowns, Florida State still scored 30 points against UCLA's defense, the same unit that held USC's offense to a touchdown. If you ever want to know why people pull their hair out trying to find a bit of predicability in football, that's why.

Oklahoma State beat Alabama in the Independence Bowl. Consider this: with no head coach and a roster that's been depleted by NCAA sanctions, Bama still only lost on a last-second field goal. I'm not saying they deserved to win or are so much better than OSU, but that was still a tad impressive to me.

Cal 45, Texas A&M 10 in the Holiday Bowl. For a long time the Holiday Bowl was the shootout game of the bowl season. Before last year's game, the previous nine winners had averaged 33.7 points a game, and four losers had scored 27 or more. That took a hit last year when Oklahoma beat Oregon 17-14 and this year when A&M got shut out in the second half. The Aggies were 5-2 in their previous seven games and each loss had been by a point, so just looking at the score it's surprising they got hammered the way they did. But watching the game, you could see that Cal clearly had better athletes, better football players, and were the more complete football team. They controlled the line on either side, and smacked the A&M offense around. You're doing pretty well when you have five incompletions the whole game.

The Liberty Bowl may be trying to take the shootout title away from the Holiday:

2005: Tulsa 31, Fresno St. 24

2004: Louisville 44, Boise State 40

This year, South Carolina beat Houston 44-36. You have to feel a little sorry for a defense that Steve Spurrier has a month to prepare for. But Houston used their prep time pretty well, and actually outgained South Carolina. Over 1,000 yards combined between the two. Fun to watch.

I saw the score for the Insight Bowl flash on the bottom of the screen. Minnesota 28, Texas Tech 0. "Don't sleep on Texas Tech," I thought. "That's well within reach of their offense." Final score: Texas Tech 44, Minnesota 41. Hell of a game to watch. Or so I assume, since I wasn't able to watch it. For whatever reason, the NFL Network decided this year to get into the college bowl business. They also televised Thursday night NFL game once the college season, hoping that this would prompt fans to call their cable companies and demand they add NFLN to their listings. I'm glad the Thursday games were stinkers, and I hope the Insight Bowl backfires on them. Thursday night games for the NFL is a dumb idea. Only three days to prepare to face another NFL team is way too little time. I think the games were stinkers because players were tired and coaches didn't have enough time to put in full game plans. For example:

November 26: Cincinnati and Baltimore are both dominant in victory, each shutting out their opponents. 30-0 and 27-0, respectively. November 30: a 13-7 clunker won by Cincinnati. Are you really going to tell me the short week didn't affect the quality of the game?

People should call the bowls and ask that they avoid being broadcast on NFLN until they get a wider audience. You're negotiating from strength, bowl people! Make them become more widespread to accommodate you. Don't let yourself be used as a carrot to attract more viewers to a fledgling operation.

I saw The Good Shepherd over the break. Good movie. I thought the acting was very good. The story is good, and we talked about it a lot afterwards, but I think it could have been put together a little better.

Favorite Christmas present I got: Cubs pullover cap thingy (technical term).

Favorite Christmas present I gave: Light spheres from Pottery Barn.

My mom and I drove down to New Orleans last Friday. This was the first time I'd ridden around since Katrina. I wasn't surprised at the devastation in Gentilly and the Ninth Ward, but I was struck at how it just went on and on, block after block after block. Sixteen months later, there are still intersections without working street lights. One we saw still had a fridge on the roof. A more pleasant surprise was the number of homes in Lakeview that have been rebuilt, or ones that have been razed and the property been rebuilt on.

For the first time in a long time, I sat down with my whole family to watch a Saints game. Each team tried to hand it to the other, but the Saints cut it out in the second half and the Giants kept on going. 30-7 Saints.

Interesting college football recruiting note: Of the top 30 QB's as rated by espn.com, 29 have already given verbal commitments to a school. It's not uncommon for many players to wait till the last minute to declare, so this seems noteworthy to me. I don't know what it means, though.

"Jesus is not a zombie"

Another great line from Bones. Love that show.

But let's talk about Casino Royale. SPOILERS. MAJOR SPOILERS.

Now and then I take notes in a movie for things I want to think about later. Here's some of the stuff I took down.

CHASE: There's a really great chase scene at the beginning of the movie. One of the best I've seen recently. Daniel Craig pursues Sebastien Foucan all over the place, with Foucan apparently doing free running to try and get away. It's really good stuff.

More ads for American Idol. 1/16/07 boys and girls.

EG: Eva Green is a good actress. Maybe very good. But I'm not sure she's right for a Bond girl. I just didn't get the energy from her that I felt I should. There's not enough pizzazz for her to hold up her half of the conversation when she and Bond are doing their witty repartee. She fixes up pretty good, though.

DEALER: At the beginning of the big poker game, the dealer flips out cards to each of the players, often tossing them several feet across the table. Looks really smooth, really cool. If it's real, then that's a helluva dealer. I like watching stuff like that, hard stuff that looks easy when done by somebody who really knows what they're doing.

WARLORD: There's something in this movie that I really appreciate. Our first glimpse of the villain Le Chiffre shows him in Africa, getting money from an African warlord-type character. Later on, the warlord wants his money. What's a warlord to do?

I think there's a tendency to make assumptions about people who live in non-technological areas. Assumptions about lower intelligence or cleverness, for example. That they can't be as smart or as the slick numbers guy from France. That if you swindle them, they won't be able to make you pay. Which is why I'd like to pay my respects to Steven Obanno, played by Isaach De Bankolé. Mr. Warlord tracks Le Chiffre to the poker game in Montenegro, breaks into his room, and threatens to kill him and/or chop off his hand if he doesn't get the money. I was pretty impressed.

STRAIGHT DRINK: After a harrowing adventure, Bond goes to his room and has a drink. About 2/3 of a glass full of whiskey or scotch or something. Just chugs it right down. It probably wasn't really alcohol, but stop and think about it for a second. How tough a drinker do you have to be to drink that much liquor that fast? I might be able to do it with Crown Royal, but I wouldn't go play poker afterwards.

That's it for now. Donald O'Connor is doing the "make 'em laugh" routine in Singin' in the Rain.

TZ Reunion

Many moons ago, back when the world was young, the Twilight Zone had an episode named "Nightmare at 20,000 Feet". It's one of the more notable episodes, with William Shatner playing a man who sees a creature on the wing damaging the plane (the only passenger to see it). Nervous breakdown, monster, airplane, good stuff. Twenty years later, the episode was redone in Twilight Zone: The Movie. John Lithgow played the main role.

Why do I mention this? As you know, I've been going through all the Third Rock From the Sun episodes, and I'd never noticed the quick exchange between Dick and the Big Giant Head (Lithgow and Shatner). BGH mentions that during his flight he looked out the window and saw something on the wing. Dick says, "The same thing happened to me!" Nice add-in with two men who have played the same character.

What else is going on? LSU is in the Sugar Bowl against Notre Dame. I never thought I'd see the day when there were LSU fans out there who were disappointed to be in the Sugar Bowl. Tons of anticipation had been building about going to the Rose Bowl against Michigan, but then USC lost to UCLA and that was the end of that. Here's a brief analysis of the matchup between the two teams:

ND Offense: Good
LSU Defense: Very Good
-------------------
LSU Offense: Good
ND Defense: Bad (sometimes very)

General consensus from what I've read is that LSU is faster on both sides of the ball, but especially on offense versus the Irish defense. I think Notre Dame certainly has a shot because of Brady Quinn and Charlie Weis, but I'm in agreement with the people who list LSU as the clear favorite. I could list important factors like pressuring the QB, running the ball, turnovers, etc., but you can get that anywhere. So I'll just say this:

LSU's defensive line is one of the elite units in the entire country. Fast, mean, deep, smart. Notre Dame's offensive line has not been as good as many people expected it to be, and that's held them back on offense, in my opinion. If these two things hold true in the Sugar Bowl, LSU should really like their chances.

Note: Last year, I thought LSU's offensive line underperformed the same way ND's did this year. But they really pulled it together for the Peach Bowl stomping of Miami. There's certainly the possibility that ND could do the same thing and get it together. As good as LSU's back four are, there's not a secondary in the country that can't be had if you give the QB time to throw. And that's all I have to say about that.

The Sky Is Falling!

Or at least that's what you'd have to believe from the reaction by some people that Congressman-elect Keith Ellison would take the oath of office by taking the oath of office with the Koran instead of the Bible. Ellison is the first Muslim to be elected to Congress. Let's see what some concerned citizens are saying to Congress:

A "...in effect he would be swearing to represent Islam, not United States citizens."

I don't see how he would be swearing to Islam any more than people swearing on the Bible pledge allegiance to Christianity or Rome or Martin Luther.

"When all elected officials take their oaths of office with their hands on the same book, they all affirm that some unifying value system underlies American civilization"

Congressmen don't put their hands on the Bible or any book. They raise their hands and recite the oath mandated by the Constitution. The "underlying value system" is that very Constitution, not Protestantism or Catholicism or [INSERT BRANCH OF CHRISTIANITY HERE]

"We have done quite well without Allah up to now, and I believe we can continue to struggle along without him in the future."

We have done well with Allah till now? No we haven't. Allah is the same God by a different name. Jews, Christians and Muslims are all "people of the book". They just believe different things about the same God.

B "I am considered a senior citizen and in all my 65 years I have never seen the Bible or the Christian religion put down so bad."

If you've never seen the Bible put down so bad, then you really need to get out more. There's a lot worse stuff going on every single day.

"When we let the immigrants that our service men are protecting tell us how and what they are going to do or not do."

We are not letting immigrants make the rules for at least two reasons: There is no rule that says the Bible must be used in the swearing in process, and Keith Ellison was born in Detroit.

"In particular, Keith Ellison a Democrate from Minnesota, newly elected to the U. S. Congress is not going to take the oath of office on the Biblle. He will only take the oath on the Koran. If this is so, then he needs to go to where the people believe in the Koran and use it as their Bible."

You mean someplace like, say, America? There's millions of Muslims living here. Hello?

C "The King James Bible is the Word of God."

Don't get me started. This is a version that worries more about sounding good than putting forth the most accurate translation. It's laughable to think that it reflects the true meaning of the writers responsible for the original.

D "If we stop honouring the One Who has helped us win so may battles and wars in the past, He will lift His Hand of protection and blessing off of our country and allow our enemies to come in upon us."

You'd better be from England or one of the former Commonwealth countries. Even so, you can't go blathering about Americans fighting wars and then spell "honoring" with a "u".

------------------------------------

Several people are writing messages to Congress that include an essay by Dennis Prager about this. You can read the essay here. You can read a very good refutation of it here.

------------------------------------

Some of my comments:

He uses the word "America" like we're some homogenous, single-minded organism instead of a collection of (at least) a thousand different ways of thinking and acting.

He uses "political correctness" as a scare term to describe what is really a man asking to use the book that his religion holds dear.

Here's a good one: "Would they allow him to choose Hitler's "Mein Kampf," the Nazis' bible, for his oath? And if not, why not? On what grounds will those defending Ellison's right to choose his favorite book deny that same right to a racist who is elected to public office?"

Maybe on the grounds that MK isn't held dear by the world's second largest freaking religion. Or that Nazism is a political ideology and not a religion at all. Or what would be my favorite: BECAUSE IT WAS WRITTEN BY A NAZI.

"But for all of American history, Jews elected to public office have taken their oath on the Bible, even though they do not believe in the New Testament, and the many secular elected officials have not believed in the Old Testament either. Yet those secular officials did not demand to take their oaths of office on, say, the collected works of Voltaire or on a volume of New York Times editorials, writings far more significant to some liberal members of Congress than the Bible. Nor has one Mormon official demanded to put his hand on the Book of Mormon."

If Jews haven't asked to be excused from using the Bible, that's on them. It's got nothing to do with Keith Ellison. Just because others opted for the Bible doesn't mean the US House should force it on Ellison.

He's also a bit off on the Mormons, who say they use the Bible in addition to the Book of Mormon.

I'm inclined to say that people are making a big deal out of something that really isn't. But maybe it's a big deal to them, which is fine. It's a free country. However, I think a lot of people take the "America is a Christian nation" ideal for granted, and have a hard time dealing with the "America is a secular country" reality.

Why? Why do you mock me, O Lord?

Over the last few years, there have been billions of words written criticizing the BCS and how it sets up teams to play in the major bowl games. But there is no greater indictment than this: Many people seem to be in agreement that LSU needs Florida to win in order to get an invite to a BCS bowl game (probably Orange or Rose). The Effing Gators have to win. Why? Why do you mock me, O Lord?

In other news, the Mighty LSU Tigers beat Arkansas on Friday 31-26. A great back and forth game, big plays on either side. Arkansas gashed the LSU run defense all day long. Darren McFadden is a phenomenal running back. It didn't help that LSU's linebackers were dinged up, but he's really that good. But LSU played well on offense and got a big kickoff return from Trindon Holliday to put them over the top. A lot of LSU fans were wiping their foreheads in relief.

Should Florida win, LSU could face Michigan in the Rose Bowl, or the winner of the ACC in the Orange Bowl. I'd feel pretty good about either. It could be a good start to the offseason, recruiting, and next season.

One final note: some people are saying that Notre Dame doesn't deserve a BCS bowl. Or Florida doesn't if they lose. Or LSU doesn't anyway. Or whoever doesn't. Let me make this clear: The word DESERVE has no place in a discussion of the bowl bid process. It's about TV, money and maybe matchups. There's no use griping about it. Just be glad if you get in.

The Reaper looks different than I thought

Gallaudet University recently went through a very dramatic time when students shut down the campus to protest the recent choice of university president. The board of trustees eventually caves to the students and removed the nominee. Below is a photo taken from the celebration.


That's a brave man carrying Death on his shoulders.

Gallaudet has had a tough time of it lately. The whole episode came off as a black eye for the school. It looked like the university allowed a student mob to start making the rules, like they can now throw a big tantrum anytime they don't like what's going on and get their way. Sort of an "inmates running the asylum" kind of thing. John McCain resigned his position on the board of trustees. The Washington Post ran a story about lapses in academic standards, incluiding grade fixing. The government funds about two-thirds of Gallaudet's budget, but gives the school a lot of leeway because of it's place in deaf society. If things continue to go badly, people are going to stop caring about the deaf part and start caring about the institutional integrity part.

@$$-gate

At halftime of the LSU/Tennessee game, CBS sideline reporter Tracy Wolfson asked LSU coach Les Miles how LSU could go out and show that they are a good football team. "Play our asses off!" he said. I thought it was great. Pretty surprising, but great. You get the feeling that Miles was really sick of hearing people talk about his supposed inability to coach the Tigers to road wins against ranked teams. I wonder how people forget the game at Alabama last year, when LSU was down and came back to win in overtime. This win might make him feel a bit better.

By the way, I don't recommend googling "assgate" unless you're in the mood for a lot of X's.

How did we win that game?

LSU turned the ball over four times, while taking it away from the Vols only once. One of the INTs was returned for a touchdown. The game was on the road, and Tennessee got a relatively inspired performance from backup quarterback Jonathan Crompton, including two long touchdown passes that got the crowd into the game. LSU committed eight more penalties than Tennessee as well. LSU's leading Russell was the 260-pound quarterback, who had an amazing 34 yard run. The referees missed what looked like an obvious touching on a Vols punt return that would have given LSU the ball on the UT 4 yard line.

So how did LSU win?

1) The defense. Tennessee managed only 247 yards, and only 62 on the ground. The defensive line shut down any holes, and the linebackers didn't allow anybody to get outside. They had two sacks, several other pressures, and an INT. Whenever the offense didn't turn it over, they made life tough on the Vols offense. They knocked Tennessee starting QB Erik Ainge out of the game in the first quarter (Ainge is the nephew of Danny Ainge).

2) A diverse and surprising ground game. I already mentioned Russell's rushing, which always came in big situations. Keiland Williams carried the ball on the second play of the game, and I'm not sure if he even saw the field before the 4th quarter in any other game. He ran with good speed and power, and I'm not sure Tennessee was expecting him. LSU also used Jacob Hester, Alley Broussard, Justin Vincent, and Trindon Holliday at running back. Holliday looks like he can go the distance on every play. He's incredibly quick and fast.

3) Russell connected on several screen passes to Dwayne Bowe and Early Doucet (inside screen to Bowe, bubble screens to Doucet) and it looked like Tennessee had no real answer for them. Bowe's TD came on one of these near the goal line, and his fumble came on one at midfield. Craig Davis also had a TD catch, but Bowe and Doucet were the two most popular targets on the day. Doucet snagged a hard pass out of the air that may have been meant for Bowe in the back of the end zone, but it turned out to be the game-winning catch.

4) LSU didn't go in the tank and quit after making so many mistakes. As hard as it is to believe, the Tigers always looked like a team that believed that victory would be gained. It's great to watch.

In Praise of Random

I wrote here about the appeal of sameness and routine. It's still as nice now as it was then. It's nice not to have to say, "You mean I have to do what today?" Having said that, over the last few weeks I have gained a greater appreciation for what I think of as "The Joy of Random" (technically, it should be "randomness" since it's a noun and "random" is an adjective, but I think it works better my way). The two main ways I've seen randomness add a certain flavor to life are humor and storytelling.

1) Humor: a random word in an unexpected place can make for a really good joke. The people you're talking to have no idea where it came from, and maybe neither do you. A word that seemingly has no connection to the conversation, but you find that it really works. Sometimes I think of these words as "appropriately random", although I think you could make a case for that being an oxymoron.

2) Storytelling: I think storytelling gets a huge boost from randomness of experience. Something that happens to you totally out of the blue that you can't wait to tell people about. Sometimes I'll be in the middle of something and already be thinking about how I'm going to tell the story to other people. The "getting kicked in the butt by a girl while at the urinal" episode is just the latest. Sign of the Whale is a great place for randomness to happen to me.

Third Dick From the Sun

I won't say that I forgot and needed to be reminded, so I will say that it's very, very nice to experience the wackiness of 3rd Rock From the Sun again on DVD. I liked it a lot when it was on TV, and I like it even more now. Wonderful writing and an on-screen chemistry among everybody in the cast made for a fun time all the time. Chemistry between the two love interests is important and rare enough, so for it to exist from top to bottom is outstanding.


One thing I really enjoy is that it was willing to do a lot of different things. Some shows do one thing and do it very well. Some do things that nobody has ever done before (though doing something that's never been done before...has been done before). 3rd Rock never fell into the trap of sameness. It helped that they could approach the most ordinary things with a fresh perspective. Two scenes that stand out are Dick experiencing kleenex for the first time and being freaked out by a pop-up book. Speaking of Dick...

One of the more enjoyable minor points of the show was that they often found inventive ways to work "Dick" into the title. Some examples:

Lonely Dick
Angry Dick
Selfish Dick
Much Ado About Dick
Dick Jokes
Dick Behaving Badly
Will Work for Dick
Stuck With Dick
Near Dick Experience
Shall We Dick?
My Mother, My Dick

It waned a bit the last two seasons, but it was a nice touch.

Ginormous

This weekend I watched most of Nebraska's game against Texas, then hopped on the bus to Tyson's Corner. Yes, the bus. I know I always tell people not to take the bus. "Have you seen the people who ride the bus?" I ask. "They let anybody on the bus!" But Tyson's is so close, it's almost stupid for me not to get there somewhat regularly.

I went to see The Prestige, though I can't exactly say why. It was mostly good. The cast is really good in the top four, and solid everywhere else, so the acting is quite good. I like the overall story as well. It jumps back and forth a lot, so you have to figure out who is doing what and when, but that's okay. I'm not sure the writers did a good enough job of making sure that the audience knows what's going on at all times, but there's nothing wrong with making people think a little more than usual. I usually watch movies to escape from thinking too much, so I never experience movies like this the way the makers intend. When I start thinking about it, I stop paying attention, if that makes any sense. I got part of the "surprise" ending, but not the whole thing.

Now that I think about it, I had heard before going to see it that David Bowie was in the movie. I forgot all about him and didn't even remember him until I linked to the IMDB page just now. I think this means two things: a) He did a great job of playing his character and not David Bowie. Very serious, very "clipped" (that's the best word I can think of) and b) I really don't see David Bowie often enough to recognize him without unless I'm expecting it.

Went home to watch LSU beat Fresno State 38-6. LSU too fast, Fresno State not good enough at skill positions.

Sunday was fun. I went to the National Zoo to see the new Asia Trail, which was good. I'm particularly fond of the red panda. When I win the lottery and plant a huge forest of bamboo in my back yard, I'm going to import a few and let them go wild.

Lunch at Chipotle in Chinatown, then a short walk to the National Portrait Gallery. When you're in town, you might want to stop by. Pack a lunch and a new pair of shoes. That place is Ginormous. I was in there about three hours, and I'm not sure I saw everything. There are many very impressive pieces of art in there. I looked at a big portrait of Toni Morrison and thought, "That guy cheated. It looks too real. There's no way anybody can paint something that looks that real." Then I saw the entries in the Portrait Competition.

The winner is another painting that looks like a photograph. I'm not a huge painting afficianodo, but there are some things I like:

Frontier landscapes that people made when the West was being pioneered

Ships at sea with a storm on the way

Italian religious paintings with colors still bright after 400 years (or however long it's been)

Details. I really, really like little details that an artist can add to a painting that make it so much better. It's often a little thing or something most people wouldn't think about adding, but it will work so well that you can't imagine it any other way. The first prize winner is here:




So if you're in town, I encourage you all to go see the Portrait Gallery. They had it closed down for what seemed like several years. With all the stuff in there, I can see what took them so long. Well done.

Ah, now I remember...

...why I used to hate the Miami Hurricanes with such gusto. Not because of the brawl they had with Florida International this past Saturday, but because they used to recruit bigmouth jerks like Lamar Thomas, who shot their mouths off about how great they were and mercilessly taunted their opponents. So it did my heart good to hear that he'd been fired as an announcer for praising the Miami Hurricane players for fighting on the field, and even adding that the two teams should meet after the game and get it on some more.

As it just so happens, Lamar Thomas was involved in one of my favorite college football plays of all time. In the Sugar Bowl against Alabama, Miami was getting hammered. Deep in their own territory, Thomas caught a long pass down the left sideline and was headed for the end zone. George Teague caught up with him, reached around, and took the ball right out of his hands before he could score. The play was nullified by an offsides penalty on Alabama, but it still prevented what could have been a big momentum changer in that game. Alabama went on to crush Miami 34-13, with Miami's only TD coming on a kickoff return. One of my favorite games ever.

Miscellaneous Items, Various Topics, and Sundry Others

Three good words there. The first is used the most. The second gets you out of jams when you don't know what else to say. The third is my favorite, but you can only use it in conjunction with "others" so possible uses are limited.

First things first: My buddy Corey has started his own myspace page. I'm taking bets on how long it takes him to get seduced by a 45 year old man.

It did my heart good to see this, a home video of Florida basketball coach Billy Donovan dropping the crystal trophy they got for winning the NCAA title last year. Stupid Florida.

In case you haven't taken notice of this story, there's some interesting stuff going on at Gallaudet University in DC. A lot of students don't like the new choice for university president and feel that they're not being paid attention to enough by the administration. So they shut down the university for three days with protests. Friday night, 133 students were arrested. The really interesting aspect from an outsider's point of view is what happens when a deaf person gets arrested and put in handcuffs. Since they communicate with their hands, it's like tying them up and putting a rag in their mouths at the same time. Only considering what it must be like to be deaf in a hearing world, you'd have to multiply it by many, many times to get the full effect.

The Mighty Saints improved to 5-1 yesterday with a 27-24 win over the Eagles. You can see highlights of the game here. The Eagles entered the game leading the league in sacks, but didn't get Drew Brees down once. How? I'll tell you. The offensive line protected well on pass plays, and they mauled the Eagles defensive front on power runs up the middle. The latter allowed them to get the defense back on its heels a little bit and set up play-action. Second, the game plan was a great mixture of the aforementioned runs and p-a, plus quick passes that allowed Brees to get rid of the ball before pressure could get to him, either from the front four or blitzes. The run game and quick passing made it tough for the Eagles to blitz as much as they wanted to.

As for the game itself, it was a matter of big runs on either side. Saints went up 10-0 and 17-3 at halftime. Eagles came out in the second half and scored 21 straight. Saints bounced back immediately and tied it at 24, then held the Eagles with 8:26 to go in the game. The Eagles never saw the ball again. The Saints drove and drove and drove, getting first down after first down. On 3rd and 1, Deuce McAllister bulled ahead for a first down and brought it to the two minute warning. McAllister ran great and tough the whole time he was in the game, with only a hamstring pull taking him out of the game in the first half.

This brought us to an interesting turning point in the game. Sean Payton, who has done seemingly everything right so far this season, called for three straight kneel downs. The Eagles were out of timeouts, so the Saints were able to run it all the way down to three seconds before calling their last timeout and kicked a field goal to end the game. A lot of people probably knew what he was doing, but may not have agreed with it. Why not at least try for a touchdown before settling for the kick? He didn't want Donovan McNabb to have the ball again is why. Score early and you give them a chance to tie. Score late and that chance never happens. If Carney misses the kick he looks like a dope who doesn't have confidence in his team. If Carney makes it he looks like a smart, clever coach who is always thinking ahead. Carney made it, so Payton looks pretty smart.

Words of Praise

I like classical music, oldies, African acapella, and a various songs from other genres of music. But my favorite songs are the hymns we sing in church. I don't know exactly why. I'm sure a lot of it has to do with the fact that I've been singing them for a long time, and I have a familiarity with them that I don't have with other songs. Part of me would like to believe that it's because the words of the songs are written in praise of the One who made us all. If this is the reason, then it comes as no surprise that I really like the passage in Paradise Lost that depicts Adam and Eve going forth to praise God. In Book V, they begin:

These are thy glorious works, Parent of good,
Almightie, thine this universal Frame,
Thus wondrous fair; thy self how wondrous then!
Unspeakable, who sitst above these Heavens
To us invisible or dimly seen
In these thy lowest works, yet these declare
Thy goodness beyond thought, and Power Divine:
Speak yee who best can tell, ye Sons of light,
Angels, for yee behold him, and with songs
And choral symphonies, Day without Night,
Circle his Throne rejoycing, yee in Heav'n,
On Earth joyn all yee Creatures to extoll
Him first, him last, him midst, and without end.

They continue on, entreating the different part of Creation to give praise to the Maker. I just think it all sound really nice. A lot nicer than Atlas Shrugged, and that's my favorite novel. Milton put out some pretty good stuff, like Raphael explaining free will to Adam and Eve:

Attend: That thou art happie, owe to God;
That thou continu'st such, owe to thy self,
That is, to thy obedience; therein stand.
This was that caution giv'n thee; be advis'd.
God made thee perfet, not immutable;
And good he made thee, but to persevere
He left it in thy power, ordaind thy will
By nature free, not over-rul'd by Fate
Inextricable, or strict necessity;
Our voluntarie service he requires,
Not our necessitated, such with him
Findes no acceptance, nor can find, for how
Can hearts, not free, be tri'd whether they serve
Willing or no, who will but what they must
By Destinie, and can no other choose?

That's good stuff, boys and girls. I especially like the part about us not being ruled by Fate. I don't happen to believe in fate or destiny, whichever name you decide to give it, so that has great appeal to me.

I've started Book VI, which depicts the battle between the faithful and unfaithful angels in heaven. Things get really good here. Abdiel, the lone angel to remain faithful among those called away by Satan, smiting him a great blow to the head. Then after much fighting, Satan squaring off against Michael, the greatest warrior in Heaven. And they talk trash to each other! How great is that? The buildup is even better than the blow:

They ended parle, and both addrest for fight
Unspeakable; for who, though with the tongue
Of Angels, can relate, or to what things
Liken on Earth conspicuous, that may lift
Human imagination to such highth
Of Godlike Power: for likest Gods they seemd,
Stood they or mov'd, in stature, motion, arms
Fit to decide the Empire of great Heav'n.
Now wav'd thir fierie Swords, and in the Aire
Made horrid Circles; two broad Suns thir Shields
Blaz'd opposite, while expectation stood
In horror; from each hand with speed retir'd
Where erst was thickest fight, th' Angelic throng,
And left large field, unsafe within the wind
Of such commotion, such as to set forth
Great things by small, If Natures concord broke,
Among the Constellations warr were sprung,
Two Planets rushing from aspect maligne
Of fiercest opposition in mid Skie,
Should combat, and thir jarring Sphears confound.
Together both with next to Almightie Arme,
Uplifted imminent one stroke they aim'd
That might determine, and not need repeate,
As not of power, at once; nor odds appeerd
In might or swift prevention; but the sword
Of Michael from the Armorie of God
Was giv'n him temperd so, that neither keen
Nor solid might resist that edge: it met
The sword of Satan with steep force to smite
Descending, and in half cut sheere, nor staid,
But with swift wheele reverse, deep entring shar'd
All his right side; then Satan first knew pain,
And writh'd him to and fro convolv'd

Take that, jerk. And tell the Robot Devil I said hello when you get back to Hell.

Gold, baby. Gold.

In his first four games, Reggie Bush didn't score a single touchdown. His longest run was 18 yards, and his longest reception 32 yards (on a little brush play by a WR that held up the linebacker for a split second, allowing him to get loose). He's been an absolute disaster, right? The way I ask the question hints at the answer, boys and girls.

Absolute disaster, no.

As I wrote about briefly here, I would have seen the logic in trading down from #2 for more picks and try to fill more holes in the roster. But the exciting move, and the good PR move, was to draft Reggie Bush. Yesterday, the exciting part paid off for the Saints in a big way. With less than five minutes left in the fourth quarter and the Saints down by four, he returned a punt 65 yards for his first touchdown of the year. It ended up giving the Saints the margin of victory in a 24-21 win.

This was the first big game-changing play he made with the ball in his hands. But that doesn't mean he's been ineffective with the ball in other ways, or that he's been ineffective without the ball. Noboy on defense wants to get beat by a rookie, and nobody on defense wants to end up on the highlight reel. Three big things come to mind:

1) Play action. Play action to Reggie Bush is gold, baby. Gold. The whole defense flows towards him, trying to make sure he doesn't break free for a big gain. That draws the linebackers in and the safeties over, creating huge areas of open space for the receivers to exploit. Marques Colston has had a great start to his career, and a nice chunk of it is due to getting single coverage. Another chunk goes to Drew Brees for finding him, and the rest is the fact that Colston is 6-4, knows how to use his body, and is tough to bring down after the catch.

2) Fake it to him. Reggie Bush comes in motion behind the QB. Deuce McAllister up the middle. One and sometimes two guys go with Bush to the outside, leaving McAllister all kinds of room up the middle. Why? McAllister is the established player. McAllister is breaking off big runs on normal running plays. Because defenses are scared of the highlight reel. Reggie Bush streaking down the sideline is the last thing they want to see. And let's give some credit to Deuce. He knows what he's doing, and he takes full advantage of the space that Bush creates. They also run play where they fake a throw to him on one side of the field, then come back to the other. Works like a charm.

3) Short passes. The Saints are running a short passing game anyway. They've had a few big pass plays, but most of it is in the 7-10 yard range to the receivers. Again, if you're going to run this sort of attack, the receivers need to have space, and they get it from Reggie Bush. With his abilities, you want to give him the ball quick and give him time to work against a defender. Sean Payton lines him up in the backfield or at receiver, and he runs routes within ten yards of the line of scrimmage, which matches him up against linebackers or safeties, an easier matchup than going against corners. It also draws the defense's attention back toward the line of scrimmage, giving the others time to get downfield. Just because these aren't 50-yard plays down the sideline doesn't mean they're not important. Keeping drives alive, with twelve catches for first downs. He leads the league in receptions, by the way, with 34. Yesterday he became the second player in league history to catch ten passes and return a punt for a TD in the same game.

It's possible that I'm overstating his impact, but I don't think so. The way I see guys swarm to him when he gets the ball tells me that they plan for him and make a commitment to stop him.

Saints, Couples, and TV Shows

Let us consider some of the things that make us happy. And when I say "us", I mean "me".

The only professional football team I cheer for is the New Orleans Saints. There are other teams I enjoy watching, the Colts currently topping the list. But the Saints, as I wrote briefly here, are like the pro football version of my unconscious (whatever that means). Much of the time I don't really pay attention to what's really going on, though it has a big effect on how I view the rest of the world. The Saints are my default setting. The Saints have never been very good. It took 35 years to win one playoff game (by comparison, both the Jaguars and Panthers made the conference championship game in their 2nd year). Cheering for them leads to a sort of resigned hopelessness. Good things never happen to us. Why bother getting too excited?

Last year the Saints went to Green Bay when the Packers were 0-3 and got hammered 52-3. Every time they have a chance to show the world what they're made of, they do. And it turns out to be some soft, gooey, gelatin-like substance that can't block or tackle. Which brings us to Monday Night Football.

Let's put aside the emotional aspect for a second. I thought the Saints had zero chance of winning. Atlanta had run the ball amazingly well, and stopping it hasn't really been the Saints' strength. Atlanta's defense would also be the best the Saints had faced so far. Somebody at work said that he would be pulling for the Saints, and he thought that a lot of others would be, too. I understood the position. Struggling city, underdog team, feel-good story. My response: Don't bother. Really. Please. It's very nice, but you'll only end up being disappointed, and you'll wonder why you ever bothered. Now for the emotions.

Before the game, I kept trying to imagine what it was like inside the Superdome. Pregame concert, intros, kickoff, all that. I couldn't imagine what the noise level was going to be like. When the Saints blocked a punt and scored a TD on the first possession of the game, I almost started crying. If I had been there, I probably would have. I spent the rest of the game in front of the TV waiting for the other shoe to drop. Surely this couldn't continue. Surely we couldn't keep playing this well. Something had to go wrong. Somebody kept a tight grip on that shoe, because the Saints played pretty well all game long. Good enough to win 23-3 and go 3-0 to start the season.

I think someone kidnapped all the Saints players and replaced them with guys who play good defense and execute well on offense.

Does this make me happy? Yes. Due to past experience, it's a tenuous sort of happiness, but you have to enjoy it while you can.

What else was I going to talk about? Oh yes, Couples and TV Shows. At the end of last season, Lorelai gave Luke an ultimatum on their marriage, and Luke balked at it. Last night's season premiere only widened the rift. This does NOT make me happy. I like them together. I watch when they're together. When I see old episodes of Lorelai dating someone else, it ticks me off. They should get her and Luke married as soon as possible so they can be happy. More importantly, so I can be happy.

I know why the writers do things like this. They love to drag things out. Increase the drama. See how long they can go until they can't stall any longer. Personally, I see it as laziness and lack of creativity. It's like they think they won't be able to find new storylines if the main characters are happy. Plus, they made Logan look good last night, and that really pisses me off. I hope he gets hit by a bus.

Contrast this with Bones. I want Booth and Brennan together. Now. Tonight's episode presented a perfect opportunity to drive them apart and put off them getting together. For a while I thought that's exactly what would happen. But the writers found a quick and easy way to resolve the conflict, and now they're closer than they were before. Of course, they ended it with something else that could be a problem, but we'll worry about that next week. My guess? I think Bones has a shorter shelf life on TV than Gilmore Girls, and the writers know it, so they want to get Bones and Booth together in a relatively short period of time. Whatever the reason, I love their chemistry and am happy with the current pace of their relationship. It makes me happy.

16 wasn't quite good enough

I thought I'd take this opportunity to review what I got right and wrong about this past weekend in college football's matchups of top 25 teams.

I didn't see a whole lot of the Michigan/Notre Dame game, but every time I turned it on, Michigan had scored again. I thought they could win if they pounded away with Mike Hart and kept their defense off the field. I didn't imagine that their defense would have so much success beating up the ND offense and coming up with big plays. All they did was go out and hammer Notre Dame by 26 on the road, with pretty much everybody playing great all over the place. Hail to the victors.

The Nebraska/USC game went pretty much like I thought. USC just has too many good players at every position for Nebraska to match up against. Their defense jumped all over the short passing game and the offense picked on the Husker secondary. It was really a more dominating performance than the 28-10 score would indicate.

Florida beat Tennessee 21-20 on the road, using a pretty balanced attack on offense and what may be the best Gator defense in ten years. Florida's good. Stupid Florida.

I thought Miami's defense would be too good for Louisville. I was dead wrong. Miami looked like garbage from one end to the other. Louisville stomped them 31-7.

I had Oregon with the edge over Oklahoma, but the Sooner did quite a bit better than I thought they would. I wasn't sure they could put up 24 on Oregon, and they went for 33. One too few, as it turns out. Oregon was the beneficiary of a "controversial" call that gave them the ball on an onside kick, when it looked like replay showed that an Oregon player touched it before it went ten yards. Even after review, they got the call wrong. I put the c-word in quotes because this is a word that writers use when they don't want to harp on how officiating blatantly cost one team the game. They think it diminishes the majesty of the sport and calls into question the legitimacy of the results. I don't like the constant griping from fans that the refs are out to get "our team" either. But let's not sugarcoat it by using a word like "controversial". The word is "wrong" or "bad". It was a BAD CALL.

I didn't see a single play of Texas Tech/TCU, but the Horned Frog defense must be pretty good to hold TT to three points. Good for them.

Remember when I said to never trust Clemson? Unranked and coming off a loss to BC, they turn around and beat Florida state in Tallahassee. Can't trust 'em at all.

The game of the day, of course, was LSU/Auburn. Both defenses are very good. I think LSU's is better, but Auburn was able to make LSU one-dimensional by totally shutting down the run. Auburn's offense put together one good drive in the third quarter, and that was enough. LSU's defense got lit up last year by Kenny Irons. This time he had 70. Brandon Cox had 110 yards passing. LSU was able to extend the no-TD streak to 16 quarters, which is terrific. I won't say that LSU will win the rest of their games, but as long as they carry this defense with them, they can beat anybody, anywhere. It's really amazing. Overall, the game consisted of two teams knocking the crap out of each other. At one point or another, every guy who stepped on the field got rocked.

I disagree with Ivan Maisel's statement that it was the kind of game that "set football back 40 years", even though he was trying to pay a compliment. The implication is that the game was sloppy, which it wasn't. There was only one turnover, and only 85 yards of penalties. The game was a well-played one in spite of the low score. I have a hard time imagining that this game was more damaging to college football than one where the defensive line gets blown off the ball, the linebackers don't fill or tackle, and the secondary lets receivers run unencumbered.

Through three games, LSU's defense has allowed 13 points. The next two opponents are Tulane and Mississippi State. There's a real chance that after five games, LSU could be allowing 2.6 points a game. Yowza.

Here's hoping for 18

This weekend brings us one of the great college football weekends of the last few years, and certainly the biggest of this season. SEVEN games match teams ranked in the top 24 in the country. Had Clemson not lost to BC in double overtime last week, the number would be eight. Lesson: Never trust Clemson.

On the slate:

11Michigan AT 2Notre Dame
19Nebraska AT 4USC
7Florida AT 13Tennessee
17Miami AT 12Louisville
15Oklahoma AT 18Oregon
24Texas Tech AT 20TCU
6 LSU AT 3Auburn
------------------------------
Michigan hasn't been much of a factor nationally the last few years, so they're flying under the radar for a team on the verge of the top ten. They have a very good RB in Mike Hart, but I can't escape the idea that QB Chad Henne and the receivers are underachieving a little. Notre Dame has a great offense being run by Brady Quinn and Charlie Weis, and they can put at least four legitimate weapons at Quinn's disposal on the field at the same time. I thought Penn State had some good success running right at Notre Dame and abandoned it a little too early, and running up the gut is Michigan's strength. If Michigan can pound away and keep their defense off the field, they've got a great shot.
------------------------------
As you might remember, I'm a fan of Nebraska. Tommie Frazier is my favorite college player of all time, Tom Osborne my favorite, coach, and I believe that 1995 Nebraska is the best college team ever. So I would love to see them win at USC, but I just don't think it's going to happen. Nebraska's front seven on defense are outstanding, but the secondary isn't ready for all the different guys who can catch passes for USC. The only hope is for the line to get so much pressure on John David Booty that he never has any time to find them, and USC's offensive line is too good for that to happen. On the other side, Pete Carroll does a good job of bringing pressure from different angles, and I don't think Nebraska's offensive line is good enough to stand up to it. Nebraska can hang with them for a while, but home field and clear edge in depth and talent will win out for USC. I'll be pulling for Nebraska.
------------------------------
Florida and Tennessee match up in the biggest game in the SEC East, probably all year. The winner's game against UGA might come close if UGA is unbeaten. The Effing Gators have looked really good in two blowout wins, and the second year of Urban Meyer's system is going a lot better than the first. They're finding ways to work freshmen Tim Tebow and Percy Harvin into the game, with good results. Especially Harvin.
Quick interruption to talk about women's soccer. Wambach has scored twice in her hometown of Rochester, NY. Natasha Kai and her tattoos just entered the game.
Tennessee is a mystery to a lot of people. After a 5-6 season last year, we didn't know if they would underachieve again or regain top form and challenge for the SEC title. They beat the stuffing out of Cal in Week 1, but maybe Cal was ranked too high (I don't like the term "overrated"). Then they almost lost to Air Force. I hope they beat the hell out of Florida. And that Florida gets hit by a bus.
------------------------------
Who in their right mind would ever think that Louisville would be ranked five spots higher than Miami when they played? Yowza. Louisville lost a marvelous running back when Michael Bush broke his leg in Week 1. Big, strong, fast, he would be a load to handle in any system, but especially with a guy like Bobby Petrino. They missed him a lot when they beat Temple 62-0 last week. So why to I think Miami will win? DefenseDefenseDefenseDefenseDefense. They'll dare Louisville to run it with Bush out, and his replacements will find Miami a lot meaner than Temple. The secondary is one of the best around and will make life tough on Brian Brohm and the receivers. And they're going to be pissed that UL is ranked higher than they are.
------------------------------
Oklahoma beat Oregon in last year's Holiday Bowl, the first time in quite a while it wasn't an offensive shootout, but a tough 17-14 Sooner victory. Oklahoma will have the best player on the field, Adrian Peterson, but I'm not sure they have enough of everything else. The defense has been given fits by UAB and Washington, not exactly USC and Notre Dame. The offense has to go with QB-then-WR-then-QB-again Paul Thompson, who lost to TCU at home last year. Yikes. Oregon is balanced on offense, has a very good RB Jonathan Stewart (averaging more than 7 yards a pop so far), was good enough to beat Fresno State on the road, and have a very strong homefield advantage at Autzen Stadium. West Coast fans hail it as the toughest place in the country. SEC fans scoff at a place with fewer than 42,000 seats (that's a spring practice crowd at Florida), but the noise is supposed to be incredible.
------------------------------
The bottom-feeder of the group, TT/ could end up being a pretty entertaining game. I looked through the TCU roster and didn't recognize a single name, which means absolutely nothing. As I mentioned above, they were good enough to win at Oklahoma last year, and some of that respect has carried over to this year. Nobody pays attention to the Texas Tech roster either, because they think all the numbers are simply products of Mike Leach's system. One roster fact of note: for the first time in a million years, Texas Tech isn't starting a senior at QB. So what Graham Harrell might do in two years could be ridiculous. I don't care who wins.
------------------------------
And of course, the best matchup of the weekend, LSU traveling to the Plains to take on Auburn. LSU won last year 20-17 in overtime, helped greatly by five missed field goals by the Auburn kicker (he went down like a choking dog). Kenny Irons hit the LSU defense up for over 200 yards. Now he and Brandon Cox have another year under their belt, and Courtney Taylor is one of the best receivers in the SEC. Winning at Auburn ain't easy. So why do I feel so good? Good question. One LSU fan commented that this was the most confident he'd seen LSU before such a big game in quite a while, and I think he's right. What's the deal?

The biggest deal to me is how much better JaMarcus Russell looks at quarterback. Yes, ULL and Arizona aren't near the level of Auburn, and yes he's had all day to find receivers. But he just looks so much better and in control of everything.

The second biggest is how quickly the defense appears to have come together after losing All-American caliber DTs Kyle Williams and Claude Wroten, a good and experienced two-way DE Melvin Oliver, and two experienced starting linebackers. A second year under Bo Pelini helps a lot. All they've done this year is outscore opponents 12-6 on their own in two 45-3 wins. No TDs allowed in the last 14 quarters. I'd love to see it reach 18.

Third biggest is Dwayne Bowe, who had Lasik surgery before the Peach Bowl and has looked great since. He has the chance to be a total beast this year.

Big questions for LSU are the running backs and offensive line. The backs are either dinged up or freshmen except for Jacob Hester, who isn't exactly the prototype SEC feature back. He is a good receiver out of the backfield, and has his moments as a runner. If Auburn stuffs the run and pressures Russell, it's going to be a long game for LSU. If they can't stop Kenny Irons with a rebuilt front seven, it'll be even longer.

I have no idea how the game will go, but the last three games for LSU (Peach Bowl plus first two games this season) have been outstanding. Like 130-9 outstanding. I do feel pretty good about that.

USA 3, MEXICO 1.

Surprise, surprise

It was with rather little expectation that I logged on to a chat on espn.com dealing with football recruiting. I'd submitted a question earlier in the day, but I didn't expect it to get read, since they rarely do. So I was rather excited when I saw that there was a post from Natchitoches, LA. But wait, I use Falls Church, VA when I post (I figure it's more likely to get answered that way). Somebody named Brian was posting from my hometown. Good for him, I thought.

So it was with even greater joy a couple a couple of questions later when I saw my question asked and answered. On the same day, in the same chat, ESPN answered my question and the question of someone from my hometown. What a great world we live in. Simple pleasures are the best, boys and girls.

LSU/Arizona

This Saturday, the Mighty Tigers will host the Arizona Wildcats. They last met in 2003, when LSU trounced them 59-13 in Tucson. Since then, Arizona has hired Mike Stoops, who has really upgraded the talent level on the team and made them a lot tougher. Browsing a message board or two, the posts seem to break down into four categories:

1) LSU fans who think Arizona stinks. They're a soft PAC-10 team that can't play defense. They've gone 3-7 the last two years. The atmosphere of Tiger Stadium and the humidity will be too much, and LSU will win in a rout.

2) LSU fans who respect Arizona and think they can give the Tigers a good game, but that LSU will still win.

3) Arizona fans who will root hard for their team, but haven't seen enough to think they can go to LSU and win. They hope they don't get blown out.

4) Arizona fans who think that the SEC is overrated, and that LSU will be overlooking them with Auburn coming up on the 16th. They play the "no respect" card. LSU thinks they're slow and aren't ready to play with the big boys. This overconfidence, combined with a great performance by Arizona, will be the Tigers' undoing.

So what do I think? Defense is Arizona's strength. Looking at how they match up with LSU's offense, I think they only spot on the field they have an advantage is when Louis Holmes lines up across from Peter Dyakowski. If Holmes can create havoc in the LSU backfield, Arizona can pick it up everywhere else. Other than that, LSU's interior line is better than Arizona's, their running backs are better than the Wildcat linebackers, and the LSU receivers are better than the Arizona secondary. Arizona hasn't seen anyone quite like JaMarcus Russell, either. I'm not saying he's so much better than the QBs Arizona has faced in the PAC-10, but he presents different challenges.

When Arizona has the ball, they're going to have it rough. Arizona could be starting a walk-on at center. Against a guy like Glenn Dorsey, that means trouble. Arizona's running game was weak against BYU, and LSU is a lot better than BYU. At running back, Arizona lost Mike Bell, who could be starting for the Broncos. Matching up with the speed of the LSU linebackers and the playmaking of Ali Highsmith will be tough. At wideout, Arizona does have a couple of talented players who can stretch the field. They're going to need to come up huge, because LSU's secondary is one of the best in the country, with three senior starters. It has corners who can cover, and safeties who can cover and hit. The leader of the offense is Willie Tuitama, who came on late last year and led them to a thrashing over UCLA, their biggest win of the year. However, he's faced with taking on the combo of defensive coordinator Bo Pelini and All-American safety LaRon Landry, who have a lot more experience and meanness to them than Tuitama does.

Some people who predict a Wildcat victory sometimes point to three things: 1) overconfidence by LSU combined with looking ahead to Auburn the next week; 2) Arizona was a big underdog to UCLA last year, and if they can beat those Bruins, they can beat these Tigers; and 3) the last two years LSU has faced a PAC-10 team, they've barely escaped with a win. They needed missed kicks and over time to beat Oregon State in 2004, and they needed to blocked kicks returned for TDs and a miracle pass and catch to beat Arizona State in 2005.

Point number one is a good one.

Point number two isn't. In terms of "plucky underdog can take down heavy favorite" it's valid. However, last year's Bruins won plenty of games in a shootout, and it was only a matter of time before their lack of defense caught up with them. No one thought it would happen against Arizona, but that's not LSU's dilemma. LSU's defense is much, much better than UCLA's last year or BYU's this year, which held Arizona to 16 points. Also, the game against UCLA was at home, while they play LSU on the road.

Point number three seems okay, but has its problems. Arizona State and Oregon State were both quarterbacked by experienced QBs in a West Coast style offense. More specifically, they had good, athletic tight ends who could catch the ball and make LSU pay for blitzing. I don't see that with Arizona. Period. Also, the other two teams had good offensive lines that could provide time for the QB or holes for the RB. Arizona's is average at best. They could get better with time or play way over their heads, though.

If you're looking for sort of cop-out reasons why the OSU and ASU results were so close when LSU was favored, here are three: 1) Heavy rain wet the field down and negated LSU's speed advantage over OSU. 2) A hurricane moved the game from Baton Rouge to Tempe for ASU. 3) The hurricane also moved LSU's opening game against North Texas back a few weeks, so LSU didn't have a warmup game to work out the kinks. ASU had Temple the previous week.

What do I expect? LSU by 10 or 13 (not covering the spread). Can Arizona win? Of course. Of course, for the SEC pick 'em on a message board, I always pick the favorite to win and cover.

A Great Way to Start the Day

An email was waiting for me this morning that included this link:

"the O'Meara deal has fallen through, according to bankruptcy court files, and a new buyer has stepped forward. Britt Swan , owner of Georgetown nightspots Modern and the Rhino Bar, told us yesterday that he intends to preserve the Sign of the Whale name and its old-school shabby gentility."

I've been to Rhino several times, and it's a darn good place to watch football on Sundays. I don't think SOTW has to become more like it, but it's nice to know it's going to someone whose work I'm already a little familiar with. But most of all, I'm happy that my favorite place within a thousand miles won't be turned into a superfluous Irish pub.

The rest of the landscape

A few days a go I talked a little bit about what I was worried and confident about with LSU this season. It was an abbreviated and not-so-good piece, but it's all I really feel like saying, so you're stuck with it.

Now on to some of the other stories.

Ohio State is ranked #1 to start the season because they have great returning talent on offense. Troy Smith at QB is a Heisman contender. Ted Ginn can score from anywhere on the field. They have a good line with a 1,300 yard rusher returning and a top RB recruit coming in. The big question is the defense, which lost nine starters. The counter to this question is another question, "When has Jim Tressel not had a good defense?" Valid point. If they get past Texas early, they can roll the rest of the way (although a lot of people are picking Iowa to beat them).

Texas is loaded with talent across the board, but they don't have Vince Young anymore. They've got the players to win, but they're probably going to be faced with the question if they can win big games without their heart and soul QB. It's very possible that they'll get tagged with the choker label again.

Notre Dame could be like UCLA was last year, winning barnburner shootouts all year long (though I don't think ND's defense will be that bad). What's really going to get them is the schedule. Georgia Tech, Penn State, Michigan, Michigan State and Purdue are the first five opponents. They could be 5-0. They could be 2-3 or worse. They'll score a bajillion points (technical term), but they have to avoid giving up a bajillion and one.

USC lost two Heisman winners, their leading touchdown rusher, and a few other guys who went pro. And they're still one of the top five teams in America. The conference schedule is favorable, but they need to avoid being snakebitten early in the year. Playing at Arkansas will be easier since Darren McFadden will be out, and Nebraska goes to L.A. But watch out for the Husker defense.

General consensus holds that LSU and Florida have the most talent in the SEC, but that Auburn is the favorite to win the league because of a favorable schedule and the returning backfield of Brandon Cox and Kenny Irons. Cox should be more consistent under center, and Kenny Irons could emerge as a darkhorse Heisman contender. He tore up LSU last season, and that was with three starters on the defensive line.

You know what? West Virginia almost never gets any big-time recruits, and they don't seem to care. The Mountaineers won the Sugar Bowl last year, and their freshman class is full of average-joe type players. They get tough guys who fit their system, and that seems to work for them. Their game of the year will be at Louisville, and we may see 110 points. The Cardinals aren't slouches, with Brohm and Bush in the backfield.

That's all for now. The fun starts Thursday. I heartily recommend ESPN Gameplan.

Snakes on a plane

Last week I went to Ballston to see the 11:45am showing of Snakes on a Plane. I said, "One for Snakes on a Plane.", and immediately thought to myself "I can't believe I just said that."

I walked into an empty theater, which is always a thrill, but also a bit of a nerve-wracker for me. On one hand, I always think it's pretty neat that the rare occasion arises that one can sit in a room made for hundreds and watch a movie on a large screen all by oneself. On the other hand, it's also a little creepy, with the specter of someone else, someone unknown, being in there without me knowing. A few more people showed up.

The general feeling I heard before seeing it was "a good b-movie" and "bad movie, good experience". That's pretty much accurate, though I don't really think of it as a "b-movie" at all. I see it more as a film that pokes fun at itself and acknowledges that the real reason the audience is there is because the movie is called--hello--"Snakes on a Plane". Someone on the imdb boards pointed out that one of the things that make it work is that everybody plays it straight. There are some b-movie type homages, such as:

--The young mother saying, "My baby! Where's my baby?!" The Simpsons have quoted this one once or twice.

--What I think of as "Monster Vision", where we see the world through the eyes of the snakes, a sort of green blurry haze.

--The most unlikable, stuck-up jerk of a character gets killed in a most enjoyable fashion (hardly unique to b-movies, but pretty much required for them).

There were only seven people in the theater when I saw it. I laughed when it was funny, and maybe a couple of times when it wasn't. I flinched whenever the snakes struck, even though I knew it was coming. I can't help feeling that it would be a lot different experience to see it in a theater full of people familiar with the backstory to the picture. Maybe I'll do that for the sequel.

Past vs. Present

Here's a post I made on the LSU board of collegefanatics.com, slightly modified.

Last year the three things that concerned me most were:

QB: Because I wasn't buying into the idea that JR "got it" just yet. All he did was go 10-2, but the defense carried the offense for much of the year. Not worried about it this year because of JR's performance in tough games and Flynn looking good against Miami. Not saying I'm expecting 35 TDs and 3,500 yards, but things look good. (I'm also expecting better QB numbers because of Bowe's eye surgery. For some reason, I have dreams that say, "LASIK = TDs)

RB: I thought Alley's injury was a bigger blow than a lot of people I read. I figured it would lead to Addai wearing down by midseason from overuse, especially if Justin Vincent hadn't returned to freshman form. I cringed every time somebody in the preseason said "We'll be fine." I'll give myself a reluctant pat on the back for this one. It didn't help that the offensive line rarely played up to the level of its talent. Not worried this year because of the freshmen. I'm completely fine with freshmen at RB, since it worked well enough in 2003. Charles Scott will be good if Keiland Williams won't. Even if Broussard isn't fully recovered, Vincent never gets back to where he was, and Hester stinks, I like the position.

DB: Just because we lost two starting corners to the NFL. I guess I needn't have worried, since the D ended up something like 3rd against the pass last year. Should be good again this year. LaRon Landry and Jessie Daniels should be a great safety tandem.

This year, here's what concerns me to start out:

DL: Losing three starters to the NFL really hurts, especially in the way of leadership. Replacements are talented but mostly inexperienced. Dorsey needs to be as good or better than Williams or Wroten for this unit to be a strength. I think there will be the potential for a lot of versatility, moving guys like Ricky Jean-Francois and Charles Alexander inside and outside depending on down and distance.

LB: Luke Sanders never stays healthy, and there's not a lot of depth if (when) he goes down again. Highsmith will be good, maybe great. Beckwith needs to prove he can do it as a full-time starter instead of a sub. Plug in freshmen at RB, okay. Plug in freshmen (Cutrera, Perry, Sheppard, Odom) at LB, not okay.

OL: You knew it was coming, right? I read that Dorsey and Co. gave the line fits in scrimmage, and you don't want that to happen against a DL with one returning starter. Ideally, I'd like to see Black, Arnold, Miller, Helms and one of the Johnsons (Herm if he's ready, Brian if he's not. But BJ seems more like a guard to me than a tackle) This is actually less of a worry for me than the others, and you may remember how down I was on the OL last year. I thought they underperformed most of the season. The dropoff won't be as drastic as it could be. I hope.

I'm sure I'll be talking about LSU and college football a lot more rather soon.

Ode to Au Revoir

Unser Schuldbuch sei vernichtet!
ausgesöhnt die ganze Welt!
Brüder- überm Sternenzelt
richtet Gott, wie wir gerichtet.

This was the reaction I had when I read that the Cubs traded Neifi Perez to the Tigers today. Although my thoughts were in English, so it would be:

The account of our misdeeds be destroyed!
Reconciled the entire world!
Brothers, above the starry canopy
God judges as we judged.

These are a few of the lines from from Schiller's "Ode to Joy". There's also a bit about "cannibals drink gentleness", but I can't honestly say I was thinking that bit.

You may remember that I mentioned that I think Neifi Perez is the most useless offensive player the Cubs have ever had. It boggles the mind that even with the postseason out of reach, Dusty Baker still put him in the starting lineup, when he had Todd Walker and a promising rookie in Ryan Theriot as alternatives. I was ecstatic that Jim Hendry finally saw the light and traded him, and dumbstruck that the Tigers actually thought he was worth trading for.

"I think he's an ideal guy to plug in for the Tigers as they try to maintain their success," Cubs general manager Jim Hendry said.

If I could, I'd link to a sound file of Mandark's evil laugh, because that's really the only thing that can verbalize the comic insanity of that statement.

"He's a legitimate everyday player and an outstanding utility player," Tigers general manager Dave Dombrowski said.

He couldn't even play solitaire every day. He should be banned from all competition. The only outstanding thing about him is his near-unmatched ability at making outs.

The headline on ESPN.com says the Tigers traded for "depth". True. Neifi Perez has more depth than a sinkhole, and outs and errors are attracted to him like he's a black hole.

You want a great stat to tell you how bad a batter Neifi Perez is, how little control of the strike zone he has? In 2004 Barry Bonds walked an insane 232 times, by far a major league record. An average player will take three or four seasons, if not more, to get there. But that's more than Neifi Perez has in eleven seasons.

I don't even care who the Cubs got in return. They could have traded him for Hassan Nasrallah, and I'd have stood up and cheered.

Snakes on Jack Benny

Continuing with my current strategy of watching some (but not all) of the AFI top 100 comedies, alternating them with MST3K episodes. I'm not reviewing any MST3K, because there's no point. They're all funny, and not a lot separates one from the other, except maybe This Island Earth, which is great. On to Mr. Benny.

To Be or Not to Be is a comedy made in 1942 and set in 1939 Poland, right before the Germans invade. Jack Benny and his wife, Carole Lombard, are actors in a theater company. Robert Stack is an unbelievable 23 years old, making me say, "Robert Stack used to be 23?" All three of them are good, and so is everybody else. It's a comedy with a serious backdrop (as if you couldn't tell when I mentioned the NAZIS). Everybody plays it straight except for Benny, who plays Jack Benny. In other cases you could call it a drawback, but I think it works very well. He never lets the movie drag you down. He conversely seems to lament his life when things are going well, and revel in the challenges when things get tough.

I laughed a lot more than I thought I would, which is always a pleasant feeling.

Snakes on Peter Sellers

I watched Being There a little while ago, and I thought it was really enjoyable and fun to watch. Sellers plays a simple-minded man who only cares about gardening and watching TV. Events put him in a position to influence a wealthy businessman's last days, the President's economic policy, and the passions of Shirley MacLaine.

Chance the Gardener becomes Chauncey Gardner, and he responds to just about every situation with comments about either gardening or television. Everything he says happens to correspond in some analogical way to the subject at hand (especially gardening and economics). The big thing I'll take away from the movie is how everyone talking to him sort of turns him into a mirror of themselves. They all assume that he's just like them. The black kids on the street believe he works for a rival gang. The dying rich man thinks he's a businessman trying to make a living who's being haggled by lawyers. The Russian ambassador thinks he speaks Russian. The gay guy thinks he's gay. Everyone who speaks to him receives either confirmation of their own world view, or the "enlightenment" that comes from speaking to an oracle. I think the latter also happens whenever someone simultaneously stops listening to their voice and starts listening to the words. Then they realize what it is that they've been thinking and saying, and gain a new perspective. "Chauncey" brings this out in a lot of people.

Peter Sellers was nominated for Best Actor, and Melvyn Douglas won for Best Supporting. Good movie, fun, poignant at times, and worth your time.

One more note: The disco version of "Also Sprach Zarathustra" and the way they worked it into Chance leaving the house for the first time was very clever.

Are you pondering what I'm pondering?

I was chatting with someone at work about Hezbollah/Israel today, after having previously discussed "Pinky and the Brain". It led to the following IM:

Nasrallah: Come, Hezbollah, we must prepare for tomorrow.
Hezbollah: What are we doing tomorrow, Nasrallah?
Nasrallah: The same thing we do every day, Hezbollah--try to destroy Israel!

So I figured that there must be lots of cases where you could insert "Hezbollah" in place of "Pinky". Let's see how it turned out, shall we?

The Brain: This is the earth. And this is Hezbollah. You can tell the difference quite easily. One is a lump of inert matter hurtling blindly through the void. The other... is the earth.

Hezbollah: Egad. You astound me, Brain. The Brain: That's a simple task, Hezbollah.

The Brain: No, Hezbollah. Never use two drops of the formula. It would cause a reaction on the molecular level that is completely unpredictable. Hezbollah: Oh, I hate it when that happens. Narf.

[that one's a little freaky]

The Brain: Hezbollah, there are times when I feel i'm bearing my soul to a tube of caulk. Hezbollah: Yum! Caulk!

The Brain: Hezbollah, you give a whole new meaning to the phrase, "counter-intelligence".

Nasrallah: Hurry up, Hezbollah, If we don't get to Carley Simon's house I'll never know if that song was about me.

[that one doesn't really have anything to do with Nasrallah or Hezbollah, but I thought it was quirky enough to put in.

And those are just the "Pinky and the Brain" possibilities. Holler if you think of others.

#20 on the field, #1 in your hearts

And when I say "your hearts", I mean "my heart".

I have been greatly remiss in not mentioning that ESPN had an article on Abby Wambach a couple of weeks ago. I'm sure I've mentioned that Wambach is #1 on the Scotty Williams Big Board. A telling quote:

"Abby has scored more goals in a shorter time than Mia did," United States coach Greg Ryan said. "If Abby was playing in 1991 to 1996, the number of goals she would have had by now is astronomical. She's done it in a much more difficult environment. The opposition is much better."

Is she Mia's equal right now? I don't think so. But scoring at a faster pace than the world's alltime leader and drawing comparisons to Michelle Akers at the same time is a hell of a start.

Archives

I paid a visit to the National Archives today, since I read they were putting on an "Eyewitness to History" exhibit. Documents and recordings from some of the more memorable events in US history. Three that stood out:

The giant photo of the standoff in the road between John Lewis's student protest group and Georgia police. The police are advancing from the left in gas masks and riot gear, carrying clubs. Lewis and his group are standing on the right, waiting and defiant. They're about to get the crap beat out of them. In the space between the two groups, about 40 or 50 feet away, you can see 15 or 20 white men in overcoats and fedora-type hats, waiting, watching and some taking pictures. It's a really amazing and moving photograph. The bystanders reminded me of some of the photos I've seen of lynchings from the 50's and 60's. You see the lower half of the victim hanging from a tree, and a bunch of high school age kids there just milling around. Boys in slacks and clean shirts, girls in poodle skirts. Like it's the most natural thing in the world to be where they are, doing what they're doing. It's the casualness of the whole thing that gives me chills.

The next thing was the audio recording of the Hindenburg disaster. The raw emotion in Herbert Morrison's voice is indescribable. Here's the text:
---------------------------------------------------

It's practically standing still now. They've dropped ropes out of the nose of the ship, and it has been taken ahold of down on the field by a number of men. It's starting to rain again; the rain had, er, slacked up a little bit. The back motors of the ship are just holding it, er, just enough to keep it from…
It's burst into flames! It's burst into flames and it's falling, it's crashing. … Get out of the way, get out of the way! Get this, Charlie, get this, Charlie! It's burning and it's crashing! It's crashing, terrible! Oh, my! Get out of the way, please! It's burning, bursting into flames and it's falling on the mooring mast, and all the folks between. Oh, this is terrible. This is the, one of the worst catastrophes in the world! Oh, my Jesus! … Oh, four to five hundred feet into the sky. It's a terrific crash, ladies and gentlemen, it's smoke and it's flames, now, and the frame is crashing to the ground, not quite to the mooring mast. Oh, the humanity, and all the passengers screaming around here! I told you, I cannot talk to people ... I can't talk, ladies and gentlemen.

Listen, folks, I'm gonna have to stop for a minute because this was the... the worst thing I've ever witnessed.
---------------------------------------------------

I also went through the Public Vault area, and they had an exhibit on immigrants and their paperwork upon entering the country. Scientists, actors, parents of famous people. I'd never seen Yul Brynner with hair before. The paperwork includes the person's race and nationality. A Chinese guy's race was given as "Oriential", and Einstein's was "Hebrew".

I stood in line to see the Declaration and Constitution again. I asked the guard at the Constitution (because he's supposed to know everything about it), if anybody ever asked why some of the s's look like f's. "Oh yeah, I get that question all the time." I got my hopes up. "It's because they had a different style of writing back at that time." And my hopes were dashed. I was hoping that he's say something about the eszett, which is sort of a double s in German. In cursive it looks like a fancy f. So I'd always figured that it carried over to English since English is a Germanic language. A word like "Congress" would have the eszett in place of the first s. But since the security guard didn't say anything about it, I may be wrong. Tragic.

Superman Returns

Considering that this is a movie about the greatest superhero known to man, I thought it actually flew under the radar during the buildup. And with Pirates opening the following week, I perhaps people forgot about it rather quickly. But I thought it was pretty good.

Brandon Routh is the new Superman, and he looks good. Good-looking, but not strikingly so, same as Christopher Reeve. His Clark Kent is still a bit unsure of himself, but he's not as fidgety as the previous iteration. Kate Bosworth is the new Lois Lane, and dark hair is probably the only thing she has in common with Margot Kidder. I think her Lois is a bit more composed and in control than before, but she's aggressive and feisty like Lois is supposed to be. Kevin Spacey was a good Lex Luthor, but I can't shake the feeling that a dozen other actors could have pulled off the same performance. I could be wrong. He's just as grandstanding, but his humor is more subdued. Gene Hackman had a bit more showmanship to his Luthor.

The only major critique I have would be that I didn't really feel a lot of suspense or danger. He's Superman, for crying out loud. He's going to save the day, and come out pretty much unharmed in the end. Not anybody's fault, but it's just the nature of the adventures of Superman, I guess.

There were some homages to the originals, like Superman telling Lois she shouldn't smoke, or him taking her heavenward for a duo flight.

The special effects are good, but this should be the last time I ever mention such a thing when reviewing a movie, because there's really no excuse for a big-budget movie not to have good special effects these days. I like the way it was shot overall. My favorite visual shot was Superman holding the globe that sits atop the Daily Planet over his head, like Atlas holding the heavens and earth upon his shoulders. Symbolically bearing the weight of the world, as it's "first and greatest super-hero", as the IMDB plot outline says.

A bit less of everything...

...is how I would describe the second Pirates of the Caribbean movie. The acting wasn't as good, the writing wasn't as good, Johnny Depp wasn't as bizarre, Keira Knightley wasn't as pretty, etc. It was okay. I knew it wasn't as good as the first one going in, but that's okay.

When you have a movie with special effects like the first one, it's almost a given that the makers will feel they have a duty to outdo themselves in that regard for the sequel. This is no exception. Undead warriors from the first are replaced by sea creature men in the second. Even when I tried to pay attention to them, I didn't really notice.

Deadwood is on, and it's just so damn good. Last weeks episode had two great speeches. One when Merrick was reading Bullock's letter to the murdered Cornishman's family, and the second when Blazanov raged against Hearst's having his foreign workers murdered. Good stuff.

I recently watched Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore, which was the basis for the sitcom Alice, something I hadn't known before. Mostly because I had no idea what the movie was about in the first place. But once I saw Vic Tayback working the kitchen, it flashed into my head. I really liked that TV show.

I also watched A Night at the Opera, a Marx Brothers movie from 1935. Fantastic. The talent that each of those guys possessed is really extraordinary. Chico playing the piano might be my favorite scene.

All My Teams

It's a rare day when my favorite teams in two different sports play on the same day. Cubs, Saints, LSU, USA. Not necessarily in that order. But since the Cubs just ended a weekend series in DC, and the US Women beat Ireland 5-0 this afternoon, it got me to thinking about why I cheer for the teams I do.

The Cubs are in my DNA. They're in my bones and my skin and my hair and all those things. I didn't choose them any more than I chose my fingernails or kneecaps. If I didn't love the Cubs, I wouldn't be me. The fact that they never win is irrelevant.

I did choose LSU and the Saints. It may have been an easy choice based on the fact that they're from Louisiana, but it was still a choice.

"USA" is a rather specific category. My favorite national team is the US Women's soccer team. I started following them umpteen years ago when I read about this 14 year old girl playing at the international level. It was American soccer, and we were actually good. So a championship team in the sport that I played was really appealing. They became my brain and my heart. They play with passion and desire and love for each other. Out of all the teams I call mine, they're the most fun to cheer for.

They say that in "The Tempest", Caliban represents the unconscious mind. The inner anger and uncontrolled passion of men. This is what LSU and the Saints are. The wildest emotions and rages are present, especially at the college level. Getting to scream at the TV when things go well or badly is a great stress reliever. It's also a good way to be pissed off for an entire week if your team loses.

It's a Beautiful Day for Baseball

Here are the good things about going to see the Cubs play the Nationals today:

1) I get to see the Cubs.
2) It's hot outside, but I'm in the shade.
3) Aramis Ramirez hit two more home runs, which gives him four in the last two games. All really hammered.
4) Seeing LSU alum Todd Walker in person. I last saw him hit a grand slam in Alex Box Stadium in the College World Series.
5) Singing "Take Me Out to the Ballgame" in the 7th inning stretch and hearing thousands of Cubs fans drown out the Nats fans with "root, root, root for the CUBBIES"

Here are the bad things:

1) Seeing Neifi Perez take the field in person. I'm pretty sure he's the most useless offensive player the Cubs have ever had.
2) Watching Phil Nevin start over Matt Murton.
3) Watching the Cubs lose.
4) Watching Alex Escobar beat the Cubs for the second game in a row. Alex. Escobar.

Just Try to Ignore the Fact That They're Nazis

I watched Cabaret recently, which was okay. I was expecting a bit more. The thing I remember most is the song "Tomorrow Belongs to Me". In the movie, it is sung in a picnic setting, started off by a member of the Hitler Youth and joined in by most of the crowd. At first you just see the kid's face, and he's the picture-perfect young Aryan man. Then you see the brown shirt and the armband and the uniform and get the full picture. But the song is great. It starts out going on about nature and the trees and the rivers and "the blossom embraces the bee". Then it goes into "Arise, arise!" and "Fatherland, fatherland, send us the sign" type stuff. But it sounds fantastic. So if you can ignore the fact that all this is a prelude to the rise of Hitler and everything that came with it*, it's really good.

*Note: You can't really ignore it.

I've gone through a lot of movies recently, probably too many to do a post on each one. So I'll run through some of them real quick.

Tom Jones: boring except for maybe the last twenty minutes.
The Greatest Show on Earth: Not bad. Charlton Heston is good. Shows a lot of the circus acts and what it takes to put the show on.
Out of Africa: Really good. Depressing, but good. Meryl Streep and Robert Redford are good. Streep nominated for Best Actress.
Oliver!: A little dull for me. Picked up towards the end. But the song about buying roses was a great one.
Three Days of the Condor: A good thriller. Redford and Dunaway go well together. I may have mentioned before that I was very pleasantly surprised by Dunaway when I watched Bonnie and Clyde and Chinatown. She's good in this one too. And let me just say this about Redford: he's always good. Even if the movie is crap, Redford is good.
Capote: Just finished it tonight. I don't care too much about the story, but if you ever see old footage of Truman Capote and then watch Philip Seymour Hoffman, you'll be mightily impressed (same thing with Denzel Washington in Malcolm X. He was robbed of an Oscar that year by Al Pacino in the utterly wretched Scent of a Woman. Can't stand that movie).

Watching True Grit right now, then it's Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore. And then the fun begins, with four episodes of MST3K on the way.

To finish, I'll check to see if my good friend Geneva Marney is still paying attention. Hey Neva, if you've got a movie recommendation or two, send them my way.