I know Tom Brady broke Manning's single season touchdown record last Saturday night and I know that finishing the season with a perfect record is an unbelivable feat...I know all of this. But the Tom Brady slurping is excessivley wearing me out. Brady might have broke Manning's record but his regular season was not better...on par perhaps...but not better than Manning's.
In 2004 Manning passed for 49 TD's...threw 10 interceptions. His completion percentage was 67.6%. He passed for 4,557 yards with an average of 9.2 yards per completion. He finished the season with a QB rating of 121.1 (the best ever).
In 2007 Brady passed for 50 TD's...threw 8 interceptions. His completion percentage was 68.9%. He passed for 4,806 yards with an average of 8.3 yards per completion. He finished the season with a QB rating of 117.2.
Pretty comparable. It is worth noting that in 2004 Manning threw for 49 TD's in only 497 attempts...while Brady threw 50 TD's in 578 attempts. It is also worth pointing out that Manning played all 16 games but only played in the first quarter of the final week while Brady played all of his team's final game.
Granted...in 2004 Manning played 10 games in a dome (eight in the RCA dome...with one in Detroit and one in Houston). That does give Manning a big edge with him playing well over half his games in temperature-controlled environments. Brady only played one game in a dome (that was in Indy).
But another interesting aspect of comparing their two seasons is their respected divisions. The AFC East in 2007 was one of the worst divisions in the NFL. The other three teams (Miami, Buffalo, and the NY Jets) finished with a 12-36 record (.250 winning percentage). In 2004 the AFC South's other three teams (Jacksonville, Tenessee and Houston) finished with a 21-27 record (.440 winning percentage). Bascially the Patriots had 6 games against very inferior competition while the Colts had 6 division games against competitive teams.
In essence what I'm saying is that Brady '07 season is not superior to that of Manning's. It was just as good as Manning's '04 campaign.
Monday, December 31, 2007
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Best of 2007's music (or something like that)
Here's my top 50 (in alphabetical order) memorable songs of 2007 ipod playlist. The list is a combination of best songs of the year with my favorite songs of the year. It's an amalgamation of the two ideas. But I have bold-faced what I think are the 10 best songs of the year. I realize that technically some of the songs were released in 2006...ie Read My Mind...but some songs weren't released as singles until 2007... again...Ready My Mind.
Here it is...
Arcade Fire, “Keep the Car Running”
Arcade Fire, “Intervention”
Arctic Monkeys, “Fluorescent Adolescent”
Black Kids, “I'm Not Gonna Teach Your Boyfried How to Dance With You”
Blitzer Trapper, “Country Caravan”
Bright Eyes, “Four Winds”
Bruce Springsteen, “Livin' In the Future”
Bruce Springsteen, “Gypsy Biker”
Bruce Springsteen, “Girls In Their Summer Clothes”
Bruce Springsteen, “Long Walk Home”
Camera Obscura, “If Looks Could Kill”
Cold War Kids, “Hang Me Up to Dry”
Common, “Drivin' Me Wild”
Feist, “1234”
Ghostface Killal (feat. Trife), “Be Easy”
Green Day, “Working Class Hero”
The Hives, “Tick Tick Boom”
The Hold Steady, “Stuck Between Stations”
Interpol, “Heinrich Maneuver”
Jay-Z, “Roc Boys (And The Winner Is)
Josh Ritter, “To the Dogs or Whoever”
Justin Timberlake, “Summer Love”
Kanye West, “Stronger”
The Killers, “Bling (Confession of a King)
The Killers, “Read My Mind”
The Killers, “Ruby, Don't Take Your Love to Town”
LCD Soundsystem, “All My Friends (Franz Ferdinand Version)
Lyle Lovette, “Up in Indiana”
Modest Mouse, “Dashboard”
Modest Mouse, “Missed the Boat”
Nelly Furtado, “Say it Right”
The New Pornographers, “Myraid Harbour”
Nikki Blonsky, Zac Efron, etc, “You Can't Stop the Beat”
Paul McCartney, “Dance Tonight”
Peter Bjorn and John, “Young Folks”
Rooney, “When Did Your Heart Go Missing?”
Ryan Adams, “Goodnight Rose”
Ryan Adams, “Two”
Ryan Adams, “Halloweenhead”
Ryan Adams, “Down in Hole”
Ryan Adams, “This is Is” (Cardinals Version)
Schooner, “Carrboro”
The Shins, “Australia”
The Shins, “Phantom Limb”
Sondre Lerche, “Say it All”
Spoon, “The Underdog”
T.I. Featuring Wyclef Jean, “You Know What It Is”
The White Stripes, “Icky Thump”
Wilco, “Hate it Here”
1990's, “See You at the Lights”
Here it is...
Arcade Fire, “Keep the Car Running”
Arcade Fire, “Intervention”
Arctic Monkeys, “Fluorescent Adolescent”
Black Kids, “I'm Not Gonna Teach Your Boyfried How to Dance With You”
Blitzer Trapper, “Country Caravan”
Bright Eyes, “Four Winds”
Bruce Springsteen, “Livin' In the Future”
Bruce Springsteen, “Gypsy Biker”
Bruce Springsteen, “Girls In Their Summer Clothes”
Bruce Springsteen, “Long Walk Home”
Camera Obscura, “If Looks Could Kill”
Cold War Kids, “Hang Me Up to Dry”
Common, “Drivin' Me Wild”
Feist, “1234”
Ghostface Killal (feat. Trife), “Be Easy”
Green Day, “Working Class Hero”
The Hives, “Tick Tick Boom”
The Hold Steady, “Stuck Between Stations”
Interpol, “Heinrich Maneuver”
Jay-Z, “Roc Boys (And The Winner Is)
Josh Ritter, “To the Dogs or Whoever”
Justin Timberlake, “Summer Love”
Kanye West, “Stronger”
The Killers, “Bling (Confession of a King)
The Killers, “Read My Mind”
The Killers, “Ruby, Don't Take Your Love to Town”
LCD Soundsystem, “All My Friends (Franz Ferdinand Version)
Lyle Lovette, “Up in Indiana”
Modest Mouse, “Dashboard”
Modest Mouse, “Missed the Boat”
Nelly Furtado, “Say it Right”
The New Pornographers, “Myraid Harbour”
Nikki Blonsky, Zac Efron, etc, “You Can't Stop the Beat”
Paul McCartney, “Dance Tonight”
Peter Bjorn and John, “Young Folks”
Rooney, “When Did Your Heart Go Missing?”
Ryan Adams, “Goodnight Rose”
Ryan Adams, “Two”
Ryan Adams, “Halloweenhead”
Ryan Adams, “Down in Hole”
Ryan Adams, “This is Is” (Cardinals Version)
Schooner, “Carrboro”
The Shins, “Australia”
The Shins, “Phantom Limb”
Sondre Lerche, “Say it All”
Spoon, “The Underdog”
T.I. Featuring Wyclef Jean, “You Know What It Is”
The White Stripes, “Icky Thump”
Wilco, “Hate it Here”
1990's, “See You at the Lights”
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Padres sign Prior
Via espn.com...
By Buster Olney
ESPN The Magazine
Mark Prior, cut loose by the Cubs earlier this month, has agreed to terms with the San Diego Padres.
Prior receives a one-year major league deal with a $1 million base salary. The contract, which doesn't include an option, contains incentive clauses that could take the total value of the deal to over $3 million.
An announcement is expected to come sometime Wednesday.
Prior, 27, last pitched in the big leagues in 2006, and had shoulder surgery in April of 2007.
The second overall pick in the 2001 draft, Prior went 18-6 for the Cubs in 2003 before experiencing a series of physical problems. He was born in San Diego and lives in San Diego County, and the Padres' hope is that he is able to join a rotation that already includes Jake Peavy, Chris Young, Greg Maddux and Randy Wolf.
He has been throwing on flat ground, and to date, has been free of pain since his surgery.
Prior's lifetime record in the big leagues is 42-29, with a 3.51 ERA.
Ryan here--Not a bad move. Chances are he won't pitch at all but if he does contribute (especially towards the end of the season--maybe during a post season run) than it won't be a bad move--that is assuming he pitches effetively. In terms of baseball economics...1 million dollars is a pretty cheap investment. Maybe being in his home town will motivate Prior to get it together. Honestly...I'm not sure what really is wrong with him half the time.
By Buster Olney
ESPN The Magazine
Mark Prior, cut loose by the Cubs earlier this month, has agreed to terms with the San Diego Padres.
Prior receives a one-year major league deal with a $1 million base salary. The contract, which doesn't include an option, contains incentive clauses that could take the total value of the deal to over $3 million.
An announcement is expected to come sometime Wednesday.
Prior, 27, last pitched in the big leagues in 2006, and had shoulder surgery in April of 2007.
The second overall pick in the 2001 draft, Prior went 18-6 for the Cubs in 2003 before experiencing a series of physical problems. He was born in San Diego and lives in San Diego County, and the Padres' hope is that he is able to join a rotation that already includes Jake Peavy, Chris Young, Greg Maddux and Randy Wolf.
He has been throwing on flat ground, and to date, has been free of pain since his surgery.
Prior's lifetime record in the big leagues is 42-29, with a 3.51 ERA.
Ryan here--Not a bad move. Chances are he won't pitch at all but if he does contribute (especially towards the end of the season--maybe during a post season run) than it won't be a bad move--that is assuming he pitches effetively. In terms of baseball economics...1 million dollars is a pretty cheap investment. Maybe being in his home town will motivate Prior to get it together. Honestly...I'm not sure what really is wrong with him half the time.
Monday, December 24, 2007
Saturday, December 22, 2007
Hardrock, Coco, and Joe
My sister found this.
This is without a doubt the greatest Christmas animated short of all-time.
For those not aware the Bozo Show (on WGN) always played this short during Christmas time. For whatever reason...my sister and I always had to watch it. It was tradition.
It brings back some fun memories.
Best Picture candidates
Twice these week...I have laid awake a night trying to come up with what the Academy members will choose for the Best Picture category. I know...that's pretty dorky...but when I have trouble sleeping I seem to only get to sleep by talking to myself (not literally) to sleep. Of note...these aren't what I think the five best movies are of 2007...just what I think will score the nominations.
Here's my take.
I say No Country For Old Men and Atonement are virtual locks. No Country has already scored some prestigious Critics Circle's awards and Atonement lead the Golden Globe in nominations.
I think Juno has a 50% shot of landing a nod. It could be this year's Little Miss Sunshine. It was Roger Ebert's number one film and Richard Roeper and AO Scott raved about on "At the Movies."
Generally there's at least one movie that get nominated that is a box-office success. These moves fit (or might fit) this profile...American Gangster, Charlie Wilson's War or Sweeney Todd. War and Todd open this weekend so it is to early to tell how these moves register with the public. Maybe the real X-factor in this category is Ratatouille. I now there's a seprate category for animation now but it was one of the best films of the year. There's a 25% chance that one of these films gets nominated.
If one assumes that only one of those three gets nominated (and that certainly doesn't have to be the case) than there's one more spot open. It will be filled by another critical darling such as Michael Clayton, There Will Be Blood, The Savages or I'm Not There. There's a 10-15% chance that one of these movies earns a nomination.
On a personal note...I'm holding out a 5% chance that 3:10 to Yuma gets a nomination. The more I think about...the more I just love that movie. But unfortunately I don't think it will earn a nomination although I think it was Best Picture material.
My prediction as of December 22 for the Best Picture Nominees is...
No Country For Old Men
Atonement
Juno
Charlie Wilson's War
Michael Clayton
Here's my take.
I say No Country For Old Men and Atonement are virtual locks. No Country has already scored some prestigious Critics Circle's awards and Atonement lead the Golden Globe in nominations.
I think Juno has a 50% shot of landing a nod. It could be this year's Little Miss Sunshine. It was Roger Ebert's number one film and Richard Roeper and AO Scott raved about on "At the Movies."
Generally there's at least one movie that get nominated that is a box-office success. These moves fit (or might fit) this profile...American Gangster, Charlie Wilson's War or Sweeney Todd. War and Todd open this weekend so it is to early to tell how these moves register with the public. Maybe the real X-factor in this category is Ratatouille. I now there's a seprate category for animation now but it was one of the best films of the year. There's a 25% chance that one of these films gets nominated.
If one assumes that only one of those three gets nominated (and that certainly doesn't have to be the case) than there's one more spot open. It will be filled by another critical darling such as Michael Clayton, There Will Be Blood, The Savages or I'm Not There. There's a 10-15% chance that one of these movies earns a nomination.
On a personal note...I'm holding out a 5% chance that 3:10 to Yuma gets a nomination. The more I think about...the more I just love that movie. But unfortunately I don't think it will earn a nomination although I think it was Best Picture material.
My prediction as of December 22 for the Best Picture Nominees is...
No Country For Old Men
Atonement
Juno
Charlie Wilson's War
Michael Clayton
Friday, December 21, 2007
This Never gets old
I know this is a year old but damn...is it still funny. No question one of the best SNL sketches of all time.
Merry Christmas.
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
"I Am Legend" movie review
This week we watched the box-office dominating Will Smith vehicle, I Am Legend (PG-13). Smith plays a man who seems to be the last person on Earth after a plague in 2009 kills 90 % of the population and turns the rest into zombie-like, vampiric non-humans. Music video veteran Francis Lawrence directs.
Andy: I should probably start off by saying that I actually enjoyed this movie, and I understand why most people would as well. But the more I thought about it, the more it became clear that this movie was much, much better when it was set in London , directed by Danny Boyle, and called 28 Days Later. The only real upgrade is that you've got one of the biggest movie stars in the world playing the lead. He does it well, too. Acting without other actors for the majority of a movie is something I would have never believed Will Smith could have pulled off as recently as a few years ago, but he does it very easily here.
Ryan: I'm not the biggest Will Smith fan but it is hard to argue against his star quality. He can successfully carry not only action movies but romantic comedies (Hitch) and dramas (The Pursuit of Happyness) as well. No doubt about it, his specialty is definitely in the sci-fi/action flick genre. I Am Legend is one of his better action pictures mainly because it is not dependent on the action. I Am Legend is a very nuanced sci-fi movie. There is as much attention paid to the details of the story as there are to the ingredients of the several action scenes. In some ways I Am Legend is an ideal sci-fi flick because it has a good balance of action and traditional sci-fi themes.
Andy: Will Smith' performance is just about the only thing this movie has going for it. Luckily, almost every scene has Smith, so the movie ends up being pretty entertaining and captivating. There is a degree of paranoia that is played up by Smith being the only person in the city, and scenes of him walking cautiously around or driving way too fast feel like something terrible is about to happen (and of course, something terrible is about to happen). That terrible thing is zombie people who only come out at night, and that' where the movie starts getting kind of dumb. When the film allows Smith to carry it, it is pretty good, but toward the end there is too much other stuff going on and it doesn't work out very well.
Ryan: Smith's range as an actor is limited but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Plenty of Hollywood icons (Wayne, Eastwood and McQueen) have proven that they can still be major stars without being Lawrence Olivier. With I Am Legend, Smith demonstrates (yet again) that he is a box-office star. With the recent demise of Tom Cruise's popularity, Will Smith is now Hollywood 's only legitimate box-office star; whereas his name on the marquee will bring moviegoers to the theatre. That might not be good news for Hollywood but it is definitely good news for Smith. What is good news for Hollywood is that the opening weekend for I Am Legend (77+ million) was the largest December opening in history.
Andy: I don't know why, when you have a star as popular and able as Will Smith, performing at the height of his craft, you would allow your film to deteriorate into a CGI-laden fiasco that looks like the opening montage to a Resident Evil video game. Perhaps I'm overstating things a bit, but this movie was pretty good in spite of its minor-league 28 Days Later status until the zombies started showing up. When they scream, for some reason their heads elongate to unnatural proportions, hammering home to the viewer the fact that this is a cartoon zombie, not a real person. I should have been tipped off early in the movie when there was a scene with some really fake looking lions that things were going to take a turn for the worse, but I didn't think it would get quite as silly as it did. The lack of originality, bad effects, and unsatisfactory ending aren't able to overcome Smith's positive performance. Final grade: C-.
Ryan: My biggest issue with the movie was with some of the special effects. I say some because the special effects showing a deserted Manhattan were phenomenal. Somebody should win an award for that. What they shouldn't win an award for are the CGI zombies. I don't know if the special effects budget was used up on making Manhattan a wasteland but the CGI zombie creatures were some of the cheesiest special effects that I have seen in awhile. The creatures are a significant part to the story so the fact that they look so campy does bring the movie down a notch. Final grade: B.
Monday, December 17, 2007
Monday Night Thougths on the Colts
I'm really not sure if I can deal with ESPN anymore.
No doubt about it...the Jacksonville Jaguars had a big win yesterday over the Pittsburgh Steelers...a game that was in Pittsburgh. Now ESPN is hyping up Jacksonville as a team that could derail the Invincible Patriots. (Which is possible...and to be honest...I hope they do beat the Patriots if they ever do play each other.) But I'm so sick of ESPN guiding coverage instead of reporting. It's almost like they get a certain notion and then send a memo to all their on-air employees to build the story. I'm sick of it.
Even on PTI...Michael Wilbon, who I normally respect, said he now ranks Jacksonville as the number two team in the NFL. Needless to say...even Kornheiser was in disbelief and remarked...what about Indy...who has already beaten them...not once...but twice. Wilbon was emphatic in that Jacksonville would now beat Indy and even stumbled around ranting that somehow Jacksonville got robbed in their last showdown in Indianapolis. Apparently Wilbon is drinking the same crazy lemonade that Jacksonville head coach, Jack Del Rio, is drinking. In that he always thinks his team gets robbed when they play Indy. Memo to Del Rio and to Wilbon...the Colts are better than the Jaguars...even with the injuries...how many times do they have to demonstrate it. It is ridiculous. Enough with that.
Speaking of the Colts...a debate is already starting on how the Colts should proceed with these next two games now that the number 2 seed (and first round bye) is locked up. Everybody remembers in 2005 when the Colts had everything locked up...rested their starters the last two weeks of the season...and subsequently lost their first playoff game to the Steelers (in a game that drove me to break several lawn chairs). But there's no question that a lot of players are going to need rest (Mathis, Brock, Bethea, Diem...and who knows about Harrison). I think the Colts will keep the pedal (relatively speaking) to the floor on offense. It is very important for our offense to keep in rhythm and to more importantly give Manning more time to get more in tune with Gonzalez (who is looking like a stud) and that other wide receiver whose last name starts with an A (he had a few nice catches as well). Defensively, they might approach it a little different. The nature of the Colts defense is relatively simple (variations of the cover 2) so a defensive player is going to have a littler easier of a time acclimating themselves back into the game (plus being on defense is more reactionary). So I look for the guys on defense that need rest...to get it. They will be fine for the playoffs.
On the other hand...maybe the Colts just lost that 2005 playoff game because of the death of Tony Dungy's son. I don't think there's any question... that tragedy played a part in the Colts lackluster performance.
There is something to be said for entering the playoffs playing meaningful games. Last year the Colts had no bye...no home-field advantage (at least in the Baltimore game) and we won the Super Bowl.
What I'm saying is that there is no definite road map for post season success. But I do think it is in the Colts best interest not to completely rest everybody. The offense has to stay sharp and they can only do that but going out there and playing. But on the other hand you don't want to take unnecessary risks. It's a fine line to walk but I trust Dungy.
No doubt about it...the Jacksonville Jaguars had a big win yesterday over the Pittsburgh Steelers...a game that was in Pittsburgh. Now ESPN is hyping up Jacksonville as a team that could derail the Invincible Patriots. (Which is possible...and to be honest...I hope they do beat the Patriots if they ever do play each other.) But I'm so sick of ESPN guiding coverage instead of reporting. It's almost like they get a certain notion and then send a memo to all their on-air employees to build the story. I'm sick of it.
Even on PTI...Michael Wilbon, who I normally respect, said he now ranks Jacksonville as the number two team in the NFL. Needless to say...even Kornheiser was in disbelief and remarked...what about Indy...who has already beaten them...not once...but twice. Wilbon was emphatic in that Jacksonville would now beat Indy and even stumbled around ranting that somehow Jacksonville got robbed in their last showdown in Indianapolis. Apparently Wilbon is drinking the same crazy lemonade that Jacksonville head coach, Jack Del Rio, is drinking. In that he always thinks his team gets robbed when they play Indy. Memo to Del Rio and to Wilbon...the Colts are better than the Jaguars...even with the injuries...how many times do they have to demonstrate it. It is ridiculous. Enough with that.
Speaking of the Colts...a debate is already starting on how the Colts should proceed with these next two games now that the number 2 seed (and first round bye) is locked up. Everybody remembers in 2005 when the Colts had everything locked up...rested their starters the last two weeks of the season...and subsequently lost their first playoff game to the Steelers (in a game that drove me to break several lawn chairs). But there's no question that a lot of players are going to need rest (Mathis, Brock, Bethea, Diem...and who knows about Harrison). I think the Colts will keep the pedal (relatively speaking) to the floor on offense. It is very important for our offense to keep in rhythm and to more importantly give Manning more time to get more in tune with Gonzalez (who is looking like a stud) and that other wide receiver whose last name starts with an A (he had a few nice catches as well). Defensively, they might approach it a little different. The nature of the Colts defense is relatively simple (variations of the cover 2) so a defensive player is going to have a littler easier of a time acclimating themselves back into the game (plus being on defense is more reactionary). So I look for the guys on defense that need rest...to get it. They will be fine for the playoffs.
On the other hand...maybe the Colts just lost that 2005 playoff game because of the death of Tony Dungy's son. I don't think there's any question... that tragedy played a part in the Colts lackluster performance.
There is something to be said for entering the playoffs playing meaningful games. Last year the Colts had no bye...no home-field advantage (at least in the Baltimore game) and we won the Super Bowl.
What I'm saying is that there is no definite road map for post season success. But I do think it is in the Colts best interest not to completely rest everybody. The offense has to stay sharp and they can only do that but going out there and playing. But on the other hand you don't want to take unnecessary risks. It's a fine line to walk but I trust Dungy.
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Mitchell Report
I'm a few days tardy on reporting on this but the long awaited Mitchell Report--about steroid use in baseball--was released on Thursday.
By now those that care...and maybe those that don't...know the gist of it.
While hardly being a comprehensive report on steroid use in baseball it does provide a slice of what has happened during the steroid era. In my book it's not going to effect how much I like baseball or care about it. Really all it does is just put the era into a context that most fans had already done. The meat of the report was the naming of names. Mitchell does come up with some smart recommendations but its the names that is driving the media coverage and dialog among fans.
The biggest name on the list...is that of Roger Clemens. I've suspected for years...and I remember Holman and I having a long chat about this at Richey's bachelor party a few years ago that we wouldn't be surprised that if at some point Clemens was linked to steroids. (He was just doing things that were Bonds-esque...things that shouldn't be possible given one's age--like Clemens having an ERA of 1.87 at the age of 42) I find it quite amusing because I have never liked or respected Clemens. As my dad would say...he's just a big dork. I couldn't agree more. What I like about it the best...is that this makes Greg Maddux, the true best pitcher of this era, look even better. Those guys are always one-two when talking about the greatest pitcher of this era. Not anymore...Maddux is number one (although he always has been in my book).
Looking at Clemens's career and when the documented steroid use happened...it's pretty clear in my book that he was juicing. (For example in the 1998 season Clemens while on the Blue Jays started the season 6-6 with a 3.27 ERA...starting juicing...than went 14-0 with a 2.29 ERA) The evidence against him is very damaging in the report. That's fine with me...as the can join the other dopes (Rose...Bonds) in the hall of shame.
Like I said before the report is hardly comprehensive. Eighty or so names...overly roughly a ten year period...is not that many names considering all the players that have played during that era. There were some omissions that were surprising. No Sammy...he was only mentioned that he was sent a questionnaire. No Brett Boone. No Javy Lopez. There are a lot of names missing of players that I've (and many other fans) have had questions about. So be it...that's the nature of this era. The Mitchell Report really didn't shed any new light on the era (besides adding more names) but it should have a positive lasting legacy if many of the recommendations are put into action.
By now those that care...and maybe those that don't...know the gist of it.
While hardly being a comprehensive report on steroid use in baseball it does provide a slice of what has happened during the steroid era. In my book it's not going to effect how much I like baseball or care about it. Really all it does is just put the era into a context that most fans had already done. The meat of the report was the naming of names. Mitchell does come up with some smart recommendations but its the names that is driving the media coverage and dialog among fans.
The biggest name on the list...is that of Roger Clemens. I've suspected for years...and I remember Holman and I having a long chat about this at Richey's bachelor party a few years ago that we wouldn't be surprised that if at some point Clemens was linked to steroids. (He was just doing things that were Bonds-esque...things that shouldn't be possible given one's age--like Clemens having an ERA of 1.87 at the age of 42) I find it quite amusing because I have never liked or respected Clemens. As my dad would say...he's just a big dork. I couldn't agree more. What I like about it the best...is that this makes Greg Maddux, the true best pitcher of this era, look even better. Those guys are always one-two when talking about the greatest pitcher of this era. Not anymore...Maddux is number one (although he always has been in my book).
Looking at Clemens's career and when the documented steroid use happened...it's pretty clear in my book that he was juicing. (For example in the 1998 season Clemens while on the Blue Jays started the season 6-6 with a 3.27 ERA...starting juicing...than went 14-0 with a 2.29 ERA) The evidence against him is very damaging in the report. That's fine with me...as the can join the other dopes (Rose...Bonds) in the hall of shame.
Like I said before the report is hardly comprehensive. Eighty or so names...overly roughly a ten year period...is not that many names considering all the players that have played during that era. There were some omissions that were surprising. No Sammy...he was only mentioned that he was sent a questionnaire. No Brett Boone. No Javy Lopez. There are a lot of names missing of players that I've (and many other fans) have had questions about. So be it...that's the nature of this era. The Mitchell Report really didn't shed any new light on the era (besides adding more names) but it should have a positive lasting legacy if many of the recommendations are put into action.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Fukudome Chooses Cubs
Japanese outfielder Kosuke Fukudome has decided to play major league baseball with the Cubs. Apparently it was between the Cubs and Padres, which is not a bad deal for me. The Padres probably needed him more, since their offense needs all the help they can get, but Fukudome, considered an on-base guy with some power, will fit nicely in the lineup in front of Lee and Ramirez for the Cubbies.
Here's an article via Yahoo Sports detailing the specifics of the deal...
Here's an article via Yahoo Sports detailing the specifics of the deal...
CHICAGO (AP) -- Japanese outfielder Kosuke Fukudome and the Chicago Cubs reached a preliminary agreement Tuesday on a $48 million, four-year contract.
The deal is subject to a physical, according to a person familiar with the negotiations who spoke on condition of anonymity because no announcement had been made. The agreement could be finalized as early as Wednesday.
Fukudome was considered one of the best outfielders in Japanese baseball. The 30-year-old slugger was a key member of the Japan team that won the inaugural World Baseball Classic in March 2006.
He had surgery on his right elbow in August and sat out the Japan Series, but has 192 homers and a .305 batting average over nine seasons with the Chunichi Dragons, who won their first championship in 53 years on Nov. 2.
After becoming a free agent, Fukudome drew interest from the Cubs, San Diego Padres and White Sox.
He is expected to play right field for the Cubs, who traded outfielder Jacque Jones to Detroit this offseason and declined their contract option on veteran Cliff Floyd.
All-Star slugger Alfonso Soriano returns in left and speedy prospect Felix Pie is expected to take over in center after shuttling between the majors and minors this season. The Cubs hope Fukudome will provide the consistent left-handed bat they seek to go with righties Soriano, Aramis Ramirez and Derrek Lee.
Chicago won the NL Central title last season before being swept by Arizona in the first round of the playoffs.
Fukudome was the 2006 Central League MVP, batting .351 with 31 homers and 104 RBIs. He recently told the Dragons he wouldn't return next season, saying he wanted to move to the major leagues.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
"The Golden Compass" movie review
New Line Cinema's latest foray into the world of fantasy and adventure is The Golden Compass. Based on the book by Phillip Pullman (from his His Dark Materials trilogy), The Golden Compass showcases a parallel world where a little girl (Dakota Blue Richards) becomes entangled in a struggle between a religious-esque organization and the more rebellious factions of its society. The film also stars Nicole Kidman, Daniel Craig, Eva Green and Sam Elliot. Chris Weitz directs.
Andy: The Golden Compass starts out explaining the complexities of the “world” in which it exists. It's not too complicated to follow, even for older kids, but it is not a very exciting way to start a great fantasy / adventure movie. It does have a level of charm, though, with every human walking around with an animal that represents their soul. Ordinarily that much CGI-animal effects (not to mention the animals talk) would turn me completely off, but I thought the device worked well throughout the movie.
Ryan: From warrior bears to spiritual animal sidekicks, the world of The Golden Compass is extremely imaginative. The film from the special effects to the cinematography looks great. For the most part the performances are more than adequate in satisfying a fantasy-driven storyline. But with all that said, The Golden Compass fails to live up to the high quality fantasy films (Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter and The Chronicles of Narnia) that audiences are now used too. Ultimately, The Golden Compass is nothing more than a run-of-the-mill fantasy flick.
Ryan: The Golden Compass was number one at the box-office, 25+ million, but it was far from being an impressive opening. Some of that could be attributed to the controversy that somewhat plagued the movie leading up to its opening. Pullman's books are popular in the US (and even more so in England). But there has been some criticism that some elements of the book are anti-Christian. Being aware of that, Weitz adapted a script devoid of many of the religious themes and ideas in the book. Conversely in doing that Weitz alienated the true fans of the series by not producing a faithful adaptation. Consequently the movie ends up being a watered-down version of the book thus turning away the fans but also confusing those new to The Golden Compass universe by presenting an authoritarian religious organization without any context.
Andy: That explains a lot, actually, because the hierarchy of authority in the movie definitely seems to be more important to the plot than the little time they spent explaining it. As with many fantasy movies, there seems to be a bigger, allegorical theme in the works with the Golden Compass, but it never makes itself very clear and ends up seeming pseudo-allegorical at times. This also makes it seem like it's trying too hard to be The Lord of the Rings, as if it has to manufacture a greater symbolic meaning than is actually there.
Ryan: From the very first trailer that I saw for The Golden Compass, it was obvious that New Line Cinema was building it up to be their new Lord of the Rings trilogy. Looking at the underwhelming box-office results (combined with that fact that the film is quite mediocre) this might be the only installment that makes it to the silver screen. Reportedly The Golden Compass cost well over 200 million dollars to produce and market. Prior to the mega success of the Rings Trilogy, some Hollywood insiders had predicted that the Rings movies might bankrupt the studio and that New Line Cinema was making a huge mistake. Ultimately that wasn't the case back then but it looks like it might be now.
Andy: I was pretty impressed with the acting in the movie. Richards could turn into a solid young actress, as she is able to adequately carry the movie. Nicole Kidman was outstanding as the charming- but-untrustworthy villain. Daniel Craig was good if underutilized, and it was fun to see Sam Elliot essentially playing his Stranger character from The Big Lebowski.
The Golden Compass has moments that are pretty good, but the movie doesn't quite hold together well enough to reach the greatness at which it was aiming. Final grade: B-.
Andy: The Golden Compass starts out explaining the complexities of the “world” in which it exists. It's not too complicated to follow, even for older kids, but it is not a very exciting way to start a great fantasy / adventure movie. It does have a level of charm, though, with every human walking around with an animal that represents their soul. Ordinarily that much CGI-animal effects (not to mention the animals talk) would turn me completely off, but I thought the device worked well throughout the movie.
Ryan: From warrior bears to spiritual animal sidekicks, the world of The Golden Compass is extremely imaginative. The film from the special effects to the cinematography looks great. For the most part the performances are more than adequate in satisfying a fantasy-driven storyline. But with all that said, The Golden Compass fails to live up to the high quality fantasy films (Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter and The Chronicles of Narnia) that audiences are now used too. Ultimately, The Golden Compass is nothing more than a run-of-the-mill fantasy flick.
Ryan: The Golden Compass was number one at the box-office, 25+ million, but it was far from being an impressive opening. Some of that could be attributed to the controversy that somewhat plagued the movie leading up to its opening. Pullman's books are popular in the US (and even more so in England). But there has been some criticism that some elements of the book are anti-Christian. Being aware of that, Weitz adapted a script devoid of many of the religious themes and ideas in the book. Conversely in doing that Weitz alienated the true fans of the series by not producing a faithful adaptation. Consequently the movie ends up being a watered-down version of the book thus turning away the fans but also confusing those new to The Golden Compass universe by presenting an authoritarian religious organization without any context.
Andy: That explains a lot, actually, because the hierarchy of authority in the movie definitely seems to be more important to the plot than the little time they spent explaining it. As with many fantasy movies, there seems to be a bigger, allegorical theme in the works with the Golden Compass, but it never makes itself very clear and ends up seeming pseudo-allegorical at times. This also makes it seem like it's trying too hard to be The Lord of the Rings, as if it has to manufacture a greater symbolic meaning than is actually there.
Ryan: From the very first trailer that I saw for The Golden Compass, it was obvious that New Line Cinema was building it up to be their new Lord of the Rings trilogy. Looking at the underwhelming box-office results (combined with that fact that the film is quite mediocre) this might be the only installment that makes it to the silver screen. Reportedly The Golden Compass cost well over 200 million dollars to produce and market. Prior to the mega success of the Rings Trilogy, some Hollywood insiders had predicted that the Rings movies might bankrupt the studio and that New Line Cinema was making a huge mistake. Ultimately that wasn't the case back then but it looks like it might be now.
Andy: I was pretty impressed with the acting in the movie. Richards could turn into a solid young actress, as she is able to adequately carry the movie. Nicole Kidman was outstanding as the charming- but-untrustworthy villain. Daniel Craig was good if underutilized, and it was fun to see Sam Elliot essentially playing his Stranger character from The Big Lebowski.
The Golden Compass has moments that are pretty good, but the movie doesn't quite hold together well enough to reach the greatness at which it was aiming. Final grade: B-.
Sunday, December 9, 2007
Candidate Calculator
Not sure who to vote for in the coming presidential race...check out the candidate calculator from vajoe.com.
Not surprising for me...I scored a 95% for Barack Obama.
Not surprising for me...I scored a 95% for Barack Obama.
Saturday, December 8, 2007
House Divided
I know the above picture is a few years old and that there was no bet on this year's game (with it being in Assembly Hall--my wife does have some basketball sense) but I never get tired of looking at that picture. For those not aware IU dominated Kentucky today winning 70-51. Again for those not aware, I'm an IU fan and my wife is a Kentucky fan. It's a house divided. But no question about it...it's a much happier house with an IU win as I don't handle losing as well as my better half.
Go Hoosiers.
"4 Tickets to Christmas"
As many of you know (since she has missed quite a few Colts games) my wife has been extremely busy preparing for the dramatic musical, 4 Tickets to Christmas, at our church (the First Baptist Church). She's in the choir portion of the musical. Here is a brief synopsis of the musical:
What's taken a life of its own are these marathon practice sessions (3 hour sessions every Tuesday and Sunday night) Jenny has had since September. The play has consumed much of her free time, which I'd must admit has been frustrating at times....but nothing that we couldn't deal with. I just don't think I could have handled that.
I must confess that practice makes perfect and the performance that I saw Friday night was excellent. It was a first rate production. I'm proud of her for committing to it and putting forth her best effort (along with the rest of the cast). It was worth it.
Four Tickets to Christmas” takes place in 1905 near Cedar Grove, Indiana on the Richmond family farm. Several generations of the singing Richmond family as well as their hometown Syracuse Family Playhouse singers unexpectedly end up rehearsing a church Christmas program in the family’s barn. The hired hand Luke has special gifts, grandson Nick and grandfather Chester Richmond share a secret, daughter Emma is out of her element since there’s “dirt on a farm”... Despite a giggly piano player and local “talent” the show does go on. Find out about the dreams and aspirations of the Richmonds as they sing their way into your heart.
What's taken a life of its own are these marathon practice sessions (3 hour sessions every Tuesday and Sunday night) Jenny has had since September. The play has consumed much of her free time, which I'd must admit has been frustrating at times....but nothing that we couldn't deal with. I just don't think I could have handled that.
I must confess that practice makes perfect and the performance that I saw Friday night was excellent. It was a first rate production. I'm proud of her for committing to it and putting forth her best effort (along with the rest of the cast). It was worth it.
Friday, December 7, 2007
City Politics
I know most of you probably don't have a large interest in local Greensburg politics and I can't say that I have a large one although that day is coming...I'm sure at some point there will be a day when it will be time to move off the sidelines. Anyway, Jim Cummings, managing editor of the Greensburg Daily News, had an interesting editorial to today's Greensburg Daily News.
I'm not going to get into all of the squabble between the paper and the various city leaders in Greensburg...from what I can tell...there's been a lot of bickering from both parties. What I will comment on...and I agree with Cummings (and he alluded to this) is that the transition from Manus's administration to Herbert's administration (and that includes the City Council as well) is about as contentious as it can get. The feeling around town (and this includes more than my usual sources) is that there is a lot animosity and ill will among (some of) the elected officials that did not get re-elected. Further exacerbating the situation is that their is this perception among many citizens in Greensburg that the transition between administrations is not being handled in a professional manner. Let me make this clear...I'm not assessing blame to either side. What I am saying is that I'm extremely disappointed by it. This is small town government...not Washington DC. I don't know where the small town morals went but they are lacking right now in Greensburg. I don't now if it's an ego thing or not but it's not healthy at all...especially given how fast this town is growing. Don't get me wrong the town is not in political turmoil. I just don't want to see it get anymore fractured than it already is. We'll see what happens. Hopefully things will work out.
I'm not going to get into all of the squabble between the paper and the various city leaders in Greensburg...from what I can tell...there's been a lot of bickering from both parties. What I will comment on...and I agree with Cummings (and he alluded to this) is that the transition from Manus's administration to Herbert's administration (and that includes the City Council as well) is about as contentious as it can get. The feeling around town (and this includes more than my usual sources) is that there is a lot animosity and ill will among (some of) the elected officials that did not get re-elected. Further exacerbating the situation is that their is this perception among many citizens in Greensburg that the transition between administrations is not being handled in a professional manner. Let me make this clear...I'm not assessing blame to either side. What I am saying is that I'm extremely disappointed by it. This is small town government...not Washington DC. I don't know where the small town morals went but they are lacking right now in Greensburg. I don't now if it's an ego thing or not but it's not healthy at all...especially given how fast this town is growing. Don't get me wrong the town is not in political turmoil. I just don't want to see it get anymore fractured than it already is. We'll see what happens. Hopefully things will work out.
Will Ferrell's "Semi-Pro"
One might think that Ferrell's shtick is getting old but he still cracks me up.
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
"No Country For Old Men" movie review
With the continued release of uninspired movies at the Cineplex, we continue with our look at Oscar hopefuls. This week is the latest project from Joel and Ethan Cohen, No Country for Old Men (R). Josh Brolin plays an ordinary guy who gets mixed up with Mexican drug dealers and ends up being hunted by a hitman (Javier Bardem). Tommy Lee Jones plays the rural Texas county sheriff who is investigating the case.
Ryan: No Country For Old Men is a really good film. Honestly I found the first two-thirds of the movie great. I'll speak more on that later but want to state that this is the best Coen Brothers' film since O Brother, Where Art Thou? No Country For Old Men is a wonderfully shot movie with precise direction and superb performances. Like the Coen Brothers' best work its a movie where there is so much more going on than what is being presented on the surface. For that reason it's a film that will require multiple viewings to fully grasp what is going on in the story.
Andy: If nothing else, this movie shows that the Coen Brothers are back. I might argue that much under-appreciated The Man Who Wasn't There might be better than this film, but the point is that the Coen's last two movies (Intolerable Cruelty, The Ladykillers) were sub par. Many filmmakers tend to get to a point where there relevancy wanes, and it looked like the Coens had arrived there. No Country For Old Men shows that they are still capable of making an outstanding, interesting, and at times, amusing film.
Ryan: The final act of No Country For Old Men prevented it from being a truly remarkable picture. I'm not saying that the final act is a letdown or that it doesn't fit what the movie is saying. In fact thematically the end of the film does make sense. But from a storytelling stand point the end of the movie left me unfulfilled. The movie's plot moves along where one is expecting the three main characters path's to intersect. That doesn't (necessarily) happen. In fact one could argue that the movie's focus takes a dramatic shift during (and after) the climax. Ultimately I found the shift more perplexing than anything else. Like I said before, another viewing of the film might be required to fully see what the Coen Brothers were trying to express.
Andy: There is no question that the end of the movie will prove problematic for many viewers. Just as you are starting to figure out what is happening in this new segment of the movie, it abruptly ends. While I understand Ryan's arguments about it being an unsettling (unneeded, even?) conclusion to the narrative, I must confess that I've been thinking about the ending off and on since I watched the movie. It seems to make some sense after some careful analysis that I'm unable (and unwilling) to articulate here. Ultimately, however, if a movie can keep me thinking about it after I leave the theatre, that's a good thing.
Ryan: Like all great directors, the Coen Brothers have that innate ability to bring forth strong performances from their actors. No Country For Old Men is no exception. Tommy Lee Jones, who hasn't starred in a relevant movie in years, puts forth one of his best performances of his career. Javier Bardem, known more for his international work, gives a haunting performance as the film's antagonist. Not as well knows is Josh Brolin but he more than holds his own with the respected cast. I'm not predicting that any one of those performances will get nominated for an Oscar but they are Oscar-worthy.
Andy: The performances in this movie are very solid across the board. Leading the pack is certainly Tommy Lee Jones. I actually think the last couple of years have been pretty good for Jones, with his turn in A Prairie Home Companion being pretty good, and his leading role in The Three Burials of Melquiades Estradas showing great promise. Tellingly, his character here is like an extension of his performance in Burials, only with a little more nuance and a haggard humor that is priceless. Bardem was predictably great, but the real surprise is the largely marginal Josh Brolin playing the lead role of this film with great precision.
No Country For Old Men combines several elements of what makes movies great. It's intriguing, captivating, thought-provoking, and perhaps most importantly, it gives us back some of our greatest American filmmakers. The last 30 minutes or so is a bit puzzling, but generally this is a sharp picture. Final grade: B+.
Ryan: No Country For Old Men is a really good film. Honestly I found the first two-thirds of the movie great. I'll speak more on that later but want to state that this is the best Coen Brothers' film since O Brother, Where Art Thou? No Country For Old Men is a wonderfully shot movie with precise direction and superb performances. Like the Coen Brothers' best work its a movie where there is so much more going on than what is being presented on the surface. For that reason it's a film that will require multiple viewings to fully grasp what is going on in the story.
Andy: If nothing else, this movie shows that the Coen Brothers are back. I might argue that much under-appreciated The Man Who Wasn't There might be better than this film, but the point is that the Coen's last two movies (Intolerable Cruelty, The Ladykillers) were sub par. Many filmmakers tend to get to a point where there relevancy wanes, and it looked like the Coens had arrived there. No Country For Old Men shows that they are still capable of making an outstanding, interesting, and at times, amusing film.
Ryan: The final act of No Country For Old Men prevented it from being a truly remarkable picture. I'm not saying that the final act is a letdown or that it doesn't fit what the movie is saying. In fact thematically the end of the film does make sense. But from a storytelling stand point the end of the movie left me unfulfilled. The movie's plot moves along where one is expecting the three main characters path's to intersect. That doesn't (necessarily) happen. In fact one could argue that the movie's focus takes a dramatic shift during (and after) the climax. Ultimately I found the shift more perplexing than anything else. Like I said before, another viewing of the film might be required to fully see what the Coen Brothers were trying to express.
Andy: There is no question that the end of the movie will prove problematic for many viewers. Just as you are starting to figure out what is happening in this new segment of the movie, it abruptly ends. While I understand Ryan's arguments about it being an unsettling (unneeded, even?) conclusion to the narrative, I must confess that I've been thinking about the ending off and on since I watched the movie. It seems to make some sense after some careful analysis that I'm unable (and unwilling) to articulate here. Ultimately, however, if a movie can keep me thinking about it after I leave the theatre, that's a good thing.
Ryan: Like all great directors, the Coen Brothers have that innate ability to bring forth strong performances from their actors. No Country For Old Men is no exception. Tommy Lee Jones, who hasn't starred in a relevant movie in years, puts forth one of his best performances of his career. Javier Bardem, known more for his international work, gives a haunting performance as the film's antagonist. Not as well knows is Josh Brolin but he more than holds his own with the respected cast. I'm not predicting that any one of those performances will get nominated for an Oscar but they are Oscar-worthy.
Andy: The performances in this movie are very solid across the board. Leading the pack is certainly Tommy Lee Jones. I actually think the last couple of years have been pretty good for Jones, with his turn in A Prairie Home Companion being pretty good, and his leading role in The Three Burials of Melquiades Estradas showing great promise. Tellingly, his character here is like an extension of his performance in Burials, only with a little more nuance and a haggard humor that is priceless. Bardem was predictably great, but the real surprise is the largely marginal Josh Brolin playing the lead role of this film with great precision.
No Country For Old Men combines several elements of what makes movies great. It's intriguing, captivating, thought-provoking, and perhaps most importantly, it gives us back some of our greatest American filmmakers. The last 30 minutes or so is a bit puzzling, but generally this is a sharp picture. Final grade: B+.
Believe in Obama
I've been meaning to have a political post for a number of months but hadn't...mainly because of my frustration with the Democratic presidential race. Namely the fact that it appeared that Hillary was going to get the nomination and that it wasn't even going to be contest (that's what frustrated me the most--that it wasn't going to be a true state to state primary race). I'm a Barack guy...I want him to win the nomination. I was just getting more and more frustrated with how his numbers were consitently behind Hillary's and that her nomination was inevitable.
I need to remind myself that it isn't over yet. In fact Obama is currently favored in Iowa. Of course I think this is great news. I'm glad that my fellow democrats are seeing that Obama is best choice for the job and that is electability, in some ways, is better than Hillary's.
Hillary Clinton is too polarizing of a figure and if she's the nominee I'm certainly not convinced that she would win...even against a Republican candidate that at this point...is not going to have a lot of clout even with his own party--that's how fractured the Republicans are right now. I'm convinced because I've heard people say it that some Republican voters (and some of these are die-hard Republicans) would consider voting for Obama. But these people will never...and I mean never vote for Hillary. That is one of the main reasons why I like Obama. He's a uniter...he's a voice of change...I believe he's what this country needs to get back on track. He resonates on all sides of the political spectrum. I just don't see a Hillary nomination (or win) as what this country needs to completely move forward from the debacle of our current administration.
That's it for now as my lunch break is about over...But I'm pretty sure that as the calender turns...my political rants are going to get more and more intense.
I need to remind myself that it isn't over yet. In fact Obama is currently favored in Iowa. Of course I think this is great news. I'm glad that my fellow democrats are seeing that Obama is best choice for the job and that is electability, in some ways, is better than Hillary's.
Hillary Clinton is too polarizing of a figure and if she's the nominee I'm certainly not convinced that she would win...even against a Republican candidate that at this point...is not going to have a lot of clout even with his own party--that's how fractured the Republicans are right now. I'm convinced because I've heard people say it that some Republican voters (and some of these are die-hard Republicans) would consider voting for Obama. But these people will never...and I mean never vote for Hillary. That is one of the main reasons why I like Obama. He's a uniter...he's a voice of change...I believe he's what this country needs to get back on track. He resonates on all sides of the political spectrum. I just don't see a Hillary nomination (or win) as what this country needs to completely move forward from the debacle of our current administration.
That's it for now as my lunch break is about over...But I'm pretty sure that as the calender turns...my political rants are going to get more and more intense.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)