![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
tehwalrus's journalLog in Create a LiveJournal Account Learn more
| You are viewing tehwalrus's journal Log in Create a LiveJournal Account Learn more | Explore LJ: Life Entertainment Music Culture News & Politics Technology |
¡Total Total Fascism!More fun than watching static since 2003 |
 |
| Just So You Know | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| "I believe whatever doesn't kill you makes you ... stranger." ...wait, that's not true. These are some web pages you can check out. Below is some text you can, but probably won't, read. I make no promises regarding consistency in length, time between updates, content, views, or quality. Good luck pal. Colebagel-Approved Links: Die Hard IV: Hung up on Ted.... FJM: Baseball + Sarcasm.... XKCD: They got my whole life in here.... H*R: Yeah! Still!... Overheard in New York.... |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Sep. 22nd, 2008 @ 02:44 pm Blast from the passed? | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Rocking At: Kenmore Square
Who remembers Square One? That old math-based educational show on PBS, which I guess was kind of "sketch"-based but not sketch comedy? (N.B.: It was still cool.) It was on in the afternoons around "Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego?" and "Bill Nye the Science Guy". (N.B.: Watch the latter in Spanish. It's pretty great.)Mood: Rocking, but also: punch-drunk Rocking With: Whatever I can remember of the Square One theme Because someone totally referenced it -- specifically, the Dragnet ripoff section Mathnet -- in my math class. I guess you had to be there, but now the damn thing is stuck in my head. To the YouTubeMobile! (N.B.: Not YouTube Mobile, as seen on my phone.) Just an odd day. |
| ||
| Sep. 18th, 2008 @ 12:19 pm I'm so glad I've got my own | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
Yes. Me. Here. Again. Here's what's changed: -little. But thanks to Curry's roommate I have taken to wearing baseball socks -- the ones with the fake stirrups -- on random days. They are most excellent and I shall be acquiring more pairs in the winter. Or maybe some rad soccer socks with horizontal stripes all the way up the side. Finally caved in and started listening to Rilo Kiley (specifically Under the Blacklight). But I noticed that "15" (a) reminds me of a Better than Ezra song with a female vocalist and (b) is about pedophilia. This prompted me to start pondering a list: PEDOPHILIA-BASED SONGS (Implicit or otherwise) ---------------------- Rilo Kiley - 15 Rolling Stones - Stray Cat Blues Sublime - Wrong Way Spinal Tap - Tonight I'm Gonna Rock You (Tonight) Curry also suggested the following based on a conversation he'd recently had: MASTURBATION-BASED SONGS ------------------------ Violent Femmes - Blister in the Sun Green Day - Longview Vapors - Turning Japanese Divinyls - I Touch Myself Feel free to add to either list in the comments. In fact, do so. Or else. |
| ||
| Jul. 6th, 2008 @ 10:50 am There are six ducks out there, and they all want Sun Chips! | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Rocking At: BAMF House, Brighton
This looks intriguing:Mood: Rocking, but also:  groggyRocking With: Mitch Hedberg - Bed and Breakfast How many total songs? 4,517 (11.9 days) Sort by song title - first and last: "The A-Team" by Tee Vee Toons "1999" by Prince Sort by time - shortest and longest: "1822!" by the Beatles (Live at the BBC) (0:10) "Live in San Francisco" by Dave Chappelle (25:52) [longest song is "An American in Paris" by George Gershwin (18:36)] Sort by Album - first and last: A-Sides by Soundgarden 2001 by Dr. Dre (they sort numbers after letters and by how big they are? really?) Sort by Artist - first and last: "Take on Me" by a-ha "Fixing a Hole" by the 747s Top five played songs: "Chan Chan" by Buena Vista Social Club (12) "The One Who Got Us Out" by Ted Leo and the Pharmacists (11) "Slow Motion" by Juvenile ft. Soulja Slim (11) "Contigo" by Federico Aubele (10) "Mo Money Mo Problems" by the Notorious B.I.G. (10) "The Seed 2.0" by the Roots (10) Find the following words. How many songs show up? Sex: 44 Death: 26 Love: 144 You: 387 Home: 31 Boy: 118 Girl: 77 First five songs that come up on Party Shuffle: "Corelli: Christmas Concerto - Vivace - Grave" by Jaroslav Krcek and the Capella Istropolitana "Imprint" by DoubleDrive "Supply and Demand" by the Hives "Back in Black" by AC/DC "You Held the World in Your Arms" by Idlewild ...this is also a lame party. But I like that I could go a week and not play any songs I haven't heard more than once. |
| ||
| Jul. 5th, 2008 @ 10:20 am Making sure I'm on my knees | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Rocking At: Photonics
Two items to "celebrate" Independence Day (because, let's face it, if you're celebrating by reading this blog, you're in serious trouble, my friend).Mood: Rocking, but also: bored at work Rocking With: Green Day - Pulling Teeth First, a Calvin and Hobbes inspired by yesterday's Boston Pops performance:  Figure 3: Because I totally referenced this yesterday. And second, let's remember our forefathers: Figure 4: Yes, this is like the ninth time I've referenced this video. It's still funny. |
| ||
| Jul. 4th, 2008 @ 11:41 am Champion of the sun | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Rocking At: Allston/Brighton
Happy Fourth. Have a fifth.Mood: Rocking, but also: excellent Rocking With: Electric Dream Machine - Day Man Woke up to go to the lab and found out I didn't have to go in today, so I got the horrifically bloating "Meatnormous" sandwich from Burger King and walked down to In Your Ear to see if it was open. It wasn't, but I was in a good mood so I kept walking west to Diskovery, a little used book/record store past Brighton Center. Got two Police albums, Who's Next, and R.E.M.'s Document. Add that to the copy of Led Zeppelin IV I found last week, and I really gotta get my record player fixed.  Figure 2: ZOMG IRL RICKROLL!!!!11!!1! Saw but did not buy this. Also saw and bought Foucault's Pendulum by Umberto Eco. Back when I was in high school, my history teacher Mr. Gage told me about the book and said his uncle gave it to him, saying, "This is what the smart people are reading." When Mr. Gage told his uncle he couldn't get through it, his uncle admitted he couldn't either and had hoped he could do better. He gave it to me -- maybe with the same hope, says the egotist -- but I couldn't get through it either. So now I try again. P.S: This is today's music selection. |
| ||
| Jun. 11th, 2008 @ 06:45 pm Facebook = devil plz? | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Rocking At: BAMF House
I just realized that almost half of my pictures on Facebook -- literally, I counted -- involve me either drinking or already obviously drunk. And that's not counting the like four dozen pictures from New Years' that I de-tagged myself from. So really it's more like 60%. This leads me to Mood: Rocking, but also:  hungryRocking With: Hans Zimmer ft Heitor Pereira - Nyah 1. People take a lot of pictures -- of me, at least -- while drunk, 2. There is a distinct possibility this influenced admissions officers while I was applying to grad school, and 3. I've got to de-tag a lot more pictures before I start looking for any sort of serious employment. To be honest, though, I thought that percentage would be higher. |
| ||
| Jun. 10th, 2008 @ 11:49 am All the way from Washington | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
Last summer, I lived out of a house with central air conditioning and made $22 an hour. This summer, I'm sweating like a pig in a sauna and waiting endlessly for BU to realize it has to pay me. One of my officemates came in two hours early today because he didn't realize what time it was. Just walked in the door, sat down and said, "Wait, it's 11." I can honestly say I've never been that far off. |
| ||
| Jun. 2nd, 2008 @ 11:42 am The movie never ends | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Rocking At: Photonics
Saw "No Country for Old Men" over the weekend -- finally -- and thought it was really good. Anybody made a running count of the bodies? Mood: Rocking, but also: way ahead of the game Rocking With: Journey - Don't Stop Believing Anyway, decided that Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem's character -- he of the goofy pageboy looking haircut) would make a terrific Halloween costume. I realize I'm a little early but hey, why not. Here's a good shot of what I'm going for:  Figure 1: The inspiration for the costume in question. Note the air compressor thing. Pretty simple, really: a jean jacket, dark pants, a dark shirt and cowboy boots, and that oxygen tank thing, which I feel like would be easier to mimic the assault shotgun he carries, but not much. If I wanted to do the scene at the end (after the accident) I'd need a fake bone sticking out of my arm (and I've seen these; they do exist) and some type of checker patterned shirt to use as a sling. There are three problems with this costume: 1. Believe it or not, a cursory search doesn't turn up his wig, or a knockoff thereof. The movie is over a year old, implying someone (realistically, several people) probably thought of this costume already and that therefore it'd be easy to find. 2. I have no idea how I'd rig up a fake air compressor gun. Again, someone's already thought of this, I'm sure, so it should be out there, but it isn't. 3. Cowboy boots (or, really, anything approximating them) don't usually make it this far north. I'll be honest, I never saw anywhere that sold them in Louisiana, but then I wasn't really looking. It'll happen, though, I can tell. EDIT: IMDB tells me this movie was released last Thanksgiving, so this is the first year of Antons and I feel confident in saying there will be several. |
| ||
| May. 27th, 2008 @ 10:22 pm High on the roof | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
I guess, at the end of the day, I should be grateful my friends aren't this clever. Or evil. [This may be my new favourite website.] |
| ||
| May. 23rd, 2008 @ 12:14 am Holy sh*t, Louisiana | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Rocking At: Photonics
I can't decide if this is the best or worst way ever to combat sexual assaults. I honestly thought it was a typo the first time I read the headline.Mood: Rocking, but also: i don't know what to think Rocking With: Ted Leo - Colleen Is this an effective deterrent? Sure, probably. Can you understand where they're coming from with this? I guess, yeah. Is it draconian as all hell? Absolutely. And what about the wrongfully convicted? Look, I'll be honest, it's a rare day when I agree with the ACLU but that day is today. Come on, guys. Fight the redneck stereotype a little. |
| ||
| May. 22nd, 2008 @ 10:16 pm The weekend seems to be just out of reach | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
Twelve hours so far, and the promise from my boss, "We'll get this done tonight! We might not sleep, but..." Terrific. Zombie Friday, I guess. And I can't even watch Tulane's baseball tournament. I can, however, watch the Celts game over the Internet. New plan. Good night(?). |
| ||
| May. 19th, 2008 @ 06:04 pm Things they do look awful cold | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Rocking At: Old BAMF's Home, Brighton
Oh, good god. ( I am officially old. )Mood: Rocking, but also: get offa my lawn! Rocking With: The Who - My Generation |
| ||
| May. 12th, 2008 @ 12:09 am So I lied. | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Rocking At: BAMF House
...yeah. It's still here. I'm not doing that other thing any more. Now that the semester's over, random thoughts will commence.Mood: Rocking, but also:  rushedRocking With: Strong Bad - The Cheat Is Not Dead But first, two thoughts.
EDIT: Also, the house crest, courtesy Alex. |
| ||
| Nov. 3rd, 2007 @ 12:12 am Things to make you go "hmm" | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Rocking With: Bob Marley - I Shot Omar Sharif
1. American Dad is still on the air; how long until we end up with a Flintstones-Jetsons style crossover with Family Guy? |
| ||
| Nov. 2nd, 2007 @ 11:56 pm To blow it to hell and gone | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Rocking At: BAMF House, Brighton
I'm done with this. LiveJournal is not interesting to me anymore, which you may have noticed from my lack of updates. But on the other hand, I like having a forum to sound off on if I so choose (and clearly I usually don't). I guess I could go friends-only, but that defeats some of the purpose, which is the whole voice-crying-into-the wilderness thing. So, screw it.Mood: Rocking, but also: el fin Rocking With: Shakira - Whenever, Wherever  Figure 10: Na na na na, hey hey hey, goodbye. Actually, I'ma change my posting style, I think. This is going to turn into a blog o' random: one random, one sentence thought a couple of times a week (no more than daily). It is now my intention to play Gimme Friction Baby and listen to Latin music for several hours. Shakira is 30? This makes me sad. |
| ||
| Oct. 6th, 2007 @ 09:12 pm Pi waits for no Ted | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
I've been told I have to put my picks online before the games start, just on the off chance someone wants to bet on them ... or, more accurately, against them. The only problem is that Ted is a bit lazy this week and hasn't posted his picks yet. That means not only do I not have anyone to make fun of, it also means I don't have lines to go off of. So I'll use the lines on ESPN.com because I think Ted said that's what he uses, and once Ted makes his picks, I'll update this and mock him as appropriate. Last Week: 4-12 Season: 22-42 Arizona at St. Louis (+3.5) Att: 64,844 65,295 Loc: 39,000 149,483 Pick: CARDINALS (when was the last time the Cards were favored in this series?) Cleveland at New England (-16.5) Att: 73,024 68,756 Loc: 42,216 186,638 Pick: BROWNS (well, this one's wrong anyway; make your own "Romeo must die" joke) Carolina at New Orleans (-3) Att: 73,707 70,002 Loc: 134,875 222,706 Pick: PANTHERS (remember last year, when this game mattered?) New York Jets at New York Giants (-3.5) Att: 77,197 78,862 Loc: 25,820 135,220 Pick: JETS (same matchup as that HDTV commercial they keep showing. Weird.) Seattle at Pittsburgh (-6) Att: 68,110 64,313 Loc: 45,246 105,352 Pick: SEAHAWKS (someone has to win the NFC West, don't they?) Detroit at Washington (-3.5) Att: 60,811 90,803 Loc: 75,055 87,851 Pick: LIONS (please, Redskins, no more yellow. Ever.) Miami at Houston (-5) Att: 70,621 70,765 Loc: 130,964 155,545 Pick: DOLPHINS (the Texans are legit, I think) Atlanta at Tennessee (-8.5) Att: 69,312 69,143 Loc: 4,053 2,329 Pick: TITANS (bad newz for the Falcons) Jacksonville at Kansas City (+2) Att: 61,821 78,038 Loc: 27,065 224,103 Pick: JAGUARS (just because the Chiefs beat San Diego doesn't mean anything) Tampa Bay at Indianapolis (-9.5) Att: 65,267 57,274 Loc: 135,368 38,276 Pick: COLTS (can we just fast-forward to the Indy-NE game?) San Diego at Denver (Even) Att: 65,175 76,463 Loc: 17,622 39,956 Pick: CHARGERS (is it bad form to fire Norv Turner before the bye week?) Baltimore at San Francisco (+3.5) Att: 71,372 67,651 Loc: 16,972 73,843 Pick: RAVENS (the 49ers have been a sleeper team for, what, 4 years now?) Chicago at Green Bay (-3.5) Att: 62,099 70,733 Loc: 1,727 262,580 Pick: BEARS (I know Ted's picking Green Bay) Monday Night game Dallas at Buffalo (+10) Att: 62,866 70,600 Loc: 49,936 1,605 Pick: BILLS (sorry Ted; btw, who thought this would be a good game?) That's all for now. Tune in next week to see if I finally break .500. |
| ||
| Oct. 3rd, 2007 @ 12:36 pm "I can't get zee f***ing trees..." | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Rocking At: Photonics Building, BU
It's been brought to my attention that a high percentage of my regular readers are not fans of the sports posts (two out of three or four...), so to them I say: you're going to want to skip this one.Mood: Rocking, but also: like a friggin hummingbird Rocking With: Bob Dylan - Subterranean Homesick Blues It's the baseball playoffs and time for me to pull a few more predictions out of my ass. "Now Bryan," you might say, "if anything you've shown over a prolonged period of time that your picks are usually horrifically wrong. So why bother?" ...I dunno. I got nothin' else to do. Or, actually, I do, and just don't want to do it. In the spirit of eternal optimism and procrastination, here are my picks (home field advantage to the team listed second): NLDS: COLORADO - PHILADEPHIA Let me start by saying no team in the National League looks like they belong in the postseason. The Rockies needed to win for like two straight weeks to even be considered in the race, the Phillies were seven games out two weeks ago, the Cubs looked like they were racing the Yankees for "biggest disappointment, expensive division" early on, and the Diamondbacks somehow managed to finish a silly 11 games over their expected won-loss record, which never happens. So I have no idea what to expect out of the NL, which is good, because it means impartiality hopefully. This series will be an absolute slugfest: the Phillies have the best offense for under $200 million, and the Rockies play miles above sea level. In addition, the Rockies' pitchers are middle-to-bottom of the pack in all major statistical categories, only to be one-upped by the Phillies' staff, which is in the NL's bottom five in the same categories. So it'll be an adventure to see if either side can actually get 27 outs. The Rockies have been white-hot -- seriously, 14 of 15? You could play college teams and not have that happen -- but the Phillies' superior offense will trump the Rockies' very good offense. Phillies in 4. NLDS: CHICAGO - ARIZONA Finally, after years of neglect, Chicago's other team gets a chance to shine in the postseason, and Steve Bartman jokes have been banned from this post. Let me reiterate my earlier comments about the D-backs' expected won-loss record, which is calculated based on the number of runs scored versus the number of runs allowed. Ignoring "clutch hitting" (which any rational person will tell you is bullcrap, and besides, Arizona can't hit anyway) this boils down to (a) luck, (b) clever use of the bullpen, and (c) more luck. Despite eons of cliches about defense winning championships, you do in fact need to keep scoring runs to advance. Not only that but the Cubs' pitching staff is apparently stellar, with the lowest OBA, second-lowest team ERA, and most strikeouts in the NL. This is a recipe for a lot of snake eggs (get it?) on the scoreboard. So I think Cubs in 4 should be fair but I'd like to mention two things: Tulane alum and Arizona emergency starter Micah Owings, who continues to shine with a bat (4 HR in 60 AB? really?), and the fact that the D-backs jersey has been parodied in a "D-Bags" shirt which I can't seem to find for linking purposes. Sad, really. ALDS: NEW YORK - CLEVELAND And now we get to the games where I know too much. If someone other than the Y***ees had made the playoffs, I would have been able to comment on one more series fairly, thus increasing my chances of not looking like a complete moron here. As it is, it became clear a while ago that I would have two rooting interests in the AL: the Red Sox, and whoever the Y***ees were matched up with. It turned out to be the Indians, who have two very good starters in Fausto (what a cool name) Carmona and C.C. Sabathia. You certainly need two top-notch aces to succeed in the playoffs, but I wonder if C.C. and Fausto (man, so cool) will be enough to offset the lackluster back of the Indians' rotation. Other than that, it's not a bad comparison with the '06 Tigers and '05 Angels, who embarrassed the Y***ees in the first round the last two years. Unfortunately, comparing the bullpens is wholly unfair. Mariano Rivera (the only Major Leaguer still allowed to wear #42, because he started killing rallies before Jackie Robinson was born), even though a few people have figured out how to hit that splitter, is far superior to Joe Borowski, whose playoff experience consists mostly of the '03 Cubs. Cleveland's offense was exceptional in the first half, but cooled down substantially after the All-Star break. Lucky for them, this is not the Y***ees' rotation of old; this year's model will try to grab the proverbial brass ring with a "hit-first, ask-questions-later" mentality that always served the Red Sox so well in prior postseasons. And even though the Y***ees went a ridiculous 37-19 in August and September, Cleveland was 36-20 in the same stretch. You can see that I'm torn here. But judging by the fact that the Indians were blown out of the water in their head-to-head matchups this year (yes, yes, "small sample size"), I really have to pick the Y***ees in 5. ALDS: LOS ANGELES - BOSTON And you thought I was biased last time. Obviously, I'm picking Boston to win -- I'll say Red Sox in 5 -- but let me give you some rationale to prove it's not just me singing "Sweet Caroline" over here. Yes, the Angels were the best home team in baseball, compiling a 54-27 record in Orange County. But the Red Sox had the best road record in the AL, at 45-36. And although the Angels' starters look formidable, the Angels' pitching numbers are not that great (an ERA which was 11th in the league and an OBA which was ninth, for instance). And yes, Mike Scioscia is orders of magnitude smart than Terry "look down-spit-repeat" Francona. But the Sox have coupled a strong offense (3rd in runs and 2nd in OPS) with a strong pitching staff (1st in OBA and ERA), and the Angels' pitching staff may well betray their starters. In addition, Scioscia's decision to carry 10 pitchers on his 25-man postseason roster is questionable given the amount of pitches the Sox like to take. If a starter implodes, what will LA's bullpen look like for the rest of the series? By contrast, the Sox will most likely have at least a few of Tim Wakefield, Julian Tavarez, John Lester, and Clay "No-Hit Wonder" Buchholz in the bullpen for long relief should Curt Schilling spontaneously combust or Daisuke Matsuzaka curl into a gyroball. Maybe my biggest concern is that everyone is picking the Sox, and the logic of crowds is usually pretty awful. NLCS: CHICAGO - PHILADELPHIA First of all, I find it hard to believe that Phillies fans try to play the "woe-is-us" card to the same extent Cubs fans do. Yes, you're in Philadelphia, it's tough, the Vet was a dump. We get it. You've won a World Series in the past generation and been to another one that I remember. Stop. Please. Not only that, but you're going to be That Team, the one the Cubs finally go through to get to the World Series. No billy goats can save you now. This is where that whole offense-defense thing comes into play, and as we've already discussed, the Cubs' pitching is statistically brilliant. Unfortunately for the Phils, their own pitching is horrendous, as previously discussed. You know you're in trouble when Tom Gordon is trotting out of your bullpen for you (fun fact: Gordon has played for four of this year's eight playoff teams). That's why I say Cubs in 6 and the National Guard takes three days to subdue the city of Chicago. ALCS: NEW YORK - BOSTON The safe route seems like the hottest team in baseball vs. the team with the best record, so that's what I'm going with, even if it's the best assurance possible that I will develop an ulcer before Christmas. This will be the fourth ALCS between the two in the last decade, and the first in which the Sox will have home field advantage. Is that significant? Since it's going to go seven games anyway, it just means I have to fight through a very nervous game seven crowd on my way home from BU. And you know that every game of the series is going to be one run, with most in the 8-7 range. Noting that Torre is also orders of magnitude smarter than Francona, it would seem that a bunch of one-run games would play in his favor. But the Y***ees' bullpen is a bigger question mark than the Red Sox, even though Joba Chamberlain will be formidable if he aims for the plate and not the helmets. Add in the quality hitting and better defense and I really think -- honest -- it'll be the Red Sox in 7. WORLD SERIES: CHICAGO - BOSTON The ESPN people will be pissing themselves after the Cubs win the NL, because you get hours of crap out of the 99-year drought, and (since the Boston-New York series will still be going on) the usual shots of Zimmer getting dropped by Pedro and the Babe winking. This was a much more intriguing matchup in 2003, when it was supposed to happen but both teams fell apart when five outs away. This time, it's a bit more clear-cut. It's hard to say who from the National League really belongs in the playoffs, as I mentioned earlier, but then again that never stopped St. Louis last year. What will stop the Senior Circuit will be the fact that, despite quality staffs in both dugouts, there is a huge run differential between the two teams (867 for Boston vs. 752 for Chicago -- that's almost a run a game). Plus, I still have problems with the idea of Carlos Zambrano as an ace, insofar as he's extremely volatile on and off the field, and it seems like the patient Sox hitters should be able to easily frustrate him. So I really think the Red Sox in 6, but wouldn't be surprised if it happened faster than that. |
| ||
| Sep. 28th, 2007 @ 07:30 pm Pi retains the exact same amount of wrongness. | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Before I begin this week, I'd like to present my feelings after the Monday night game, courtesy of my roommate's cat: Figure 9: At least the cat knows enough to run north-south. I'm talking to you, Reggie. That is all. Also, more college football bitching, prompted by Tulane's 40-point underdog status against LSU. Mostly, college football is crap, as several people have argued more eloquently. The latest egregious offenses are as follows: first, the renaming of Div. I-A and Div. I-AA to the "Bowl Subdivision" and "Championship Subdivision", respectively. In any other sport, the league labeled "championship" is superior but, Appalachian State notwithstanding, not here. It also further emphasizes the idiotic championship selection process in the big league. The second was brought on by Oklahoma State coach Mike Gundy who ripped some hapless reporter to shreds for critiquing the "heart" of his quarterback. Look, pal, this isn't Pop Warner. This isn't some overzealous parent at Williamsport. This is Big 12 college football -- which is much closer to professional than "amateur", as Mr. Gundy suggested -- and the kid in question is at least 20. He's an adult, he knew what he was getting into when he signed that letter of commitment, and yes, he will get second-guessed if he misses a few passes. The guy's playing in front of crowds every week of 80,000 people. Give me a break. Alternately, Mr. Gundy, you could return your seven-figure paycheck that you get for these allegedly insignificant games. Fine, the pros, which are slightly less work thanks to bye weeks. Ted finally returned to earth last week, going 6-10. This would have been awesome, except that I went 6-10 for the third straight week! How the hell is that even possible? If that happens again, someone should start putting actually betting against my picks because you'd apparently come back up two games on the deal. This week's picks, against the spread, with Ted's selections in bold caps. The method, once again, is as follows: we take the attendance from each teams' last home game, then find out where this number first shows up in pi. Whichever team's attendance figure shows up earliest is my pick for that game. Any questions, ask in the comments section. Last Week: 6-10 (Ted: 6-10) Season: 18-30 (Ted: 24-24) Houston at ATLANTA (+2.5) Att: 70,765 68,175 Loc: 155,545 578,952(!) Pick: TEXANS (talent? where?) Upset Special New York Jets at BUFFALO (+3.5) Att: 77,197 71,132 Loc: 25,820 28,728 Pick: JETS (whoever the quarterback is, he's gotta be better than that Losman guy. Seriously, what backwater school did he crawl out of?) Baltimore at CLEVELAND (+4.5) Att: 71,372 72,801 Loc: 16,972 259,755 Pick: RAVENS (Ted's kiss of death: picking you to win) St. Louis at DALLAS (-12.5) Att: 65,295 63,031 Loc: 149,483 45,574 Pick: COWBOYS (not that concerned, I see) CHICAGO at Detroit (+2.5) Att: 62,099 61,771 Loc: 1,727 229,838 Pick: DA BEARS (it has to prove it has a quarterback) Oakland at MIAMI (-3.5) Att: 51,075 71,615 Loc: 204,671 54,917 Pick: DOLPHINS ("better than Oakland" is like saying "better than Tulane") GREEN BAY at Minnesota (+2.5) Att: 70,733 62,815 Loc: 262,580 29,232 Pick: VIKINGS (Kevin better hope the Pack is never a Sunday guarantee) Seattle at SAN FRANCISCO (+1.5) Att: 68,110 68,111 Loc: 45,246 22,895 Pick: 49ERS (the home dog, like ... Minnesota?) Pittsburgh at ARIZONA (+5.5) Att: 64,313 64,542 Loc: 105,352 2,699 Pick: CARDINALS (ugh indeed) Denver at INDIANAPOLIS (-9.5) Att: 76,463 57,361 Loc: 39,956 88,788 Pick: sigh...BRONCOS (Denver sucks + Indianapolis is good = 9-1/2 point line) Kansas City at SAN DIEGO (-12.5) Att: 78,038 67,837 Loc: 224,103 1,244 Pick: CHARGERS (statement: "Belichick didn't even need to cheat to stop us") PHILADELPHIA at New York Giants (+2.5) Att: 67,570 78,701 Loc: 194,671 65,987 Pick: GEEEEE-MENNN (hopefully Philly's defense brings their C-game at least) Ted Hall's Sunday Guarantee Tampa Bay at CAROLINA (-2.5) Att: 65,267 73,665 Loc: 135,368 73,494 Pick: SILVER PANTHERS (c'mon, put in Ted!) Monday Night game New England at CINCINNATI (+7.5) Att: 68,756 66,093 Loc: 186,638 64,425 Pick: BENGALS (and more points than a TU basketball game) Tune in next week to see how we did. If it's 6-10 again all hell will break loose. |
| ||
| Sep. 27th, 2007 @ 12:28 pm Thought for the Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
Bill Simmons, on Jason Varitek's asking Red Sox fans not to boo J.D. Drew: "Can you ask 35,000 loyal fans who are paying as much as $312 a ticket to sympathize with a $14 million-a-year guy who has killed more rallies than the National Guard?" ...the whole quote's actually kind of lame. The end I really like though. So let's make it: "[Drew] has killed more rallies than the National Guard." Better. |
| ||
| Sep. 23rd, 2007 @ 02:05 am The Continuing Story of Pi vs. Ted | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Rocking At: Mercifully not the Superdome
Before I get into the picks, a quick note about everyone's favorite college football team whose nickname involves the color green. Mood: Rocking, but also: disgraced Rocking With: Timbaland - The Way I Are Tulane played the Southeastern Louisiana Lions -- who, unlike Lafayette High, don't even bother pretending to call themselves "Mighty" -- of Div. I-AA. Tulane won by eight -- at home -- making me question how well Tulane would do if they switched from C-USA to, say, the Southland Conference or something. Anyway, during this game running back Matt Forte racked up an absurd 303 yards rushing on 40 carries, which of course sets all types of records that no one really cares about. But during the same game, Tulane's quarterbacks threw for a combined 110 yards passing. This is not Navy. We're not running the option, and Matt Forte is not the reincarnation of Barry Sanders. Our starting quarterback went a whopping 9-for-24 for 83 yards, prompting Li'l Scelfo to go 3-for-5 for 27 yards. And the worst part is, despite calling 41 running plays (and yes, all but one went to the same back), Tulane still lost the time-of-possession battle, keeping the ball for just over 26 minutes. How is that even possible? Next week, Tulane plays former in-state rival LSU in the Louisiana Meh-it's-all-right-dome. For reasons unbeknownst to me (sadism maybe? train wreck you can't look away from?) ESPN has decided to televise this game across the country at noon. Jeff Sagarin's predictor rankings (one of a few computer rankings used by the BCS) currently ranks the Bayoux Bengals first in the nation with a predictor score of over 106. Tulane, meanwhile, ranks 140 with a score of just over 51. The way these scores work is that, by comparing the two scores, you can determine which team is favored and by how many points. Ignoring the three-point home field advantage (because, let's face it, Tulane will be lucky if 10,000 of the people in attendance are wearing green), LSU is something like FIFTY-FIVE POINT FAVORITES. Let that number sink in for a second. The sad thing is I'm still debating whether I'd be willing to take LSU and 55 points. And now, pro football. Pi responded with its second consecutive six-correct week. That's modest if not great, but Ted pulled off 11 correct somehow, leaving me six back after only two weeks. Fantastic. To his credit, he did correctly get the upset special, but his Sunday Guarantees are now 0-2. This week's picks, against the spread, with Ted's selections in bold caps. The method, once again, is as follows: we take the attendance from each teams' last home game, then find out where this number first shows up in pi. Whichever team's attendance figure shows up earliest is my pick for that game. Any questions, ask in the comments section. Last Week: 6-10 (Ted: 11-5) Season: 12-20 (Ted: 18-14) ARIZONA at Baltimore (-7.5) Att: 64,542 71,246 Loc: 2,699 37,847 Pick: CARDINALS (more than a feeling?) SAN DIEGO at Green Bay (+4.5) Att: 67,837 70,598 Loc: 1,244 67,890 Pick: CHARGERS Indianapolis at HOUSTON (+5.5) Att: 57,361 70,080 Loc: 88,788 38,500 Pick: TEXANS Minnesota at KANSAS CITY (-2.5) Att: 62,815 77,500 Loc: 29,232 81,539 Pick: VIKINGS BUFFALO at New England (+15.5[!]) Att: 71,132 68,756 Loc: 28,728 186,638 Pick: BILLS MIAMI at New York Jets (+3.5) Att: 71,615 77,900 Loc: 54,917 124,832 Pick: DOLPHINS DETROIT at Philadelphia (-6.5) Att: 61,771 67,726 Loc: 229,838 253,933 Pick: LIONS SAN FRANCISCO at Pittsburgh (-8.5) Att: 68,111 64,307 Loc: 22,895 27,803 Pick: 49ERS (but very close) ST. LOUIS at Tampa Bay (-3.5) Att: 65,295 65,178 Loc: 149,483 353,401 Pick: RAMS Jacksonville at DENVER (-3.5) Att: 61,821 76,784 Loc: 27,065 193,338 Pick: JAGUARS (yeeesss, let the hate flow) CINCINNATI at Seattle (-3.5) Att: 66,093 68,044 Loc: 64,425 88,709 Pick: BENGALS Upset Special Carolina at ATLANTA (+3.5) Att: 73,665 68,834 Loc: 73,494 46,926 Pick: MILLENIUM FALCONS (is the home dog hungry enough?) NEW YORK GIANTS at Washington (-4.5) Att: 78,701 90,163 Loc: 65,987 161,481 Pick: GIANTS (but Eli is worse than they say) DALLAS at Chicago (-3.5) Att: 63,031 62,095 Loc: 45,574 255,791 Pick: COWBOYS (double D?) Ted Hall's Sunday Guarantee Cleveland at OAKLAND (-3.5) Att: 72,801 61,547 Loc: 259,755 171,254 Pick: RAIDERS (I must be "high as a kite") Tennessee at NEW ORLEANS (-4.5) Att: 69,143 70,001 Loc: 2,329 138,696 Pick: TITANS (let's get geauxing, guys.) Tune in next week to see how we did. |
| ||
bored
confused