If you know me, you know I love dogs... and I loved the idea of adopting. But I have a warning: don't even bother going to the Washington Humane Society. Their policy is awful in that they are a "first come, first serve" shelter, and do not look for the best situation for an animal.
Yesterday, Cindy and I put in an application for a 3-4 month old Shiba Inu at the WHS. We were told that another application had been placed but we were also told that adoptions were not done on a "first come, first serve" basis. They supposedly had a "best fit for the animal" policy. Since Cindy works at an Animal Hospital there wasn't much doubt that we would fit as a excellent situtation to place the animal.
Alas, today we got a phone call from the shelter stating that someone else had put in an application before us and that they were "moving ahead with that." So we called back. We were informed that when they had more than one "qualified" application they were "first come, first serve." So in essence, with any dog that is at all desirable (small, young, etc.) they don't care to put the animal in the best situation, just in a not bad situation. And I think that is haphazard and apathetic.
We even left last night thinking, "the only situation which would be better than us, would be a vet." But in the end it didn't matter and since we can't get there when they open everyday to put in an application the moment a dog is available, we won't be adopting (at least not at the Washington Humane Society). And now I understand another reason why people don't adopt, and that is just sad.
Friday, September 30, 2005
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
NFL top 15 (week 4)
ESPN just came out with their week 4 NFL Power Ranking, and I can't HELP but comment.
I'll start with the nitpicking. Cowboys are #13, Redskins are #15. The Cowboys barely won a game against the 49ers and end up 2 spots ahead of the Redskins. Um, exactly what part of that win over the 49ers (two touchdowns in the 4th quarter, sounds familiar doesn't it?!) nullifies the Redskins beating the Cowboys less than a week earlier? I mean come on, there are only 4 undefeated teams left and you put them at #1, 4, 6 and 15! Granted the bye week helps, but they're only ranked higher than three 2 win teams. The Redskins are ranked lower than the Chargers (#11) who have only beaten the pretty weak NY Giants (who btw have only beaten the 0-3 Cardinals and got lucky in many ways against the Saints). They are also ranked lower than the Panthers who have lost to an emotional Saints team and to a Jeckyl and Hyde Dolphins team. I guess I can see the Panthers ranked so high (since they beat the Patriots) but the Redskins again get no love... but as I have stated before, I'll deal.
Remember how last week I said Kansas City's defense didn't impress me. Well last night they didn't impress me either. Shocking! You'll hear it over and over again, a good defense travels, and they did not. Anyways, why I would say their defense doesn't impress me and then put them at #4 last week is beyond me. Oh well... what is also beyond me is that I'm believing the Bengals hype and am moving them to #5. Their offense convinced me against the Bears, but their defense has yet to play a quality offense. And I don't see a quality offensive until they play the Colts in mid NOVEMBER, although the Jags might give them a game on Oct. 9th.
Other Things:
1. I don't want to say it because they certainly know how to win close games, but the Patriots are suspect.
2. The Eagles know how to beat bad teams, but I'm still afraid of putting them so high at #4.
3. I still think the Steeler's offense is weak and since they're not playing a decent defense until mid-October when they play the Jaguars, I'll have to rank them high.
4. I put the Colts #1 because they've only given up 16 points all season and the history of their offense, BUT I still haven't seen them play yet and I want to see their defense to believe the hype.
5. The Raiders could easily beat the Giants this Sunday if not for one man, Norv frickin Turner.
6. If you want to see why I don't like the passer rating, especially early in the season, check out Michael Wilbon's column in today's Post. The passer rating over-emphasizes touchdown passes, and favors throw the ball short and let your WR run with it QBs like Donovan McNabb...
7. I think Peter King is rediculous for ranking the Cowboys at #10, and three 1-2 teams (Chargers, Panthers, and Vikings) at #11, #13, and #14 AND not even listing the 2 win, NO lose Redskins. But what can you expect since King has always been seriously biased against the Skins and for the Giants and Parcells. Someone whose NFL Ranking that I can respect if not entirely agree with: Dr. Z over at SI.com.
1. Indianapolis Colts
2. New England Patriots
3. Tampa Bay Bucs
4. Philadelphia Eagles
5. Cincinnati Bengals
6. Pittsburgh Steelers
7. Jacksonville Jaguars
8. Redskins
9. Seattle Seahawks
10. Atlanta Falcons
11. Denver Broncos
12. Kansas City Chiefs
13. Dallas Cowboys
14. Miami Dolphins
15. New York Giants
I'll start with the nitpicking. Cowboys are #13, Redskins are #15. The Cowboys barely won a game against the 49ers and end up 2 spots ahead of the Redskins. Um, exactly what part of that win over the 49ers (two touchdowns in the 4th quarter, sounds familiar doesn't it?!) nullifies the Redskins beating the Cowboys less than a week earlier? I mean come on, there are only 4 undefeated teams left and you put them at #1, 4, 6 and 15! Granted the bye week helps, but they're only ranked higher than three 2 win teams. The Redskins are ranked lower than the Chargers (#11) who have only beaten the pretty weak NY Giants (who btw have only beaten the 0-3 Cardinals and got lucky in many ways against the Saints). They are also ranked lower than the Panthers who have lost to an emotional Saints team and to a Jeckyl and Hyde Dolphins team. I guess I can see the Panthers ranked so high (since they beat the Patriots) but the Redskins again get no love... but as I have stated before, I'll deal.
Remember how last week I said Kansas City's defense didn't impress me. Well last night they didn't impress me either. Shocking! You'll hear it over and over again, a good defense travels, and they did not. Anyways, why I would say their defense doesn't impress me and then put them at #4 last week is beyond me. Oh well... what is also beyond me is that I'm believing the Bengals hype and am moving them to #5. Their offense convinced me against the Bears, but their defense has yet to play a quality offense. And I don't see a quality offensive until they play the Colts in mid NOVEMBER, although the Jags might give them a game on Oct. 9th.
Other Things:
1. I don't want to say it because they certainly know how to win close games, but the Patriots are suspect.
2. The Eagles know how to beat bad teams, but I'm still afraid of putting them so high at #4.
3. I still think the Steeler's offense is weak and since they're not playing a decent defense until mid-October when they play the Jaguars, I'll have to rank them high.
4. I put the Colts #1 because they've only given up 16 points all season and the history of their offense, BUT I still haven't seen them play yet and I want to see their defense to believe the hype.
5. The Raiders could easily beat the Giants this Sunday if not for one man, Norv frickin Turner.
6. If you want to see why I don't like the passer rating, especially early in the season, check out Michael Wilbon's column in today's Post. The passer rating over-emphasizes touchdown passes, and favors throw the ball short and let your WR run with it QBs like Donovan McNabb...
7. I think Peter King is rediculous for ranking the Cowboys at #10, and three 1-2 teams (Chargers, Panthers, and Vikings) at #11, #13, and #14 AND not even listing the 2 win, NO lose Redskins. But what can you expect since King has always been seriously biased against the Skins and for the Giants and Parcells. Someone whose NFL Ranking that I can respect if not entirely agree with: Dr. Z over at SI.com.
1. Indianapolis Colts
2. New England Patriots
3. Tampa Bay Bucs
4. Philadelphia Eagles
5. Cincinnati Bengals
6. Pittsburgh Steelers
7. Jacksonville Jaguars
8. Redskins
9. Seattle Seahawks
10. Atlanta Falcons
11. Denver Broncos
12. Kansas City Chiefs
13. Dallas Cowboys
14. Miami Dolphins
15. New York Giants
Saturday, September 24, 2005
Birthdays and Movies
Yes, my birthday was this past Wednesday and so to anyone who I have forgotten to get back to, thanks!
Now to the movies. The past few weeks there has been a dearth of movies I would be interested in seeing. But this week is entirely different, so I'm recommending a few movies.
First, and I've mentioned it before but now its finally out: Corpse Bride.
Second, A Sidewalk Astronomer, which is only playing in a few places, like Fairfax in the DC area. Why am I recommending it? Well, for one I love astronomy (which if you know me you might already know). And the fella in the trailer intrigued me. My favorite quote in the trailer: "Once you've come to the conclusion that what you know already is all you need to know, then you have a degree in disinterest." Kinda obvious, but I still like it.
And I'm mildy intrigued by El Crimen Perfecto and A History of Violence. Both intrigue me but I'm definitely recommending them until I see them.
Now to the movies. The past few weeks there has been a dearth of movies I would be interested in seeing. But this week is entirely different, so I'm recommending a few movies.
First, and I've mentioned it before but now its finally out: Corpse Bride.
Second, A Sidewalk Astronomer, which is only playing in a few places, like Fairfax in the DC area. Why am I recommending it? Well, for one I love astronomy (which if you know me you might already know). And the fella in the trailer intrigued me. My favorite quote in the trailer: "Once you've come to the conclusion that what you know already is all you need to know, then you have a degree in disinterest." Kinda obvious, but I still like it.
And I'm mildy intrigued by El Crimen Perfecto and A History of Violence. Both intrigue me but I'm definitely recommending them until I see them.
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
Sweet Revenge
Last year in Texas Stadium, the Redskins were ready to win their first game against the Cowboys in Dallas in almost a decade. 41 year old Vinny Testaverde threw a long touchdown to Patrick Crayton. (You should probably say "who?" now.) Heartbreaking.
Well it didn't take long for the Skins to get return the favor, coming back from 13-0 to win 14-13.
First let me say, I don't want to hear from a single person saying this was a fluke, because I've got two words and a phrase for you: "Flea Flicker" and "One good fluke deserves another." Hey, I'll be the first to say that the Skins aren't juggernauts, at least not the offense. But it comes down to this: when your offense isn't scoring in a close game, you need to find what you can score with. And the Skins found it late with Mark Brunell's arm and Santana Moss's legs.
Unfortunately it took Joe Gibbs, having his team down 13-0 with about 9 minutes left in the game to go for the long ball. And they missed the first few times. In the drive before the first TD drive, passes to Moss and David Patten went incomplete. But eventually they scored on a Cowboys secondary that they should have been attacking with medium to long stuff from the get go. (Honestly their secondary isn't exactly stellar. Roy Williams is a very good player but I think he's a linebacker in a strong safety position. I wouldn't want to run at him, or have to block his blitzes, but throw behind him and it should be money. I certainly wouldn't try to run against the Cowboys at the beginning, though. Heck, I couldn't even name another DB (okay thats a lie, Newman) but I could probably name half the starting DL and LBs... well maybe not buy I know Ware, Glover, Canty, and Nguyen.)
I have to agree with Michael Wilbon when he says that it looked like the rust came off on that second TD throw. And considering he didn't spend all preseason getting starter reps, I'ld say thats a pretty quick "derusting." But really, he's had a whole year now to learn Gibb's system (with this years mods to boot!). The main difference I saw was that Brunell never seemed to lose his confidence. But also as Wibon noted, only the game against the Seahawks will tell. It almost makes the Bye week THAT much more important.
Now, on to stuff that bothered me: For the first 3 quarters the pass protection was... well, not there. My only complaint about the defense was no turnovers (I know, picky huh?). And I'll be the first to say that giving Gibbs a Gatorade shower was REDICULOUS. But hey, maybe it will drive home the point that going long isn't exactly bad. (How that equates I'm not exactly sure.) Gibbs went for the shotgun, so why wouldn't he be willing to throw 2 or 3 early long balls per game, especially when other things aren't working. About my top #15, I am definitely not giving the Redskins the #5 spot. I'll give the Giants #5, Eagles #6, Steelers #7, and Skins #8.
Finally, When the Skins scored that first TD making it 13-7, I truly felt they had a chance to win because of two things: First and foremost their defense and second because they finally scored and then had no choice but to throw the rest of the way. So now I think they have a chance this season because of two things: First and foremost their defense and second because after this game they might finally learn from last year's loses. It's weird that the confidence of win, is how one might learn from a loss.
Well it didn't take long for the Skins to get return the favor, coming back from 13-0 to win 14-13.
First let me say, I don't want to hear from a single person saying this was a fluke, because I've got two words and a phrase for you: "Flea Flicker" and "One good fluke deserves another." Hey, I'll be the first to say that the Skins aren't juggernauts, at least not the offense. But it comes down to this: when your offense isn't scoring in a close game, you need to find what you can score with. And the Skins found it late with Mark Brunell's arm and Santana Moss's legs.
Unfortunately it took Joe Gibbs, having his team down 13-0 with about 9 minutes left in the game to go for the long ball. And they missed the first few times. In the drive before the first TD drive, passes to Moss and David Patten went incomplete. But eventually they scored on a Cowboys secondary that they should have been attacking with medium to long stuff from the get go. (Honestly their secondary isn't exactly stellar. Roy Williams is a very good player but I think he's a linebacker in a strong safety position. I wouldn't want to run at him, or have to block his blitzes, but throw behind him and it should be money. I certainly wouldn't try to run against the Cowboys at the beginning, though. Heck, I couldn't even name another DB (okay thats a lie, Newman) but I could probably name half the starting DL and LBs... well maybe not buy I know Ware, Glover, Canty, and Nguyen.)
I have to agree with Michael Wilbon when he says that it looked like the rust came off on that second TD throw. And considering he didn't spend all preseason getting starter reps, I'ld say thats a pretty quick "derusting." But really, he's had a whole year now to learn Gibb's system (with this years mods to boot!). The main difference I saw was that Brunell never seemed to lose his confidence. But also as Wibon noted, only the game against the Seahawks will tell. It almost makes the Bye week THAT much more important.
Now, on to stuff that bothered me: For the first 3 quarters the pass protection was... well, not there. My only complaint about the defense was no turnovers (I know, picky huh?). And I'll be the first to say that giving Gibbs a Gatorade shower was REDICULOUS. But hey, maybe it will drive home the point that going long isn't exactly bad. (How that equates I'm not exactly sure.) Gibbs went for the shotgun, so why wouldn't he be willing to throw 2 or 3 early long balls per game, especially when other things aren't working. About my top #15, I am definitely not giving the Redskins the #5 spot. I'll give the Giants #5, Eagles #6, Steelers #7, and Skins #8.
Finally, When the Skins scored that first TD making it 13-7, I truly felt they had a chance to win because of two things: First and foremost their defense and second because they finally scored and then had no choice but to throw the rest of the way. So now I think they have a chance this season because of two things: First and foremost their defense and second because after this game they might finally learn from last year's loses. It's weird that the confidence of win, is how one might learn from a loss.
Monday, September 19, 2005
Hopefully, my only words on the Ramsey-Brunell saga
I find it AMAZING that sportswriters don't understand why Joe Gibbs would have moved to Mark Brunell. I'll admit it is quick, but I would rather him do it now than 8 weeks in, when the Redskins are 3-5 like last year. To be honest, it's real simple: like SI's Andrew Perloff notices, Patrick Ramsey had the whole preseason (which amounted to around 8 quarters, or about 2 full games, worth of time) to solidify his starting job. He just plain didn't. Ramsey has had the starting job since at least week 9 of last year, and he has done nothing with it.
Last week Tony Kornheiser seemed to understand Gibbs saying: "Gibbs is doing what coaches do everywhere -- putting a guy out there who he thinks gives his team the best chance to win." I think Gibbs is smart enough to realize that last year Ramsey and Brunell were about same in his old system. (Hmm, maybe if you think about it, maybe it was Gibbs system that sucked... thats sarcastic if you haven't noticed) If you've watched the preseason and first game you'll notice that Ramsey still likes to throw iffy balls. The QB just cannot do that with this WR corps. You need a tall physical WR like Terrell Owens or Randy Moss to do that, and the Skins don't have any one like that. And I think Mark Brunell is experienced enough to run this system. And that is what counts, not who needs or deserves a chance, but who can do the best with the tools at hand.
Last week Tony Kornheiser seemed to understand Gibbs saying: "Gibbs is doing what coaches do everywhere -- putting a guy out there who he thinks gives his team the best chance to win." I think Gibbs is smart enough to realize that last year Ramsey and Brunell were about same in his old system. (Hmm, maybe if you think about it, maybe it was Gibbs system that sucked... thats sarcastic if you haven't noticed) If you've watched the preseason and first game you'll notice that Ramsey still likes to throw iffy balls. The QB just cannot do that with this WR corps. You need a tall physical WR like Terrell Owens or Randy Moss to do that, and the Skins don't have any one like that. And I think Mark Brunell is experienced enough to run this system. And that is what counts, not who needs or deserves a chance, but who can do the best with the tools at hand.
NFL Top 15
The NFL seems to be off to a very interesting start. By tuesday morning there will only be 7 undefeated teams after two weeks. One team, the Bengals, have benefited from playing two terrible teams in the Vikings and Browns. Another team, the Colts, finally have a defensive front, and scare me.
Anyways here comes my prediction: first, the Redskins/Cowboys game will be close. If the Redskins win they will be the lowest ranked unbeaten team (although the Bucs might be close) in ESPN's week 3 NFL Power Rankings. If Dallas wins, the Redskins will be the lowest ranked 1-1 team (although the Niners might be close) and will be ranked lower than the Bears who would also be 1-1 and who they beat last week. Peter King even has the Bears ranked #15. (I really think he has a man crush on Kyle Orton.) It's not that I disagree with the Bears at #15, but if you just lost to a team, that team should be ranked higher than you (unless it is a fluke, which the Redskins win wasn't; there are a few other exceptions to this rule but i'll cover them later.) And how Dallas gets all that love (#8 at ESPN and #13 with King) after only barely beating the surprisingly weak Chargers is beyond me. Have I mentioned how I don't like King.
The point is that the Redskins will get no love this weekend, unless they blowout the Cowboys, and that won't happen. But once again... this might be a good thing.
Now for the rest of my thoughts:
1. About the Ravens, I am confident about saying this: I told you so.
2. Kansas City's defense isn't as good as people seem to think. The Raiders scored 2 touchdowns on them which were called back on a bad penalty (Randy Moss's catch), and a stupid penalty that had nothing to do with the play (Lamont Jordan's run). I think they'll drop once they play good teams. (Oakland could be a good team if they weren't being run by Norv Turner)
3. The only teams that get by the "you lose, you're lower" rule are last year's Superbowl teams and League championship game teams. So the Patriots and Eagles (and Steelers and Falcons to a lesser extent) need to lose a few more times to be knocked below the teams they lose to.
4. And even though the Steelers were in last years AFC champ game, like i said a few weeks ago... they seem weak to me. They have not impressed me with wins over the Titans and Texans. And in case you are wondering the Falcons haven't impressed me either... 14-10 over the Eagles doesn't do it, when you're at home. The second Michael Vick gets hurt its over for the Falcons.
My top 15 (16):
1. Indianapolis Colts
2. New England Patriots
3. Tampa Bay Bucs
4. Kansas City Chiefs
5. Redskins or Cowboys (whoever wins)
6. Saints or Giants (whoever wins)
7. Philadelphia Eagles
8. Pittsburgh Steelers
9. Cincinnati Bengals
10. Atlanta Falcons
11. Jacksonville Jaguars
12. Carolina Panthers
13. Redskins or Cowboys (whoever loses, as long as it is close)
14. Saints or Giants (whoever loses, as long as it is close)
15. Seattle Seahawks and Chicago Bears
Anyways here comes my prediction: first, the Redskins/Cowboys game will be close. If the Redskins win they will be the lowest ranked unbeaten team (although the Bucs might be close) in ESPN's week 3 NFL Power Rankings. If Dallas wins, the Redskins will be the lowest ranked 1-1 team (although the Niners might be close) and will be ranked lower than the Bears who would also be 1-1 and who they beat last week. Peter King even has the Bears ranked #15. (I really think he has a man crush on Kyle Orton.) It's not that I disagree with the Bears at #15, but if you just lost to a team, that team should be ranked higher than you (unless it is a fluke, which the Redskins win wasn't; there are a few other exceptions to this rule but i'll cover them later.) And how Dallas gets all that love (#8 at ESPN and #13 with King) after only barely beating the surprisingly weak Chargers is beyond me. Have I mentioned how I don't like King.
The point is that the Redskins will get no love this weekend, unless they blowout the Cowboys, and that won't happen. But once again... this might be a good thing.
Now for the rest of my thoughts:
1. About the Ravens, I am confident about saying this: I told you so.
2. Kansas City's defense isn't as good as people seem to think. The Raiders scored 2 touchdowns on them which were called back on a bad penalty (Randy Moss's catch), and a stupid penalty that had nothing to do with the play (Lamont Jordan's run). I think they'll drop once they play good teams. (Oakland could be a good team if they weren't being run by Norv Turner)
3. The only teams that get by the "you lose, you're lower" rule are last year's Superbowl teams and League championship game teams. So the Patriots and Eagles (and Steelers and Falcons to a lesser extent) need to lose a few more times to be knocked below the teams they lose to.
4. And even though the Steelers were in last years AFC champ game, like i said a few weeks ago... they seem weak to me. They have not impressed me with wins over the Titans and Texans. And in case you are wondering the Falcons haven't impressed me either... 14-10 over the Eagles doesn't do it, when you're at home. The second Michael Vick gets hurt its over for the Falcons.
My top 15 (16):
1. Indianapolis Colts
2. New England Patriots
3. Tampa Bay Bucs
4. Kansas City Chiefs
5. Redskins or Cowboys (whoever wins)
6. Saints or Giants (whoever wins)
7. Philadelphia Eagles
8. Pittsburgh Steelers
9. Cincinnati Bengals
10. Atlanta Falcons
11. Jacksonville Jaguars
12. Carolina Panthers
13. Redskins or Cowboys (whoever loses, as long as it is close)
14. Saints or Giants (whoever loses, as long as it is close)
15. Seattle Seahawks and Chicago Bears
Friday, September 16, 2005
Trying to explain the lyrics to Don Edwards's "Coyotes"
Earlier this summer, when I first watched the trailer to "Grizzly Man," I became familiar with Don Edwards and his song "Coyotes" (written by Bob McDill). I loved the song and was happy to hear it played at the end of the movie. I also became interested in the meaning behind the figures in the lyrics and, in particular, the things that are listed as "gone" in the chorus. So here is a list of things mentioned in the song with explanations and links to wikipedia, if you care to learn more.
There is one thing which, I cannot make out. It sounds something like "Stan Juanti" or maybe "Stanwanti." If you are familiar with the song and know what that word is, please email me.
UPDATED (2/7/07): I found out that "Stanwanti" is Stand Watie, a leader of the Cherokee Nation and a general in the CSA during the Civil War.
UPDATED (10/4/07): I've now had more than one person point out that "Cointreau" is most likely actually, "Quantrill." I'll believe it, so I've made the change.
- Pancho Villa - General in the Mexican Revolution.
- Longhorns - Breed of cattle common to cattle drives.
- Drovers - persons who drove livestock.
- Comanches - American Indian nation in the southwest.
- Outlaws - Criminal in the American Old West.
- Geronimo - Legendary American Indian of the Chiricahua Apache.
- Sam Bass - Wild West train robber.
- Red Wolf - A critically endangered species which was once widespread in the Southwest.
Cointreau - Orange flavored liqour and original ingredient of a Margarita.- Quantrill - William Quantrill, Confederate guerrilla leader of Quantrill's Raiders
- And last but not least, Coyote.
There is one thing which, I cannot make out. It sounds something like "Stan Juanti" or maybe "Stanwanti." If you are familiar with the song and know what that word is, please email me.
UPDATED (2/7/07): I found out that "Stanwanti" is Stand Watie, a leader of the Cherokee Nation and a general in the CSA during the Civil War.
UPDATED (10/4/07): I've now had more than one person point out that "Cointreau" is most likely actually, "Quantrill." I'll believe it, so I've made the change.
Tuesday, September 13, 2005
President Bush finally gets some points in my book
I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge President Bush's admission of responsibility for his administrations failures in responding to Hurricane Katrina. Hopefully this is a step, and not just a response to his record low popularity numbers.
Monday, September 12, 2005
Ansel Adams's Autumn Moon
Astronomers at Texas State University have figured out that Ansel Adams shot his photo "Autumn Moon" at 7:03 p.m. on September 15, 1948. It seems that the scene reoccurs every 19 years. So people are getting together to watch and photograph the moment this time around. My first two thoughts. First, it's cool that the astronomers can figure these sort of things out. Second, it's sad that people are getting together for it... but hey its a better reason than anything else to gather there.
football, football, football...
I'll start out by saying this: I was at the Redskins game yesterday and I am pretty sure Mike Wilbon was there too. So I find it surprising that he so easily dismissed the role the crowd played in the Bears three straight false start penalties. It was loud, and Wilbon makes it seem like the crowd had nothing to do with it. Silence and the Skins defense could have done it just as easily.
Now about the game: How it is passed over I understand. No one cares about two very good defense holding two offenses to single digits. But that the Redskins are getting no credit is a joke! I wasn't sure of a win until the false start sequence, but I never felt like the Redskins wouldn't be able to respond. The offense was strong enough to make one certain that even if the Bears got a field goal, they could drive for at least a field goal if not a touchdown.
SI's Peter King is a homer, in that he loves NY teams and he loves player and coaches that are nice to him. So I really don't mind that he praised Bears QB Kyle Orton, without mentioning the Redskins. But the fact that the Bears defense could take blame for the loss (Chicago Tribune and Sun-Times) is entirely misleading. It sounds like the Skins defense could have lost the game to Orton, and it was the Skins offense which won the game. To be honest though, I don't respect King (to slanted) and the Chicago columnists do spread the blame for the loss. But still no one is crediting the Skins for the win.
And to Len Pasquarelli's column I say: okay fine, the Skins didn't outwardly impress this weekend. But maybe you should have watched the game before commenting. The Bears red zone offense and special team was pretty good. And the Redskins did score a touchdown, but it was taken back on a questionable offensive pass interference (Cooley was being held on that play). Plus, not everyone wins blowout games (see the Patriots for more on that). The Cowboys impressed me, but they could have easily lost that game, and th Giants win just showed me that Arizona apparantly isn't the sleeper everyone was talking about (it looks like their defense will keep that from happening).
Come to think of it this game reminded me of another game I attended back in 2000. The Redskins lost to a Giants team with a great defense, 7-9. The Giants went on to lose the Super Bowl that season to a better offense, the Baltimore Ravens. That Giants team knew how to win the close ones with a questionable QB, Kerry Collins, and great tandem in Thunder (Ron Dayne) and Lightning (Tiki Barber). Reminds me of Patrick Ramsey, Ladell Betts, and Clinton Portis.
I'll finish by thanking everyone for not talking about the Skins. Not too many people were talking about the Giants and Ravens before the 2001 Super Bowl. Just like no one was talking about the Rams (2000 Super Bowl winners) and the Patriots (2002 Super Bowl winners). Since then we had a string of expected Super Bowl participants (except for the Panthers) so I think it's time for a little of the unexpected, the untalked about.
Now about the game: How it is passed over I understand. No one cares about two very good defense holding two offenses to single digits. But that the Redskins are getting no credit is a joke! I wasn't sure of a win until the false start sequence, but I never felt like the Redskins wouldn't be able to respond. The offense was strong enough to make one certain that even if the Bears got a field goal, they could drive for at least a field goal if not a touchdown.
SI's Peter King is a homer, in that he loves NY teams and he loves player and coaches that are nice to him. So I really don't mind that he praised Bears QB Kyle Orton, without mentioning the Redskins. But the fact that the Bears defense could take blame for the loss (Chicago Tribune and Sun-Times) is entirely misleading. It sounds like the Skins defense could have lost the game to Orton, and it was the Skins offense which won the game. To be honest though, I don't respect King (to slanted) and the Chicago columnists do spread the blame for the loss. But still no one is crediting the Skins for the win.
And to Len Pasquarelli's column I say: okay fine, the Skins didn't outwardly impress this weekend. But maybe you should have watched the game before commenting. The Bears red zone offense and special team was pretty good. And the Redskins did score a touchdown, but it was taken back on a questionable offensive pass interference (Cooley was being held on that play). Plus, not everyone wins blowout games (see the Patriots for more on that). The Cowboys impressed me, but they could have easily lost that game, and th Giants win just showed me that Arizona apparantly isn't the sleeper everyone was talking about (it looks like their defense will keep that from happening).
Come to think of it this game reminded me of another game I attended back in 2000. The Redskins lost to a Giants team with a great defense, 7-9. The Giants went on to lose the Super Bowl that season to a better offense, the Baltimore Ravens. That Giants team knew how to win the close ones with a questionable QB, Kerry Collins, and great tandem in Thunder (Ron Dayne) and Lightning (Tiki Barber). Reminds me of Patrick Ramsey, Ladell Betts, and Clinton Portis.
I'll finish by thanking everyone for not talking about the Skins. Not too many people were talking about the Giants and Ravens before the 2001 Super Bowl. Just like no one was talking about the Rams (2000 Super Bowl winners) and the Patriots (2002 Super Bowl winners). Since then we had a string of expected Super Bowl participants (except for the Panthers) so I think it's time for a little of the unexpected, the untalked about.
Thursday, September 08, 2005
Nationals tickets for the Hurricane Evacuees at the DC Armory?
So I went to Nats game on tuesday, where they lost a close one with a pitcher making his debut, Darrell Rasner. I noticed two things: All the news trucks outside the Armory and a good amount of empty seats in the upper deck. The news trucks were there for the Hurricane Evacuees who had just arrived on tuesday. So the obvious occurred to me. The Nats should invite the evacuees to a game.
I mean its right across the street. No need to bus them over or anything, just giv'em the tickets and let them walk across the street. Really its perfect... the Nats Triple-A affiliate are the New Orleans Zephyrs!
So I have emailed them to suggest it. No response yet but I'll write something if it comes up. I'm even willing to pay for 10-12 tickets. I know its not alot but hey... im not exactly rich ya know!
I mean its right across the street. No need to bus them over or anything, just giv'em the tickets and let them walk across the street. Really its perfect... the Nats Triple-A affiliate are the New Orleans Zephyrs!
So I have emailed them to suggest it. No response yet but I'll write something if it comes up. I'm even willing to pay for 10-12 tickets. I know its not alot but hey... im not exactly rich ya know!
Tuesday, September 06, 2005
Monday, September 05, 2005
It's official, No need to worry about Katrina's vicitms.
George Bush's mom thinks that things are going pretty well for Katrina's victims because they were poor anyways. Please tell me this isn't evidence for how disconnected the family is.
ESPN is not watching the preseason
Did ESPN watch ANY of the preseason games. Or did they make their power rankings before the preseason? It really looks like they just phoned it in, by using last seasons final rankings. Now, I'll admit to being a homer... I certainly have a bias towards the Redskins, but this is a joke. They have the Redskins 8 spots out of last place and the Steelers are #5 and the Ravens are #8. Allow me to retort:
The Redskins TOTALLY handled both teams starting offenses not allowing either a touchdown. And although they didn't finish as well as one would like, the Redskin's starting offenses moved the ball on both teams starting defense. Now I'm not saying the Redskins are going 11-5 this season, but I seriously don't think 10-6 is out of the question (split their division games (even tho i think sweeping the Giants is possible) and allowing for losses at the Chiefs and at home vs. the Chargers would leave them in that 5 or 6 loss range). The cetainly don't deserve #26... more like #15.
These 3 teams are pretty even, and to be honest I think the Raven's are the worst of the 3. I guess it just comes down to this: I don't think the Steelers and Ravens are that good. The Steeler's defense was alright, but their offense was terrible. They better hope Big Ben isn't slumping in his second season. The Raven's defense (minus Ray Lewis) was certainly not impressive. And their offense was not there, until the 4th quarter against the former Redskins who are now looking for jobs in the Arena League.
Sure, it might just be preseason, but that first quarter in preseason games tells you ALOT! During last year's preseason (and the Spurrier preseason to) I was pretty worried watch the Redskins do nothing until the second half. This season there was promise, especially in that last first quarter against the Ravens. Unless all those dropped balls become a constant, I'm not too worried about this season. Well as long as they stop getting all those penalties...
The Redskins TOTALLY handled both teams starting offenses not allowing either a touchdown. And although they didn't finish as well as one would like, the Redskin's starting offenses moved the ball on both teams starting defense. Now I'm not saying the Redskins are going 11-5 this season, but I seriously don't think 10-6 is out of the question (split their division games (even tho i think sweeping the Giants is possible) and allowing for losses at the Chiefs and at home vs. the Chargers would leave them in that 5 or 6 loss range). The cetainly don't deserve #26... more like #15.
These 3 teams are pretty even, and to be honest I think the Raven's are the worst of the 3. I guess it just comes down to this: I don't think the Steelers and Ravens are that good. The Steeler's defense was alright, but their offense was terrible. They better hope Big Ben isn't slumping in his second season. The Raven's defense (minus Ray Lewis) was certainly not impressive. And their offense was not there, until the 4th quarter against the former Redskins who are now looking for jobs in the Arena League.
Sure, it might just be preseason, but that first quarter in preseason games tells you ALOT! During last year's preseason (and the Spurrier preseason to) I was pretty worried watch the Redskins do nothing until the second half. This season there was promise, especially in that last first quarter against the Ravens. Unless all those dropped balls become a constant, I'm not too worried about this season. Well as long as they stop getting all those penalties...
Sunday, September 04, 2005
Seriously this is REDICULOUS!
Now even Republicans (like Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney) are saying that FEMA's response to New Orleans is a joke. FEMA chief Mike Brown was fired from his last job overseeing horse shows! Horse Shows! He has little experience which would qualify him for the job. But of course, Bush tells Brown that he's "doing a heck of a job!" Entirely not surprisingly, the Bush Administration is blaming everyone but themselves. Obviously the buck does not stop at Bush's desk. Does he not feel even a modicum of accountability in any of this? (and of course I speak of the response, not the actual tragedy)
And now Chief Justice Rehnquist is dead. As sad as a death is, I hope this spurs Congress into not just rubber stamping John Roberts on to the Supreme Court. This is nothing against Roberts, but in light of the past week (if not the past 4 years) Bush's appointees should be subject to such scrutiny. Especially when speaking of the Supreme Court.
Finally, and this is the least of anyones worries, but I went by two gas stations today that were closed because they had no gas. And ironically enough the gas station named "Lowest Price Gas" was selling at $3.99, $4.05 and $4.15, while the Citgo next door (and every other station for that matter) was at least 30 cents cheaper.
btw, most of these links are via PoliticalWire.com.
And now Chief Justice Rehnquist is dead. As sad as a death is, I hope this spurs Congress into not just rubber stamping John Roberts on to the Supreme Court. This is nothing against Roberts, but in light of the past week (if not the past 4 years) Bush's appointees should be subject to such scrutiny. Especially when speaking of the Supreme Court.
Finally, and this is the least of anyones worries, but I went by two gas stations today that were closed because they had no gas. And ironically enough the gas station named "Lowest Price Gas" was selling at $3.99, $4.05 and $4.15, while the Citgo next door (and every other station for that matter) was at least 30 cents cheaper.
btw, most of these links are via PoliticalWire.com.
Friday, September 02, 2005
links and stuff
- So when did the US Open paint their courts blue? Watching it this year has been weird... was it like this last year?
- I know I didn't give a movie recommendation last week so I'll do two things this week. First I'm recommending The Constant Gardener, a movie I haven't seen. And I'm recommending it mainly because it stars one of my favorite actors, Ralph Fiennes (who for you Harry Potter nuts will play Lord Voldemort in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, but you probably already knew that).
- Second, now that I have seen it, I'm re-recommending Grizzly Man. A very well done documentary about a man who just wasn't all there. Many parts made me laugh, others made me jealous, and yet other parts infuriated me. Finally though, I just felt bad for Timothy Treadwell. He obviously had asocial (almost antisocial) and psychological issues. Werner Herzog seems pretty fair in his depiction of Treadwell as a man who seemed to (at least to Treadwell himself) function better among a group of wild animals. Unfortunately for Treadwell it took just one of those animals to live up to it's instinct to kill him.
- I never did put up a link to pictures of the Big U Turn (National Park Sampler) Tour 2005.
- Finally, I travelled to NYC in August of 2001 and went to the observation deck of the WTC. Last year I took my first trip to New Orleans. Went down Rt. 90, which runs along the coast line, all the way through Mississippi to Alabama... right through what is now the most devestated areas. It feels weird, even though it has been more than a year, to see roads, places and lives destroyed like that. I still really don't know what to say about it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)