NFL discloses that Force is to be reckoned with in decision to bring back refs

In a stunning announcement,Commissioner Roger Goodell revealed the real truth behind the pressure to get the NFL referees back working.  Fittingly, the Green Bay Packers were the ones to apply pressure on the league to make a deal happen, following their controversial last second loss this past Monday night to Seattle.  The play that won the game for the Seahawks caused a major outcry throughout the nation, as an embarrassingly poor call on the hail mary touchdown to Golden Tate gave Seattle the win.

Since last year's loss to the Giants in the playoffs, promient Green Bay players, including Aaron Rodgers, Clay Matthews, and Jarrett Bush have blamed defeats on "beating ourselves," giving no credit to Giants or 49ers for their victories.  However, the true nature of how the Packers beat themselves has been hushed until now by the league and ties in to the NFL's rush to get a deal done in the referee lockout.

In an exclusive interview yesterday, Rodgers explained the process of their discovery.  "We first got a hint that Force manipulation was involved after the 49ers game to start the season.  After talking with teammates in the locker room, we realized that there were large gaps of the game where our minds went suddenly blank, coincidentally before big plays by the Niners."  Rodgers was concerned enough by this that he finally reviewed film from the Giants game in last year's playoffs and saw significant lapses in concentration by his receievers.  "Jermichael and Greg would never drop balls like that in such clutch situations if there was not something else going on.  The only explanation is that the Giants have a Sith Lord on their bench who was manipulating our thoughts to give the Giants the edge.   Even the best efforts of the referees to even the playing field in that game wasn't enough to counteract the Force.  I will never underestimate it again. Personally, I suspect Coughlin.  He looks like Palpatine."

Jets' coach Rex Ryan.  Of Hutt descent?

On further investigation of the game tape from the opening game against the Niners, Jarrett Bush has also saw evidence of mind tricks.  "Everyone in the league knows that I am one of the top cornerbacks.  There is no way those chump receivers of Frisco could get the better of me without that voodoo religion.  Both of those Harbaughs are clearly creatures of the Dark Side...I never seen such rage channeled to winning football games."  As an aside, the seeming success of head coaches who are either angry, fat or both may be explained by this theory.  Anger, as is well known, is a passion that fuels the power of the dark side of the Force;  therefore it raises suspicion about force sensitivity in any successful coach who often displays this emotion.  As far as fat coaches go, it is also known that Hutts, the species of nefarious underworld bosses from Nar Hutta, are resistant to Jedi mind tricks and therefore are not easy prey to the force sensitive coaches.  It may be no coincidence that quarterbacks yell "Hutt" before the ball is snapped.

Artist's rendition of inner lining of Packer helmets.

Any resemblance to tin foil is coincidental

The Packers started taking steps to defend against further thought invasion.  In the game against the Seahawks, they managed to contract with an outside bounty hunting supply company to get ysalamiri skins to line the inside of their helmets.  Ysalamiri are creatures from the planet Myrkir which can create Force neutral bubbles.  "I haven't felt that kind of mental clarity in ages," said Clay Matthews, who though he only had 3 assisted tackles in the game, was still a disruptive force for the Pack on defense.  "The problem was that we didn't account for the refs."


Ah, yes, the infamous replacement referees.  Anyone who saw the final play of Monday night's game is still dumbfounded at how many things went wrong with the call.  From the obvious fact that M.D. Jennings intercepted the pass to the inexplicable lack of a conference among the officials to make sure that the call was correct, the Charlie Foxtrot of that play is mind-blowing.  However, the recent revelation about Force mind control may offer an explanation.

"Mental conditioning to resist Force manipulation is a major part of our off-season training," says Jeff Triplett, a veteran NFL referee who was a contributor to the negotiations for a new CBA.  "We have even got to the point where we can tell when a team is trying to use it and we throw in calls to try to even things up."  This explains the past bias that Triplett has been accused of showing against certain teams like the Giants in the past.  "I mean, you can pretty much call holding or pass interference on every play anyway...if teams try to gain some advantage by mind manipulation, then we need to set things straight.  It is part of our job, isn't it?"

In light of these revelations, it is clear why Commissioner Goodell and the NFL were swayed to come to a quick deal.  Clearly the mental fortitude needed to resist mind tricks can't be developed over the course of a few weeks.  "While we were targeting getting a deal done quickly anyway, we realized the true value of keeping the tried and true referees in place.  The replacement officials could call the games just as well as the real ones, we are certain of that, but they just would need more time to develop the iron will needed to keep the Sith out of their heads.  We also appreciate the gravity of that experience and were happy to cave into..I mean, find a common ground with them in a new collective bargaining agreement.  As far as the mind tampering, that has been in the game at least since the days of Vince Lombardi.  I don't think we have reason to enact any legislation against it now.  However, we may bring it up at a future owners meeting."  When further questioned about the possible widespread use of performance-enhancing drugs in the NFL, Goodell was heard to mutter "these aren't the roids you're looking for," and ended his press conference.

With order once again restored to the NFL galaxy, we can now look forward to operations as usual for the rest of the season.  Already, with the real refs back in their accustomed position, there were no surprises in the Ravens-Browns game (yes, Weeden really is that bad right now) on Thursday night.  Hopefully, even descent into that wretched hive of scum and villainy known as the Linc will not be enough to keep the officials from calling the Giants-Eagles game in an equitable manner.

Disclaimer:  As usual, the above report is purely fictional, a product of the delusions of the author in an attempt to entertain himself.

NFL Week 3 Observations

Admittedly and regrettably, today had less than nine hours of football due mainly to schoolwork. However, I have still seen enough for a decent set of observations, especially since it is highly doubtful I will be able to do so for the next two weeks due to the Chagim. Today, I watched most of Cowboys-Buccaneers, as well as Eagles-Cardinals and am in the process of watching Patriots-Ravens.
-I will lead off with a general Fantasy announcement: It really, really screws up rooting priorities. While I always root for the Giants regardless of fantasy, and against the Eagles and Cowboys, I am in a very interesting position regarding the current Sunday Night game. I am simultaneously rooting for Brandon Lloyd, Rob Gronkowski, and the Ravens Defense, while rooting against Stevan Ridley in one league but for him in another. Oy. What this means is that I need the Patriots to pass a lot, but only to score if it is Gronk or Lloyd. Very twisted scenario there. Tomorrow night I get to root for Aaron Rodgers, Cedric Benson, and Randall Cobb, but against Jordy Nelson and Mason Crosby. The Packers will hopefully score in very precise, helpful manners. Sigh...
- Now, to get everything else in in a hopefully chronological manner. I believe that the Giants broke the Buccaneers. Whatever made them tick for the first week and a half has clearly been shattered by the awesome that is the Giants. Hopefully, they can rebound to beat the Redskins next week.
- Speaking of which, RGIII is legit. However, and I say this having only watched replays and seeing the box score, it seems like the Skins are starting to have issues with giving up long plays. The first one to AJ Green was a trick play, but it was something like three long touchdowns on the day. That is bad. Jest bad.
- Back on to the Bucs game, it seems Schiano still isn't cowed by all the media pressure, and finished an awful loss to the Cowboys by attacking the kneel down twice in a row. While I appreciate your wanting to win the game, not giving up, etc., this is not college, and you should be man enough to learn not to do that. Just take the loss like a man. Really, nobody will think any worse of you. If Tampa does that next week as well, it will be a Chazaka, and they will then have to do it every game, whether they win or not. Maybe it will curse them and they won't win until Schiano is gone. I am making this up, but he really should stop, even if just from a player safety standpoint.
- Three overtime games today, and apparently epic finishes to a bunch of other ones. And I was on Dallas-Tampa... Detroit is a concern now, what with Stafford hurting his shoulder for like the 70th time in 4 seasons. Shaun Hill shall rise again! Bright spot for them, though- at least they had a 100 yard back for the first time in a bit. They may be 2-1, but the Jest still suck, and got really super lucky with Carpenter having a total off-day.
- Zona! Dominant win over Philly, who is about as good as everyone thinks they are, except the Eagles themselves. Thankfully, it wasn't the Browns nor were the rep refs screwing the ravens this week, so Philly finally got its first loss, though its third deserved one. I hate them. Truly disgusting franchise. Kudos to Zona for tenderizing Vick, who has something like 11 turnovers already. And many more! Giants get them next week. Hopefully, both teams will play as they are (Giants dominantly win), but in a division all bets are off. Not that I will be able to watch. Succot. Will go rewind on it if they win. Which they should.
- Incidentally, do not pick anyone in a division game if you are playing in a survival league. I know a guy who picked Indy this week. They were coming off an evidently good win, and were playing Jacksonville, but no. Don't pick in a division game. Maybe if it is like Niners-Rams, but I still wouldn't.
- Also, there is a statistic somewhere out there I would really like to see. Are replacement refs overturning a higher percentage of calls on coaches challenges this season than the regular refs usually do? Twice during Dallas-Tampa, Romo fumbled, both of which were only called so after Schiano challenged. However, on both of them, while watching the instant replay, I declared that neither were fumbles. While I rarely complain about a Dallas turnover, I did not think that either were fumbles, and I am inclined to stand by that. There was another overturned call in Cardinals-Eagles, something to do with a two yard catch on third down that wasn't questionable on the refs part, but rather on Wisenhunt's. He was totally right about it not being a catch, but was it worth it for the two yards? That is why he is coaching and I am not. Finally, an Anquan Boldin catch was overturned and ruled a first down, even after the commentators clearly explained why it wasn't. They could well have been wrong, but still. I have yet to see a call upheld this season, at least as far as I can remember. Are these rep refs so intimidated/scared that they are overturning everything on grounds that the coaches must know better or wouldn't challenge? Maybe they just want to be cool. At any rate, a stat I would really like to see. These rep refs really suck and I am so ready to see them go.
- The Ravens kicker is Justin Tucker. That's just annoying. Does he think he is a better #91 on the Giants than Justin Tuck? If so, he should just challenge him to a test of Justin Tuck-ness. My money is on Justin Tuckest, however. He has definitely got what it takes.
Think that's all I got. I will see all four of you who read this in three weeks, in NFL week 6. Meantime, enjoy your viewing.

Je me rende

Shocking the world, the French have decided to close down their embassies and schools this Friday, due to the cartoons published in Charlie Hebdo this past week.  Fear of reprisals from Muslims over the offensive pictures of Mohammed prompts the upcoming closures, which will mark the 4000th time since Waterloo that the French have publicly surrendered. 

Even the clear attempt to defray Mohammedan wrath by simultaneously publishing offensive images of Jews in the same series of cartoons was not enough to allay French fears, since they were nowhere near as offensive as routine publications within the Arab world.  Ali "Hu" Akhbar, a resident of Vaulx-en-Valin, described the Jewish images as "...really nothing.  Such amateur efforts at caricaturing the Zionist pigs are frankly a further insult to the Prophet." 

French government officials immediately denied involvement in the publication of the cartoons and denounced them, questioning the wisdom of intentionally inflaming the already inflamed practitioners of radical Islam, following the now infamous YouTube video of last week.  However, they did timidly defend the right of the magazine to exercise such stupidity, citing the national French motto "liberté, égalité, fraternité."

Hopes are high that this incident will blow over without serious consequence.  In honor of the milestone achievement, the French have decided to follow the example of the Swiss Army Knife, by releasing a commemorative corkscrew, pictured below.

Disclaimer:  The above, as usual, should not be taken seriously by anyone, but is meant as a deranged satire, mostly to entertain the author.

   

 

RGIII to be Limited to 35 Quarters this Season

Redskins sources have recently announced that rookie sensation Robert Griffin III (RGIII) is to be limited in terms of how many quarters he is allowed to play this season. Says GM Bruce Allen: "We feel that Robert is a valuable piece of our football team, a standout on the roster, and one of our most exciting and electrifying players overall, particularly because he is a rookie of such high caliber and surrounded by so much hype. As such, we at the Washington Redskins organization feel that for the greater long term success of our franchise, we should limit Robert to 35 quarters, so that he doesn't overwork himself or risk potential season ending injury. We have been discussing this issue since we drafted him, and while we recognize that the fans will not be happy with this decision, we can only hope that they can recognize that we do this with only the best interests of Robert, the Redskins, and even the fans at heart".
Evidently inspired by the Washington Nationals brilliant plan of ending ace pitcher Stephen Strasburg's season after roughly 160 innings, the Redskins have taken to heart the underlying message. If you want your exciting young stars to have long, healthy careers, your best move as a franchise is to keep their playing time down during their first few seasons. As perennially lambasted owner Daniel Snyder puts it, "we firmly believe that the Nationals have the right of it, to bench Strasburg just before the late season playoff stretch. Our goal of 35 quarters, a number we collectively decided upon for Robert, is to keep him active long enough to give the fans hope for the playoffs, but not long enough to actually ensure any postseason victories".
While the organization may truly have RGIII's long term health issues at heart, fans are understandably upset. Hear it from them:

"WHAT THE F**K SNYDER!!! WE FINALLY HAVE A GOOD QB AND YOU DECIDE TO BENCH HIM. THIS IS WHY WE F**KING SUCK. SCREW YOU FOR ALWAYS GIVING US HOPE AND NEVER FOLLOWING THROUGH. I HOPE YOU BURN IN HELL!!!
                                                                                                                 - SkinsGirl21

"The Washington Redskins organization is without a doubt one of the worst run football clubs in America. The sheer fact that they would ever consider something as blatantly backwards as benching your star rookie just in time for playoffs says all I need to know about them: Under Mr. Snyder, they never have, and never will be true winners"
                                                                                                                  -Matt B.
"Lolz skinz always suk will never win nething rg3 done GO BOYZ!!! rOmo always wins never benched Best team evr"
                                                                                                                  -Cletus 

Of course, despite the rampant fan outrage against the organization, they will, of course stand firm in their decision. Fantasy players beware, and get ready to dump Griffin as of week 10, because he will not be playing. It appears that this is now a ritual of passing in Washington sports, as first Strasburg and now Griffin are being shut down while healthy purely in the name of long term health. The Washington Capitals have already announced that they are currently planning on following suit with their first round picks for the next several years. If this strategy pans out, who knows? We may see this spread beyond our nation's capital, and become a true American sports tradition.
Griffin himself could not be reached for comment as of yet, but it is generally understood that he fully respects the Redskin's decision and will not complain when he is shut down nine games into the season. Redskins sources say that backup Rex Grossman is "psyched" to get the chance to lead the Skins to the playoffs later this year. Washington fans, beware.
      

NFL week 1 observations (Sunday only)

So I figure if I am going to contribute to a blog, the least I can do is discuss one of my favorite subjects: the NFL. The beauty of Sundays is that you can wake up late, eat, and then watch six straight hours of football (barring OT) before it stops. You then have approximately one hour before the final three hours that come with the night game. To me, since I have to eat dinner during the second game as per dining hall time restrictions (dinner over at 7), I appear to have this one hour window from roughly 7:30 to 8:30 which appears to be very good for blogging my reflections on the early day games (and Thursday night game - Wednesday this week). This will likely be one of those things I do only until I reach a Sunday where I have to actually work, but since I am not there yet, I can say with no certainty that I would like this to be a weekly thing, for the next 21 weeks or so. Sorry I'm not covering the Sunday night and Monday night games, but alas, that is how my schedule apparently works out.
Today I watched (on my laptop- thefirstrow.eu- don't download any of their stuff, ignore all the popups, and the videos should come on on their own) Redskins- Saints and Packers- 49ers. Nothing that likely wasn't on your local FOX doubleheader. At any rate, some observations and thoughts:
- Are the Skins actually good, or do the Saints just suck, what with all the suspensions and bounties and no head coach and all? My take is that to some degree both are true. These Skins would NOT have beaten last year's Saints, though this year's Saints would still destroy last year's Skins. Seems kind of obvious there.
- Is Goodell planning on paying every team to intentionally injure the Saint's record i.e. beat them? I feel like it would be his distorted form of justice. Beat the Saints, get $5 million more in cap space!
- Brandon Weeden pretty clearly sucks, at least insofar as I can judge a rookie who has only ever played one game. However unfair that assessment may be, particularly in light of the fact that he was up against Philly's well designed coordinated assembled thought out overhyped defense, I still think he performed below average, and I wonder how long it will take before Shurmer brings in his backup, likely some 5 year old from Saskatchewan who is supposed to look good in college in 15 years. Never to early...
- On that note, can the entire league please come to terms with the fact that Vick is simply not a QB on an NFL level? 4 picks, one for a TD against Cleveland? Really? They may not be as bad as everyone thinks (might be worse actually), but 4 picks against any team is inexcusable, unless you are Eli Manning, in which case they are likely your receiver's fault (come on, that one is true often enough. And I am totally biased)
- For some reason, likely that it was pirated European TV, all the in-break commentary and commercials for the Packers- 49ers game was in British (I still got the Buck/Aikman play by play and commentary). I have no objection to that whatsoever, just an interesting side note. The part that threw me off though was when they aired their Super Bowl predictions: Ravens vs. Eagles, with the Bills as a dark horse. First of all, what is the deal with putting a dark horse in there? Will the Ravens make it or the Bills? You can't choose 2 teams to make it and 1 to maybe make it. Predictions don't work like that. I don't even need to get in to the fact that the Ravens are by far too trendy a pick to ever make it, the Eagles are an overrated bunch of wanna-be's who always think they are great but never are, and the Bills? The Bills? The Buffalo Bills? These same Bills that got blown out earlier today by the NY Jest? I will grant that they are adorable in their suckiness, but really?
- Packer's defense finally reached the point where the offense can no longer keep the pack in the game, at least not aginst a legit D, which the Niners clearly have. Kudos to them for winning the matchup of the last two NFC teams to lose to the Giants in the playoffs.
- Either the Bucs are better than everyone thought, or the Panthers are way worse. I am inclined to think they both suck. At least they are next on the Giants schedule. God, Carolina looked awful, based mainly on the box score, as I was not watching the game.
- John Skelton got injured. Does anyone care? Oh, wait, we have this guy Kolb who we gave up a second round draft pick, our top CB, and a $60 million contract for. Maybe he can play. Hmm...
- Finally, as every announcing booth has mentioned ad nauseum today, these replacements throw way too many flags. And  Mario Williams is right. They kind of suck. Let's end this lockout please.
Nothing more to really add here, except that I really hope both Peyton Manning and Willis McGahee can manage to score fewer than 24 points more than the Ravens defense on Monday. One can always hope. Nothing like Fantasy to screw up all your rooting priorities.
Enjoy tonight's game, since I highly doubt anyone will really care at all about tomorrow's (especially with who ESPN has announcing them. Ick)

Ve ri tas

This morning I have been thinking about the recent cheating scandal at Harvard University, where approximately half of a class of 250 students are suspected of cheating on a take home examination.  The initial reports declined to mention the name of the course, but in an opinion article printed in the Washington Post this morning (apparently on the website since 8/31), Professor Howard Gardner revealed that the cheating occurred in "Introduction to Congress."  I was surprised by this for a few reasons:

1)  Why anything involving cheating and Congress is worthy of news.
2)  How precocious the students at Harvard must be if they are learning how to cheat so early on in a class about Congress.  In most colleges that doesn't begin until the 200 level course.
3)  Why anyone is shocked that a large percentage of people would refrain from such a temptation on a take home exam.

The first two thoughts haven't really occupied much of my time, but I was considering the third point during my commute to work.  The fact is, as is pointed out in the editorial, our society values success over honesty.  Flaunting laws and/or ethics is viewed by far too many people as a worthwhile price to pay to attain a goal.  Unfortunately, teaching our children otherwise is difficult when they are so often surrounded by public figures who succeed by doing just that.  As an example, I remember having a long discussion with one of my kids over why insider trading is wrong.  One only needs to look as far as our leaders to recognize how pervasive is this contempt for ethics.  From my own lowly vantage point, it seems that running the country in the best interest of the country comes as a secondary goal to running the country in the best interests of the leaders who are in office.  My wife is a strong supporter of limiting public office seats to one term (of whatever length that may be), and I find myself agreeing with her.  If our leaders spent less time worrying about retaining their positions of power, then they might actually make decisions that benefit the nation first.  It may be a bit naive of me to think that, but it could not be worse than the way our current system seems to be heading.  The only problem with this is finding enough of those people in power who would support such legislation.  Catch 22 anyone?

Rotten to the core

Over the weekend, round one of Apple's lawsuit against Samsung came to an end, with the verdict finding Samsung guilty of patent infringement and responsible for damages to Apple exceeding $1 billion.  What, you may ask, were the patents in question which Samsung so shamelessly stole?  Well, as is enumerated in Forbes magazine by Hayden Shaughnessy, they were related to design.  None of these "features" were really innovative.  It is patently ludicrous (see what I did there) to assign a patent to a shape (rounded corners on a rectangular phone). I have no idea what goes on in assigning a patent or copyright, but there clearly should be better standards than what currently exist. The "pinch to zoom" feature that was also included in the lawsuit is a means of input, not a mind-blowing concept that defines the pinnacle of innovation and whose use by other companies clearly hurts the business of Apple.  If that were the case, then the first computer company to use a keyboard as an input device should have been able to patent that.  According to the Church of Jobs, that is likely their fault for not doing so.
This strikes at the heart of the matter, which is Apple's hubris.  Since the inception of the company, it has defined itself as the cutting edge of innovation.  In reality, the company has been very good at two things, which are user-friendly designs and bilking the gullible. If you don't believe me on the latter, just wait to see the lines that form up for the new iPhone 5, which will not be any real improvement over the iPhone 4.  I can envision a Retina Plus display coming out at some point, which will boast a resolution greater than the eye can detect and which will be the toast of the iCommunity.  I only hope that the process of our courts will get this ridiculous verdict overturned.  Otherwise, I may need to delete this blog post before Apple comes after me for using their names in vain.

On replacements

On my way in to work this morning, I was listening to Steve Czaban, a local sportstalk personality who has a national show in the mornings.  Anyone who knows about him knows that he often has some, er, interesting opinions about the NFL and Roger Goodell.  Today the focus of his rant was the replacement referees, who have begun to officiate preseason games this week.  I have yet to see them in action, but from what I have heard and/or read, the discrepancy between their abilities and those of the regular NFL referees (who are currently locked out by the league) is considerable.  While the majority of fans, myself included, are often unsatisfied with the jobs that the refs do, I think that most would agree that it is not an easy job.  The regulars have many years experience with the NFL game, one which is played at a significantly faster pace than NCAA football, arena football, lingerie football, or the local pickup game.   As such, even though most of the refs have regular occupations besides their work for the NFL, they deserve appropriate compensation.  From where I sit, the NFL is being cheap.  For the amount of money that the league makes annually, I don't see how they could possibly be at that much of an impasse over the amount they are willing to raise the refs' salaries. 

There are seven officials per game, with up to 16 games played per week. That requires up to 112 referees for any given week of football, assuming that crews don't officiate more than one game per week (i.e. Thursday, Saturday, Sunday, etc).  I am not sure what the deal is with officials in the booth.  The salary range for an NFL ref is $25K-70K per year, with an average of about $27K (at least according to my internet research, which could certainly be wrong).  Multiplying that average by the number needed per week gives you $3,159,000 for the yearly salary.  I have no idea what the referees are requesting in the CBA negotiations, but even assuming they want a 25% increase in salary (which is a pretty significant raise by most people's standards), that is $789,750 out of a revenue of billions.  Adam "Pacman" Jones probably threw more money in the air when he "made it rain" at that strip club years ago.  Hell, even a 50% increase would be a drop in the ocean of ever-increasing NFL revenue.  Given the current league position on emphasizing player safety and continuing to improve the quality of the game, shouldn't league be happy to spend such a relatively small amount to be assured of getting the best refereeing possible?  Their willingness to lockout the officials over such a small amount of money is like a buyer canceling the purchase of a house because he wants the seller to foot the bill for cutting the lawn one last time.

In a word...cheap.

Kudos to Colbert King

Colbert King is a regular contributor to the Washington Post's op/ed page, with a weekly opinion piece that generally deals with local DC issues or with civil rights issues.  This past Saturday, he tackled the recent comments from the leaders of Iran. 

Article can be found here.

It is worthwhile read for everyone.  He deserves a great deal of credit for his intolerance of all forms of injustice, not just those which apply to him.  While I appreciate Mr. King's comments about a topic which is personally important to me, I appreciate more, whether intended or not, the introspection which they have initiated.  I know that I am guilty, as many of us are, of focusing mostly on issues that impact my own life.  When faced with issues of racial, religious, or social injustice, I will remember the example set by Mr. King and try to be more empathetic to and supportive of those affronted.  Prejudicial intolerance is ugly, no matter what form it may take.  Only by fighting it in all of its permutations can we have any hope of eradicating it.

A few reasons why I am ambivalent about the Olympics

The Olympics has been in the press quite a bit lately, for many obvious reasons.  However, I have come to the realization that I really don't care about it anymore and the reasons below should explain why:

1)  IOC:  The International Olympic Committee is responsible for running the Olympic Games in the spirit of the original Olympiad.  In Ancient Greece, the Olympics were a gathering of the different city-states of the Mediterranean for a religious festival, which involved numerous competitions.  These games were sacred, so much so that Sparta was loathe to send warriors to defend against Xerxes at Thermopylae because the invasion coincided with the Olympiad. They only dispatched a token force under Leonidas until the end of the festival, although to their credit that did seem to be enough.  Outside conflict was not welcome at the Olympiad.  Its purpose was peaceful competition with a spirit of unification rather than division.   This meant a great deal at a time when nations were pretty much perpetually at war.
The current IOC's actions are nothing like that spirit.  As with any entity which gets so large, the corrupting influence of greed has firmly infested the leadership of the modern Olympics.  From the decisions of which cities get to host, to the ways in which tickets are distributed, it is clear that lining the pockets of the committee is first and foremost.  They even manage to wield what power they have over their own partners, as evidenced by NBC's apparent refusal to allow Bob Costas to have an on-air minute of silence to mark the 40th anniversary of the tragic murder of the Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich games.  If you think the IOC did not lean on NBC, I hope for your sake that you do not read any e-mails from Nigeria.

2)  Hypocrisy:  The reason given by the IOC for not having a minute of silence is that the Opening Ceremonies are not the place for such remembrances.  According to Jacques Rogge (the head of the IOC), such a remembrance would not be appropriate and has no precedent.  This is taurine excrement of the highest degree. The IOC was perfectly content to hold a memorial moment of silence in the Opening Ceremonies for the people slain in the 2005 bombing of the London underground.  It is clear that the IOC has their own political agenda, one which is strongly in line with that of the Arab nations.  The protests by various countries to having a moment of silence for the Israelis, such as the Palestinian contention that it would be "racist" (you keep using that word..I do not think it means what you think it means), were ludicrous.   The massacre in 1972 was an act so contrary to what the Games should be about, that by not memorializing it, the IOC members clearly show that they are unfit for their jobs.  The only part of this whole thing which surprises me is that somehow Israel is still allowed to compete in the Games.

3)  Tape delay:  Along the lines of money, the broadcast of the Games holds very little interest by the time it airs at prime time, because the results have already been reported.  There are few enough events that I am interested in watching to begin with and a lot of those don't get aired, since they are not as interesting to the target audience.  I did watch some of the women's gymnastics last night, even though I knew that the US had won, but that was mostly because a) there was nothing else on and b) my daughter is a gymnast and REALLY wanted to watch it.  I will not lie and say I did not enjoy it; to say that the level of skill and dedication among the athletes is amazing would be a gross understatement.   Of course, to get maximum ratings NBC intersperses coverage of different events so that I had to endure a few swimming races and synchronized diving events in between.  The "color coverage" stories in between the events is still as nauseating as ever.

I could probably go on about the things that are wrong with the Olympics, but I am sure that you, dear reader, are as tired of my complaints as I am of complaining.

Regarding the Food Network

I happen to be an avid  Food Network viewer, and I have recently noticed what cannot properly be construed as a problem, but more of an observation on the nature of the programming.
As I was watching this past week's "Restaurant: Impossible" episode today (thank God for the wonder that is TiVo), I noticed a promo for the upcoming season of "Extreme Chef", a show which, in its first season, failed to excite anyone and only lasted a few episodes if I remember correctly. The basic premise was a "Chopped"- type competition, where four chefs compete in three rounds, with one getting eliminated after each one, leaving one lucky winner with $10,000. The nature of these challenges was "extreme", as they termed it, meaning that contestants had to swim across a lake to get ingredients, cook in a tornado, or plunge their hands into the chests of screaming Indians such that they could delicately prepare his still-beating heart for the judges, often including Simon Majumdar (who would criticize just about everything involved in the process).
As far as we could tell, the only other rules were that the token woman/homosexual always got eliminated first, and that the final round was always between the classy restaurant chef and the Conan the Barbarian impersonator who fricasseed dead racoons in backwoods Kansas for a living, but knew how to "cook real good". It was a toss-up.
At any rate, this upcoming season appears to only feature seven chefs, but in a more global setting, meaning that the chefs will travel around the world throughout the competition. This actually appears to be a more interesting premise for the show, but my first thought was "wait...this is just a spoof of "The Amazing Race".
Of course, once I realized this, I started thinking about all the other Food Netwrok Shows, and came to an important conclusion: Other than instructional shows ("30 Minute Meals", "Aarti Parti", etc.), shows that tour different culinary locations ("Diners, Drive-ins, and Dives", "Heat Seekers", "Kid in a Candy Store"), educational shows ("Good Eats", "Unwrapped") and "Throwdown With Bobby Flay". NO SHOW ON THE NETWORK IS ACTUALLY ORIGINAL.
Think about it. Even "Iron Chef America", their signature show, comes directly from "Iron Chef". "Chopped", the newest big thing, is essentially an expansion of the secret ingredient aspect of "Iron Chef", though admittedly with some additional creativity regarding the elimination process.
I have assembled a semi-complete list, detailing the Food Network show, and the show it is based off of on TV. It will not be complete, as I cannot remember every show to air on the network off the top of my head.

Again, not complete, and I'm likely missing some significant shows, but I think the connection is clear. It is only honest to point out that I still watch and will continue to watch many of the shows on the chart, as I personally find them entertaining, but it remains a curious observation (note to whoever thinks up these shows-try something original, please). Just some food for thought on a fast day, I suppose.

Training camp!

Today marks a very important day, which is the birthday of my younger daughter.  In other much more minor news, the New York Giants start training camp today, beginning the long run of their attempted title defense.  I am actually optimistic about the upcoming season.  Many signs point to the strong likelihood of at least an NFC East title this year, most of them related to the almost universal opinion of pundits that the Giants have no chance of repeating.  Reading many of the previews, there are multiple reasons that the Giants should consider not even showing up for their games:

1.  The Philadelphia Eagles (density's team) have once again won the offseason. Through aggressive maneuvering on draft day, signing of free agents, contract extensions, and the return of last year's dream team (who would have taken the Giants' place in the playoffs had the Giants not been so lucky), the Eggs have clearly positioned themselves to win every game and send Michael Vick and Andy Reid straight to the Hall of Fame.  *Yawn*  When have we ever heard that before?  Only every year for the past decade.  Clearly now that Douche-on Jackson is signed to a long term deal, he will be happy and give a full effort.  I have never heard of a player tanking after he signs for  big bucks, particularly following a few years of rather vocal discontent over his contract situation. My only hope is that Vick was right in saying that the Uggles have the potential to be a dynasty...and continue their 46 year streak of no championship.

2.  The Washington Redskins have found their savior in the personage of Robert Griffin the Third (no relation to Thurston Howell the Third or Shrek the Third).  While he has an impressive toolset and it would not surprise me if he does go on to have a very good, if not great, pro career, I do not see the 'Skins being quite THAT good this year.  Even Cam Newton, who by most measures had the best rookie season a quarterback has ever had last year, only managed to elevate the Panthers to a 6-10 record last season, up from 2-14 the year before.  I would be surprised if RGIII has a similar season, and even if he does, improving the teams winning record by 4 games would be a lot to ask.  I could see him bringing them up to 8-8, but would be impressed with anything better.

3.  The Dallas Cowboys have also made many moves to improve their roster.  They have addressed their secondary issues through free agency and a rather costly draft day move.  Tony Romo should have another prolific regular season, and this could be the year where he does come through in the clutch. Jerry Jones has cleared laid it on the line with his comments about the closing window of opportunity.  IF they can manage to keep Jerruh in the front office and IF his pressuring of the team doesn't get to them and Jason Garrett, then I can see them being somewhat of a threat in the division.  However, they always seem to find a way to lose out in the end (at least in the past 17 years).

4.  The other strong teams in the NFC (Panthers, Lions, Bears, Falcons, Saints, Bucs, 49ers, Rams, etc) will clearly be the ones to take the wildcard spots, leaving nothing for the NFC East.  Since the Giants won't win the division (see reasons 1-3 above), they are looking a January of golf.

5.  No team has repeated as Super Bowl Champion since 2005.  The way I see it, we are getting due for another.

By my editorializing, you can see what I think about the staying power of the above reasons.  Below are the reasons I think the Giants should remain strongly in contenion:

1.  Eli Manning.  He has improved his numbers every year he has been in the league.  I see no reason why he should not once again throw for over 3000 yards with a >60% completion percentage.  And honestly, I cannot think of another quarterback I would want on my team in the 4th quarter or in the playoffs.  He is far from perfect and has a ways to go before he should be considered Hall of Fame material, but he is certainly pathing in the right direction.

2.  Tom Coughlin.  If there is any coach in the league who will not be swayed from his course by a Super Bowl victory, it is Coughlin.  He will make sure to keep the team grounded and hungry for another title.

3.  Injuries.  While the Giants were fortunate in getting people healthy for their run at the end of the year, it seemed like they were seriously plagued by injuries to many starters at the beginning of the year.  One of the main reasons I can think of for their 9-7 regular season record is the injuries to starters and depth on the defense.  There were a lot of rookies playing for them last year with a limited offseason beforehand due to the lockout.  This year will hopefully see fewer people hurt.  Granted, if I am wrong about this, it could be a long season.

4.  Strength of schedule.  The Giants have the toughest schedule this year, based on last year's regular season records of their opponents.  So why have a put this as a strength?  Well, the Patriots have one of the easiest schedules this year and we know what that means.  Another potential rematch with:

Whatever happens, it should be a fun season.  Also gives me more to read about during my lunch breaks at work.

GO GIANTS!!!!

Immortality? Not that way, thanks!

As I was going through my workload today, I came upon a specimen from an unfortunate man who suffered from Fournier's gangrene. I paused to consider how much I would want to be famous for something like that and came to the rapid conclusion: not in the slightest.  One has to wonder how the people who have described diseases feel about the eponymous descriptors of those diseases.   If I were, say,  Leishman, who identified the protozoan that causes Leishmaniasis, I probably would not mind terribly, since the disease is named after the organism which he described (Leishmania sp.), and finding new species, even parasitic ones, is a pretty exciting thing.  However, being recorded for eternity in connection with some of the more (or less, depending on your perspective) colorful diseases out there, seems somewhat less than desirable.  I certainly would not want to be remembered for the reasons we immortalize Peyronie, Bowen, von Recklinghausen, or Queyrat (go Wikipedia them yourself).  Eponyms are frowned upon in medical schools (at least they were in mine when I went there), probably in part for these reasons.  Some common names for diseases are understandable;  for example, syphilis being called the French pox by the English, the English pox by the French, and lues in older medical terminology, derived from the Latin for plague.  However, if I should ever wind up discovering a novel disease, I would probably be happiest giving it a long Latin name in keeping with the likes of pityriasis lichenoides et varioliformis acuta, to at least be certain of giving future medical students headaches in pronouncing it (much less remembering it).   In retrospect, it wouldn't surprise me if Fournier was really the name of the man found in a compromising situation with the wife of the person who first discovered the disease.  That is an eponym of which I would wholeheartedly approve.

P.S. I did not go with my initial inclination of linking the Google Images page for Fournier's gangrene. Go ahead...click it...I dare you.

The pet dog

Sunday marked the 6th birthday of my dog, Tundra.  As I did not start this blog until yesterday, I am only getting around to public acknowledgement of his natal anniversary today.  My oldest son, Jason, is more in tune with these events and posted his birthday wishes to the dog on a different website, which rhymes with Macehook.
For those of you deficient of the inestimable pleasure of knowing my dog,  I will proceed to let you know more about him whether you wish to or not.  Tundra is of that rare hybrid designer breed known as a Sibercan.  This is a fiendishly clever contraction of the two breeds of his parents, a Siberian Husky and a Canaan dog.  The former breed is pretty well known, whereas the latter is a bit more obscure, unless you happen to have read the somewhat recent article about their plight in the Washington Post or you are an expert in obscure AKC breeds.  I know that I had never heard of them before we got Tundra.  Needless to say, the experiment by the breeder in making this hybrid went over so well, that Tundra's was the only litter they produced.
We first got Tundra at the tender age of 8 weeks, delivered to us by a dog-courier facility from the Michigan location of his breeder.  He was even sold at half price, due to the fact that he was a "shy" puppy.  Since then, I have suspected that "shy" might be a euphemism for "mentally retarded" in the world of canine husbandry, but since he does occasionally show flashes of functional grey matter, he may indeed just suffer from diffidence.
The best thing I can say about our dog is that he provides us with a seemingly endless source of entertainment, although I am pretty sure that none of it is intentional.  He is most easily described (with all due apologies to the late Douglas Adams) as acting in a manner almost, but not entirely, unlike a dog.  I have even considered looking for a zipper to see if he is just a sheep wearing a dog suit and often refer to him as our "dog-shaped mammalian pet."  The following list highlights his canine deficiency syndrome:
He does not appear to enjoy being petted.
Pleasing his owners only seems to be a motivation to him if he stand to gain something in the process.
If you throw an object at him, such as a tennis ball, piece of cheese, or chainsaw, he calmly lets it bounce off of his head/shoulder/back, without making an effort to catch it.
He will not chase thrown items (which makes it very difficult to play the fun game of faking a throw in order to watch his confusion at where the ball disappeared to)
He almost never barks.
He follows commands at times (i.e. if we are going through his training before giving him a treat), but generally just runs through a sequence of actions, rather than listening to what he is being told to do.
Along that line, he seems to have always interpreted the "sit" command as "take two or three steps back and then sit."
When strangers come to the house, he occasionally gets up to sniff them, but usually just stays reposed on the floor.
He will not climb stairs in the house (either up or down).
He has a nearly constant sad expression on his face, even when (especially when?) he is being petted or otherwise attended.
He has been observed digging a hole in the backyard to bury a rawhide bone....with his nose.
He used to routinely chew on grass when he was a puppy.
When we used to take him to the dog park, his main interest was standing near the water pump and not interacting with the other dogs.
However, this used to appeal to him so much that he would (probably still does) whine and pull towards the park every time we walk in sight of it.
When deer come into our backyard, he just stands around and looks at them (of course this may be due to his concern about the electronic fence..he has been zapped by it before and enjoys it even less than being petted).

I am sure there are many other examples I can come up with, but the above should be enough to give a general idea of what he is like.  To be fair, a lot of the reasons listed above are a part of why he is such a great dog for our family.  In addition, he is terrifically patient with the kids (my daughter used to pull on him to stand up when she was a toddler and he sat there stoically without making a move toward her), he house trained pretty quickly, he stays off of the furniture, he only requires one walk a day (but is a great pest when he does not get it), and occasionally shows glimpses of being smarter than he lets on.  My wifegenerally insists that he is independent;  however this does not keep her from calling him "stupid" a good portion of the time.  All in all, I am glad we have him.

Go read something

Society's evolved in many ways,
As it's been wont to do throughout the years.
More leisure time now fills our average days,
And Boredom rivals other primal fears.
Though blessed with countless ways to occupy
Our time productively, we often fail
To make the most of it, but mollify
That lassitude which does our Sense assail:
Senselessly watching worlds diverse from ours,
Regurgitated shows far less than real,
Virtual weapons, imaginary powers -
Our fleeting useful hours distractions steal.
Profoundest loss Society's incurred 
Is dwindled fondness for the written word.