I'll be talking about NBC a few times in this post so I'll use them as bookmarks:
NBC (1): Has anyone else noticed that the show Friday Night Lights is on Tuesday night? I understand that most of the demographic they are aiming for would be out on Friday night at the game so it doesn't make a ton of sense to put the show in that time slot. I'd call it something different, though. You can still piggy back on the success of the film in the advertisements for Gridiron Guts & Goalline Glory that airs on Tuesdays. (I bet the high school football fanatics love that it's on Tuesdays. It'd be like having an NFL game on Wednesday!)
Gas prices: I'm going to start out by saying you can't have it both ways because it just doesn't make sense and then explain myself. When gas prices spiked and topped $3.00 per gallon, people blamed the President. Apparently he wasn't powerful enough to do anything to stop the incredible rise and so somehow, it was his fault. Now that gas has fallen below $60.00 a barrel and less than $2.25 a gallon, those same people are saying that this was some type of political move by the right to attempt to retain seats in the house and the senate! So on one had he was powerless to stop it, and on on the other, not only is he powerful, he devious and calculating as well! Seriously, you can't have it both ways.
NBC (2): I happend to flip on channel 7 one Saturday and saw Zidgel, Midgel, Fidgel and Kevin. That's right, the 3-2-1 Penguins were on! It's a new Saturday Morning progam where NBC is showing Babar, Veggietales, 3-2-1 Penguins, and other wholesome children's programing. I was very excited to see that NBC was going to be showing such God centered programing! Then I read an article that NBC was removing any "non historical references to God" including the VeggieTales tag line "Remember, God made you and he loves you very much!" I was floored. Phil Visher admitted that he was told that VT would be edited for tv, but he thought it would be for the time allotted, not for content! Remember, this is the network that has brought us Medium, Law & Order: SVU (that stands for "Special Victim's Unit" which is all sexual crimes), Las Vegas, Passions, and Friday Night Lights (which I'm sure will be completely wholesome.) So we can do pyschics, sexual crime, hookers, gambling, greed, etc, but God forbid we mention God. (Whoops, even that line probably wouldn't be allowed!) What demographic is NBC looking to cater to?
Did I make any sense? Perhaps. We all know, that it's just my opinion.
Friday, September 29, 2006
Friday, September 22, 2006
Journalism and ethics
The writers of the book "Game of Shadows" (the expose book that makes the claim that Barry Bonds has been taking steroids since 1999) are facing over a year of jail time. They have refused to relinquish the name of the person from whom they received an illegal transcript of Barry Bonds grand jury testimony. Apparently, they believe they are within their legal rights to withhold this information or at the very least, are ethically required to protect their informant.
So here is the question of the hour: If you were a journalist, would you give up your source to avoid going to prison?
The issues that I would have to consider are as follows: The source did something illegal and now expects me to cover for him. There is no telling whether or not the journalists gave their word that they wouldn't turn the informant in to the authorities. Even if they had, is there wisdom in agreeing to protect someone from punishment if they broke a law that is not unethical? Grand jury testimony must be protected or else people would fear testifying.
Do their ethical requirements change if they approached the snitch and asked for the information? I argue that they don't. The leaker is still the one who chose to break the law and is responsible for his choice (and if he were reimbursed for this leak, he's all the more in the wrong).
An odd twist to this case is that the journalists have not committed a crime by simply having the leaked information. This is not like stolen property, where it is against the law to have possession of it. Their crime is refusing to answer a question posed to them by a judge. They are in contempt of court.
I suppose it would have to come down to how strongly I felt about the information. Did my source leak information to me that could topple the government? I'd probably protect them. Did they leak information to me regarding mob or organized crime activity? I'd definitely protect them (mostly because I'm probably safer in prison anyway.) Did they leak information about something that nearly everyone accepted as fact? I'd probably turn them in.
Many people have said this falls under the first amendment with freedom of the press. However, they wrote a book. They are making money off of this information. This wasn't a breaking news story, this was a for-profit endeavor. Also, journalists are free to print whatever they like, it's how they get their information that's in question. If a journalist broke and entered an office to obtain information, is he or she immune from prosecution for that crime? I don't think so.
Bottom line: There are consequences for our actions. The man who leaked the grand jury testimony should have assumed he'd face possible jail time. If the journalists want to protect him and take his jail time, that's their prerogative. However, they are not ethically required to protect him from the consequences of his own actions.
Well, that's just my opinion. What's yours?
So here is the question of the hour: If you were a journalist, would you give up your source to avoid going to prison?
The issues that I would have to consider are as follows: The source did something illegal and now expects me to cover for him. There is no telling whether or not the journalists gave their word that they wouldn't turn the informant in to the authorities. Even if they had, is there wisdom in agreeing to protect someone from punishment if they broke a law that is not unethical? Grand jury testimony must be protected or else people would fear testifying.
Do their ethical requirements change if they approached the snitch and asked for the information? I argue that they don't. The leaker is still the one who chose to break the law and is responsible for his choice (and if he were reimbursed for this leak, he's all the more in the wrong).
An odd twist to this case is that the journalists have not committed a crime by simply having the leaked information. This is not like stolen property, where it is against the law to have possession of it. Their crime is refusing to answer a question posed to them by a judge. They are in contempt of court.
I suppose it would have to come down to how strongly I felt about the information. Did my source leak information to me that could topple the government? I'd probably protect them. Did they leak information to me regarding mob or organized crime activity? I'd definitely protect them (mostly because I'm probably safer in prison anyway.) Did they leak information about something that nearly everyone accepted as fact? I'd probably turn them in.
Many people have said this falls under the first amendment with freedom of the press. However, they wrote a book. They are making money off of this information. This wasn't a breaking news story, this was a for-profit endeavor. Also, journalists are free to print whatever they like, it's how they get their information that's in question. If a journalist broke and entered an office to obtain information, is he or she immune from prosecution for that crime? I don't think so.
Bottom line: There are consequences for our actions. The man who leaked the grand jury testimony should have assumed he'd face possible jail time. If the journalists want to protect him and take his jail time, that's their prerogative. However, they are not ethically required to protect him from the consequences of his own actions.
Well, that's just my opinion. What's yours?
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Fashion on the move
First, something somewhat encouraging and yet incredably humorous: The fashion industry in Europe is finally moving in the right direction. At a fashion show in Madrid, the city grounded 30% of the models that had participated the year before. The reason they were kept off of the runway is that they were too underweight and did not promote a healthy body image. Milan is going to follow in the footsteps of this landmark decision. This is the encouraging part. The reaction to this action has got me rolling!
New York is livid. Some of the comments have been, "What about the freedom of the designer?" Freedom to do what? Make clothes that only models and hunger strike survivors could wear? Freedom to break out of the constraints of the modeling industry? Wouldn't that mean making clothes that look good on someone who doesn't wear them like a hanger? Or is it freedom to perpetuate an unhealthy body image? Freedom to try and make 98% of people feel poorly about how they look.
(Here's the one that really got me): when asked how she felt about being banned from the event, one model responded, "This is crazy. You can't discriminate against people because they are thin. That's like discriminating against people because they are fat."
No, really. She said that.
"That's like discriminating against people because they are fat." Like your industry has been doing for multiple decades? Yeah. How does it feel? Now instead of "I can't eat that crouton, I might lose my job" it's, "I must eat this ice cream or my BMI will be too low and I won't be able to work!"
Another designer from New York said, "I'm tired of the fashion industry being the scapegoat for eating disorders and other illnesses." Psst, there is a difference between "scapegoat" and "reason." I think you need to look it up. See, a scapegoat doesn't deserve the blame.
I've encountered too many women (and a few men) who have to deal with body image issues daily. I am thrilled that the runway may finally have a women who actually look healthy on it. I can only hope that print media will soon follow.
Second, the news: The rumors are true. Some may have noticed that there have been some whispers that The Queen of Hearts and I are taking our little Full House out of Massachusetts.
This is true. We are moving to central Connecticut at the end of the month. My family has a beautiful single family house with about 1/2 acre of land that we are going to be moving into. Isaac will have a yard. Vanessa will not be cooped up in a stuff apartment. I might have an opportunity to work at a nEarby sportS emPloyer iN the next town over.
We are sad to leave our family, church, friends, theater troupe, coworkers, neighbors, library (they have a great DVD selection), ocean, etc. But we are excited to see what God has in store for us as we feel this is in His plan.
We thank you for your prayers. I will attempt to keep up with this blog but posts may not be as often as they have been in the past.
We are doing what is best for our family. And I sincerely hope that is the truth, and not just my opinion.
New York is livid. Some of the comments have been, "What about the freedom of the designer?" Freedom to do what? Make clothes that only models and hunger strike survivors could wear? Freedom to break out of the constraints of the modeling industry? Wouldn't that mean making clothes that look good on someone who doesn't wear them like a hanger? Or is it freedom to perpetuate an unhealthy body image? Freedom to try and make 98% of people feel poorly about how they look.
(Here's the one that really got me): when asked how she felt about being banned from the event, one model responded, "This is crazy. You can't discriminate against people because they are thin. That's like discriminating against people because they are fat."
No, really. She said that.
"That's like discriminating against people because they are fat." Like your industry has been doing for multiple decades? Yeah. How does it feel? Now instead of "I can't eat that crouton, I might lose my job" it's, "I must eat this ice cream or my BMI will be too low and I won't be able to work!"
Another designer from New York said, "I'm tired of the fashion industry being the scapegoat for eating disorders and other illnesses." Psst, there is a difference between "scapegoat" and "reason." I think you need to look it up. See, a scapegoat doesn't deserve the blame.
I've encountered too many women (and a few men) who have to deal with body image issues daily. I am thrilled that the runway may finally have a women who actually look healthy on it. I can only hope that print media will soon follow.
Second, the news: The rumors are true. Some may have noticed that there have been some whispers that The Queen of Hearts and I are taking our little Full House out of Massachusetts.
This is true. We are moving to central Connecticut at the end of the month. My family has a beautiful single family house with about 1/2 acre of land that we are going to be moving into. Isaac will have a yard. Vanessa will not be cooped up in a stuff apartment. I might have an opportunity to work at a nEarby sportS emPloyer iN the next town over.
We are sad to leave our family, church, friends, theater troupe, coworkers, neighbors, library (they have a great DVD selection), ocean, etc. But we are excited to see what God has in store for us as we feel this is in His plan.
We thank you for your prayers. I will attempt to keep up with this blog but posts may not be as often as they have been in the past.
We are doing what is best for our family. And I sincerely hope that is the truth, and not just my opinion.
Friday, September 08, 2006
Speaking at Harvard
The following is a survey for potential speakers at Harvard University.
Please fill out the following questionnaire to determine your suitability for speaking at the prestigious Harvard University:
If you answer was D, please answer the following:
If your answer to question 1 was E, please answer the following:
If you have made it this far, please answer yes or no to the following:
If you have made it this far, please submit this form to Harvard for further consideration. We will interview you to make sure there is absolutely nothing that appears to be common sense or main stream thought emitting from your mouth. After all, we must be open minded at such a prestigious educational institution. If you are not suitable to speak at Harvard, please go take a flying leap. Maybe Yale will take you. You may enjoy the post below this one regarding the NFL.
Please be aware: If you are the most successful African American Female in US government, you are welcome to speak at Harvard but you will face massive protests and name calling.
Thank you,
The Harvard Board of Directors
Please fill out the following questionnaire to determine your suitability for speaking at the prestigious Harvard University:
- 1) Are you:
- A) The leader of the free world?
B) A very successful business man?
C) White
D) The leader of an international terrorist organization?
E) Anyone who strongly disagrees with the current administration?
If you answer was D, please answer the following:
- 2) Which best describes you:
- A) I am a reformed terrorist. I have turned in many of my former comrades in destruction.
B) I support them only with money. I have not attended any training camps.
C) I desire to see the entirety of America in flames
If your answer to question 1 was E, please answer the following:
- 3) Which best describes you:
- A) I voice my dissent at the voting booth only.
B) I actively campaigned for an opponent of this administration who was not a Libertarian
C) I have been arrested more times than I can count because of my demonstrating against this administration
If you have made it this far, please answer yes or no to the following:
- 4) Do you know what an IED is?
5) Have you ever strapped one to your body?
6) Do you think Clinton should be able to serve a third term?
7) Do you think Christians should still be fed to lions?
8) Would you consider your political views "Left of the Left?"
If you have made it this far, please submit this form to Harvard for further consideration. We will interview you to make sure there is absolutely nothing that appears to be common sense or main stream thought emitting from your mouth. After all, we must be open minded at such a prestigious educational institution. If you are not suitable to speak at Harvard, please go take a flying leap. Maybe Yale will take you. You may enjoy the post below this one regarding the NFL.
Please be aware: If you are the most successful African American Female in US government, you are welcome to speak at Harvard but you will face massive protests and name calling.
Thank you,
The Harvard Board of Directors
The NFL season has begun!
Number of NFL games in the 2006 season: 1
Number of NFL games in the 2006 season where the refs had a significant effect on the outcome: 1
Apparently, one of the alterations that we were not made aware of regarding the "Coach's Challenge" is the new "Optional" rule. The refs seem to have the option as to whether or not they want to review a play.
The officials claimed they didn't see the flag. Well, what was Nick Saban (head coach of the Dolphins) supposed to do? Run on the field dancing and hurling the flag at a ref's bum?
Yes.
The truth of it is, Nick didn't receive the updated "Coach's Challange rules." You see, he failed to do the "red flag rhyme." It goes something like this:
I must now this field invade
I don't like the call you made
You need to, I wish you would,
go under the replay hood
Then he had to recite one of the following: (depending what the play he's challenging was)
To challenge an incomplete pass call
You know I don't live by deceit
That pass was not incomplete.
To challenge a complete pass call
I have come to kick and scratch
There's no way he made that catch.
To challenge in or out of bounds
At your job, you're doing fine
I think you need to watch the line.
To challenge the game clock
Please stop lighting up your bong
I think the game clock is wrong
To challenge a fumble
How’d you make that stupid call?
You missed when he lost the ball!
To challenge a touchdown
I’m sure you don’t like my tone
Check again for that end zone.
Don't forget, there are hand motions and gyrations that go with each of these rhymes. Because Saban failed to fully perform the challenge routine while dangling the red flag in front of the referees, they decided they didn't want to review the play where the tight end was clearly out of bounds before he entered the end zone. Which forced the Dolphins to go to the air, which forced the interceptions, etc, etc, etc...
Be on the lookout, I've heard that Belichick has a few verses of his own.
Number of NFL games in the 2006 season where the refs had a significant effect on the outcome: 1
Apparently, one of the alterations that we were not made aware of regarding the "Coach's Challenge" is the new "Optional" rule. The refs seem to have the option as to whether or not they want to review a play.
The officials claimed they didn't see the flag. Well, what was Nick Saban (head coach of the Dolphins) supposed to do? Run on the field dancing and hurling the flag at a ref's bum?
Yes.
The truth of it is, Nick didn't receive the updated "Coach's Challange rules." You see, he failed to do the "red flag rhyme." It goes something like this:
I don't like the call you made
You need to, I wish you would,
go under the replay hood
Then he had to recite one of the following: (depending what the play he's challenging was)
You know I don't live by deceit
That pass was not incomplete.
To challenge a complete pass call
I have come to kick and scratch
There's no way he made that catch.
To challenge in or out of bounds
At your job, you're doing fine
I think you need to watch the line.
To challenge the game clock
Please stop lighting up your bong
I think the game clock is wrong
To challenge a fumble
How’d you make that stupid call?
You missed when he lost the ball!
To challenge a touchdown
I’m sure you don’t like my tone
Check again for that end zone.
Don't forget, there are hand motions and gyrations that go with each of these rhymes. Because Saban failed to fully perform the challenge routine while dangling the red flag in front of the referees, they decided they didn't want to review the play where the tight end was clearly out of bounds before he entered the end zone. Which forced the Dolphins to go to the air, which forced the interceptions, etc, etc, etc...
Be on the lookout, I've heard that Belichick has a few verses of his own.
Tuesday, September 05, 2006
NFL Preview
With the Sox struggling to make the playoffs and football season about a week away, it is time for the Just My Opinion NFL Preview show! We're going to out line the surprises and "Not so surprising" for each division, along with my expected playoff set up and Super Bowl winner. (If you don't want to read each division, there's a quick version at the bottom.)
NFC East (Giants, Cowboys, Eagles, Redskins)
With Eli entering his second year as a starter, TO joining the Cowboys, and all the additions to the Redskins, this division may be the most contested in the NFC. You wouldn't have heard me predicting this two years ago when this was one of the weakest divisions in the NFL and we all knew the Eagles would run away with it. Well, this year I believe the Eagles will land in last place. I don't think the Giants will make the playoffs. Eli is still just too young. There is wild card potential from this division.
Winner: Dallas
NFC West (Cardinals, 49ers, Seahawks, St. Louis)
This division should just take the year off. Seattle has lost too many players to have a repeat appearance in the Super Bowl but there's nobody who is going to beat them from the NFC West! Arizona will improve vastly, but you can't win games without a defense. Their aging veterans will win more than the 5 games they won last year but they won't make it to the post season. St. Louis is going to have to acclimate to the new coach and the Niners might win more than the 4 they won last year. Seattle runs away with this one.
Winner: Seattle
NFC North (Vikings, Bears, Lions, Packers)
This is another cake pick. The Lions blew up their offense in an attempt to get better. If I were to compare them to another Detroit team: they are the Tigers of two years ago working their way to the Tigers of this season. They will be good, but not this year. The Packers have already dug their own grave by allowing Favre to decide whether or not he's returning (and then allowing him to play). I think he'll have a 1:2 TD:INT ratio this year. The Vikings are still recovering from last year's debacle and the Bear's D is unstoppable! Expect the Bear's maul the competition.
Winner: Chicago
NFC South (Panthers, Falcons, Saints, Buccaneers)
This one's not so cut and dry. The Panthers should take it, but they are the only team who didn't significant improve in the off season and with their injury prone superstars it may be a crap shoot. Here's what to watch: Can Vick complete more than 50% of his passes? Will the double barrel running game of Bush and McAllister rocket the Saints to victory? Is Sims ready to be a top rate passer rather than the dink and dunker that he's been? Watch for a wild card to come out of this division.
Winner: Carolina
NFC Wild Cards: Tampa Bay and Washington
AFC East (Dolphins, Jets, Patriots, Bills)
While the Dolphins have improved and are the popular pick for the national media, they still won't win this division. The Jets managed to get worse in the off season and the Bills have remained terrible. With the third easiest schedule in the NFL, the Patriots will run away with the playoff spot from the East. Watch for a fishy wild card team, though.
Winner: New England
AFC West (Raiders, Broncos, Chargers, Chiefs)
Somehow the Broncos managed to make it to the post season last year. I hope they enjoyed it, because they won't be back. They've lost too much and failed to acquire the talent to replace it. The Chargers should have been their last year and will be able to power through this year. The Chiefs still need defense! The Raiders? They might finish third in the division.
Winner: San Diego
AFC North (Bengals, Ravens, Browns, Steelers)
This division was shaping up to be a dogfight. A damaged Palmer vs a damaged Big Ben with a surging Browns and a contending Ravens! Now Ben's in the hospital, Palmer's looking less damaged than before the hit, the Browns are smoke and mirrors and the Ravens are hopeful but unlikely playoff contenders. The Bengals should run away with the AFC North. There may be a wild card team coming out of this division.
Winner: Cincinnati
AFC South (Texans, Jaguars, Colts, Titans)
It pains me to say it, so I'll get it out of the way: The Colts will again win this division. Without the Edge, Manning no longer has the same run threat so double covering Harrison will be much easier. Watch for Wayne to have a career year because of this. Also, Pittsburgh offered the NFL a toutorial on how to defeat the Colts in the playoffs last year (They took notes from all of the Indy/NE games.) The problem is, no one else in this division can beat them. Will they go far in the post season? No, but they'll get there. The Jaguars are their biggest competition, but watch for some surprise wins from Houston. Maybe a wild card team as well.
Winner:Indianapolis
AFC Wild Card: Miami and Pittsburgh
Quick Break Down:
NFC
East: Dallas (Bye)
West: Seattle
North: Chicago
South: Carolina (Bye)
Wild Card: Tampa Bay, Washington
AFC
East: New England (Bye)
West: San Diego
North: Cincinnati (Bye)
South: Indianapolis
Wild Card: Miami and Pittsburgh
Second Round teams:
NFC
Dallas
Carolina
Seattle
Chicago
AFC
New England
Cincinnati
San Diego
Pittsburgh
Championship game:
NFC
Dallas
Carolina
AFC
New England
Cincinnati
Super Bowl
New England vs Dallas
Champion
New England
Don't forget to check back in January to see how I did with my predictions. Don't put any money on these picks, though, because they are (after all) just my opinion.
NFC East (Giants, Cowboys, Eagles, Redskins)
With Eli entering his second year as a starter, TO joining the Cowboys, and all the additions to the Redskins, this division may be the most contested in the NFC. You wouldn't have heard me predicting this two years ago when this was one of the weakest divisions in the NFL and we all knew the Eagles would run away with it. Well, this year I believe the Eagles will land in last place. I don't think the Giants will make the playoffs. Eli is still just too young. There is wild card potential from this division.
Winner: Dallas
NFC West (Cardinals, 49ers, Seahawks, St. Louis)
This division should just take the year off. Seattle has lost too many players to have a repeat appearance in the Super Bowl but there's nobody who is going to beat them from the NFC West! Arizona will improve vastly, but you can't win games without a defense. Their aging veterans will win more than the 5 games they won last year but they won't make it to the post season. St. Louis is going to have to acclimate to the new coach and the Niners might win more than the 4 they won last year. Seattle runs away with this one.
Winner: Seattle
NFC North (Vikings, Bears, Lions, Packers)
This is another cake pick. The Lions blew up their offense in an attempt to get better. If I were to compare them to another Detroit team: they are the Tigers of two years ago working their way to the Tigers of this season. They will be good, but not this year. The Packers have already dug their own grave by allowing Favre to decide whether or not he's returning (and then allowing him to play). I think he'll have a 1:2 TD:INT ratio this year. The Vikings are still recovering from last year's debacle and the Bear's D is unstoppable! Expect the Bear's maul the competition.
Winner: Chicago
NFC South (Panthers, Falcons, Saints, Buccaneers)
This one's not so cut and dry. The Panthers should take it, but they are the only team who didn't significant improve in the off season and with their injury prone superstars it may be a crap shoot. Here's what to watch: Can Vick complete more than 50% of his passes? Will the double barrel running game of Bush and McAllister rocket the Saints to victory? Is Sims ready to be a top rate passer rather than the dink and dunker that he's been? Watch for a wild card to come out of this division.
Winner: Carolina
NFC Wild Cards: Tampa Bay and Washington
AFC East (Dolphins, Jets, Patriots, Bills)
While the Dolphins have improved and are the popular pick for the national media, they still won't win this division. The Jets managed to get worse in the off season and the Bills have remained terrible. With the third easiest schedule in the NFL, the Patriots will run away with the playoff spot from the East. Watch for a fishy wild card team, though.
Winner: New England
AFC West (Raiders, Broncos, Chargers, Chiefs)
Somehow the Broncos managed to make it to the post season last year. I hope they enjoyed it, because they won't be back. They've lost too much and failed to acquire the talent to replace it. The Chargers should have been their last year and will be able to power through this year. The Chiefs still need defense! The Raiders? They might finish third in the division.
Winner: San Diego
AFC North (Bengals, Ravens, Browns, Steelers)
This division was shaping up to be a dogfight. A damaged Palmer vs a damaged Big Ben with a surging Browns and a contending Ravens! Now Ben's in the hospital, Palmer's looking less damaged than before the hit, the Browns are smoke and mirrors and the Ravens are hopeful but unlikely playoff contenders. The Bengals should run away with the AFC North. There may be a wild card team coming out of this division.
Winner: Cincinnati
AFC South (Texans, Jaguars, Colts, Titans)
It pains me to say it, so I'll get it out of the way: The Colts will again win this division. Without the Edge, Manning no longer has the same run threat so double covering Harrison will be much easier. Watch for Wayne to have a career year because of this. Also, Pittsburgh offered the NFL a toutorial on how to defeat the Colts in the playoffs last year (They took notes from all of the Indy/NE games.) The problem is, no one else in this division can beat them. Will they go far in the post season? No, but they'll get there. The Jaguars are their biggest competition, but watch for some surprise wins from Houston. Maybe a wild card team as well.
Winner:Indianapolis
AFC Wild Card: Miami and Pittsburgh
Quick Break Down:
NFC
East: Dallas (Bye)
West: Seattle
North: Chicago
South: Carolina (Bye)
Wild Card: Tampa Bay, Washington
AFC
East: New England (Bye)
West: San Diego
North: Cincinnati (Bye)
South: Indianapolis
Wild Card: Miami and Pittsburgh
Second Round teams:
NFC
Dallas
Carolina
Seattle
Chicago
AFC
New England
Cincinnati
San Diego
Pittsburgh
Championship game:
NFC
Dallas
Carolina
AFC
New England
Cincinnati
Super Bowl
New England vs Dallas
Champion
New England
Don't forget to check back in January to see how I did with my predictions. Don't put any money on these picks, though, because they are (after all) just my opinion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)