Ok, so my Oscar reactions are coming shortly but I have to take a few minutes to weigh in on the current election climate; particularly on the Democratic side of the ring.
What I am seeing from the Clinton and Obama campaigns is exactly what terrifies me about the prospect of a President. Any President. I'm not going to discuss their platforms. I'm not going to talk about their healthcare plans. I'm not going to mention any of their political view, votes, or visions. I'm getting ahead of myself...
I've talked about it before: The President that I want is a person (see, I refrained from saying "man" even though I would have meant it generically)... a person who feels called to lead. One who begrudgingly takes the position of leadership because the citizens are begging them to. I want a George Washington, who twice retired from public office before finally being able to retire to Mount Vernon. I want a Caesar Augustus, who thrice refused to return as Caesar before he could ignore his fellow Romans' pleas no longer. I want Thomas Jefferson, who basically said that his name would be on the ballot and vote for him if you wanted to, otherwise, he'd be more than happy to stay at Monticello.
I do not see any of these people from the left side of the aisle. What I am seeing in our Democratic candidates is a hunger, a drive, a desire, an incomparable yearning for the power of the White House. I see two similar candidates attempting to destroy each other because they both want the title so badly. These aren't people who are concerned about the status of their platforms. They share so many of the same ideas that it doesn't matter which one of them is elected: Healthcare would be a huge topic; the war would be altered; minimum wage would change... These are two people whose primary goal is the advancement of themselves, not their country.
Compare this to Mitt Romney: He threw in the towel (to continue the boxing metaphor) because he wanted the Republican Candidate to be able to focus on a national campaign, rather than spend time and money attempting to sway like-minded voters. Here is a man who would rather see another Republican in office over someone who holds political views that differ from his own.
The Democrats, meanwhile, are causing irreparable damage to each other as they attempt to claw their way to the nomination. Every sound-bite, every photograph, every stab, jab, and upper cut is ammunition that the Republicans can use again during the national campaign.
It's not the office of power that frightens me. It is the person who so strongly and blatantly desires that power who does. I want a candidate, a President, who's first concern is for the country, not one who's first concern is for themselves.
This is why I fear, yes fear, a Clinton or Obama Presidency. It is not their spoken plans, policies, or platforms. It is that characteristic that recklessly drives them to ceaselessly strive for the Oval Office, letting no one stand in their way. That need for power that knows no satisfaction.
Of course, I could be wrong in all of this. It's possible that what I'm seeing as a desire for power is, in fact, simply a desire for posterity. If either were to win, they would be first in their respective uniqueness: First Woman, First African American. (Of course, the insatiable desire to have your name in the history books is not much of a step from the lust for power...) Or, perhaps once one is nominated and has the full support of their party all of this will change. But it won't remove it entirely. This episode will still remain, regardless of what type of national campaign they run. Right now, it's what I see, and it's just my opinion.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
35 Seconds
The more I think about it, the more I realize just how close the Patriots came to "perfection." They were in the lead until the last 35 seconds of the 4th quarter. 35 seconds. They were one muffed interception short, one unmade holding call short, one ball on a helmet short of 19-0. 35 seconds! Read this paragraph 2 & 1/2 times. That's about 35 seconds.
The jury is still out on if that thought is comforting, or more crushing than before.
After reviewing the play that is still seeking a name (currently called The Play, The Play To Be Named Later, The Great Escape, and Immaculate Reception II) the more I am convinced that the egregious no-call was not the non-sack, rather it was the no call on the two offensive linemen holding and one blocking in the back. Those calls are not usually made when the offense happens as the QB is tackled, however, as soon as Eli "escaped" the flags should have flown. If all of the penalties could be assessed at once, it would have been 3 and 40. Of course, this is not possible, but they still would have faced 3rd and 15 rather than making Super Bowl history.
For those of you who think that I'm just being bitter when it comes to my gripes about the officiating. Consider this: NFL.com had a segment called "Official Review." In this 5 to 8 minute video clip the NFL.com reporter grills the VP of NFL officials regarding questionable or obscure calls made that week. They even continued this during the post season. Why is it that the cowards at NFL.com (run by the NFL, mind you) decided that they would not have him explain the questionable calls during Super Bowl XLII? Could it be because the biggest question mark leads directly to a Giants victory?
There is a Super Bowl "curse" that many may not be aware of: 7 of the last 9 losers of the Super Bowl failed to even make it to the playoffs the following year. A few of them ended up finishing dead last in their division. I predict a dramatic reversal of this curse. Not only will the loser of the Super Bowl make it to the playoffs and return to the Big Game. But I also predict that it will be the winner of this year's NFL Championship game that will fail to make next year's post season. (Especially if the Redskins are able to weasel Chad Johnson away from the Bengals) You heard it here first: we will not see Eli and the Giants in the playoffs next year.
Here are the last nine Super Bowl losers. Which teams managed to claw their way back to the post season the year after their loss?
Bears XLI
Seahawks XL
Eagles XXXIX
Panthers XXXVIII
Raiders XXXVII
Rams XXXVI
Giants XXXV
Titans XXXIV
Falcons XXXIII
One record that was set this year by the Patriots will continue to notch additional tallies: Consecutive regular season wins spanning multiple seasons. They surpassed their own record of 18 this year having won the last three games of 2006 and all of 2007. If they have a decent winning streak to open 2008 this will be a record that will stand for a long long time!
Now, having said all of that: Pitchers and catchers report tomorrow! Bring on the baseball!
Go Red Sox!
The jury is still out on if that thought is comforting, or more crushing than before.
After reviewing the play that is still seeking a name (currently called The Play, The Play To Be Named Later, The Great Escape, and Immaculate Reception II) the more I am convinced that the egregious no-call was not the non-sack, rather it was the no call on the two offensive linemen holding and one blocking in the back. Those calls are not usually made when the offense happens as the QB is tackled, however, as soon as Eli "escaped" the flags should have flown. If all of the penalties could be assessed at once, it would have been 3 and 40. Of course, this is not possible, but they still would have faced 3rd and 15 rather than making Super Bowl history.
For those of you who think that I'm just being bitter when it comes to my gripes about the officiating. Consider this: NFL.com had a segment called "Official Review." In this 5 to 8 minute video clip the NFL.com reporter grills the VP of NFL officials regarding questionable or obscure calls made that week. They even continued this during the post season. Why is it that the cowards at NFL.com (run by the NFL, mind you) decided that they would not have him explain the questionable calls during Super Bowl XLII? Could it be because the biggest question mark leads directly to a Giants victory?
There is a Super Bowl "curse" that many may not be aware of: 7 of the last 9 losers of the Super Bowl failed to even make it to the playoffs the following year. A few of them ended up finishing dead last in their division. I predict a dramatic reversal of this curse. Not only will the loser of the Super Bowl make it to the playoffs and return to the Big Game. But I also predict that it will be the winner of this year's NFL Championship game that will fail to make next year's post season. (Especially if the Redskins are able to weasel Chad Johnson away from the Bengals) You heard it here first: we will not see Eli and the Giants in the playoffs next year.
Here are the last nine Super Bowl losers. Which teams managed to claw their way back to the post season the year after their loss?
Seahawks XL
Eagles XXXIX
Panthers XXXVIII
Raiders XXXVII
Rams XXXVI
Giants XXXV
Titans XXXIV
Falcons XXXIII
One record that was set this year by the Patriots will continue to notch additional tallies: Consecutive regular season wins spanning multiple seasons. They surpassed their own record of 18 this year having won the last three games of 2006 and all of 2007. If they have a decent winning streak to open 2008 this will be a record that will stand for a long long time!
Now, having said all of that: Pitchers and catchers report tomorrow! Bring on the baseball!
Go Red Sox!
Monday, February 04, 2008
18 - 1
Why, oh why, did they print this book? The cover says that it's for information only, but both Target and Walmart have been carrying it for 2 weeks, now.
Why, oh why, did he wear this sweatshirt, when all we know him in is this one?
Why didn't we execute the quick passes, short passes that elevated us over the Chargers and makes people think that Peyton is a QB phenom?
Why didn't we attempt the 47 yard field goal?
There were many missed opportunities. The Patriots had three chances to put the game away if their defensive backs could have hung onto the ball. It seems to me that Brady's ankle must have been bothering him. His inability to be accurate down the field was glaringly obvious and completely removed the deep threat. The injury to Kevin Faulk was also a huge detriment to the Patriots. It's hard to win when someone that many picked to be MVP is no longer in the game.
And we can't ignore the amazing play of the Giant's Defensive line. The Patriots are nutorious for not only being able to stop the front four, but picking off blitzers as well. They did neither in this game.
That all being said, how can I comment on a football game without mentioning the men in black & white? I'm going to offer a critique of three questionable calls; all of which had an affect on the outcome of the game. I'll list them from most obvious to least.
2nd Quarter: 3-7, Patriots. Giants driving. Toomer runs down the left sideline. The ball is somewhat under-thrown. Toomer puts his hand on the face mask of the cornerback, extends his arm, pushing the defensive back out of the way. He cut to the sideline and made the catch. Call on the field: reception. Correct call: Offensive pass interference. Result of the play: 1st down on NE 19, rather than 3rd and 20 on NY's 28.
2nd Quarter: 3-7, Patriots. Giants have the ball. Eli muffs a hand-off to Bradshaw on NY 33 yard line! The ball falls and the Patriots fall on it. The Patriot who fell on the ball is the only man within 3 feet of it. He lays on it for a few seconds and then Bradshaw rolls him over and takes the ball from him while he is on the ground. Call on the field: Giants recovered the fumble. Correct call: Down by contact, Patriot's ball, short field. This would have been a fantastic opportunity for the Patriots to go up by two scores. It was denied because, for some reason, referees like to see who comes away with the ball. Rather than call the person with the ball down by contact. (Of course, if every play were refereed the way a fumble is, then you could strip the ball from a running back while he's on the bottom of the pile and, as long as you come away with it, it's your ball.) This is not a reviewable play.
4th Quarter: 14-10 Patriots. Giants driving. 3rd and 5 from the NYG 44 yrd line. Well out of Field Goal range. Manning scrambles. Grabbed by several Patriot defensive lineman. He escapes and throws the ball 32 yards to Tyree keeping the drive alive. Call on the field: Completion. 1st down. Correct call: Sack, forward progress ended. 4th down. The Rules clearly state "Officials are to blow the play dead as soon as the quarterback is clearly in the grasp and control of any tackler, and his safety is in jeopardy." They never should have allowed him to continue the play. This is the single biggest blown call of the game.
That being said, I will not go as far as some who claim that the NFL did not want the Patriots to go 19-0. Had that been the case, the last team they would have orchestrated them playing would have been the New York Giants.
It is unfortunate that the better team did not win this game. Man for man, position for position, the Patriots are, without a doubt, the better team. How can anyone claim that a team that is 10-6 is the best team in the NFL, when there were three teams that went 13-3, two that went 11-5, and one that managed 16-0? And let's also consider the strength of their schedules. The Giants were 1-5 against teams with a winning record. All of their opponents had a combined winning percentage of .515. Their 10 wins came against teams that had a winning percentage of .375! The Giants played 6 games against teams that went to the playoffs. They lost 5 of them and were out-scored 137-188 through the course of all six. The Patriots also played 6 playoff bound teams (avg winning percentage: .688) and defeated them by a margain of 234-116.
I have a solution that would make it more likely the team that emerges triumphant from the NFL playoffs would be the best team of the season. Here's my idea (Hear me out before you start hating it.): When teams face off in the playoffs, the team with the better record starts the game with points. The points they get at the beginning of the game would be equal to the number of games they are over their opponent. A match-up of a 13-3 team vs a 10-6 team would provide the 13-3 team 3 points at kickoff. Not insurmountable, but recognizes that one team played better all year, compared to another team that might have struggled, snuck into the playoffs and finally started clicking. With this scoring system, the 2000-2001 Patriots would not have won the Super Bowl.
It's amazing that people were asking "Is this the greatest football team ever?" Comparing them to the Cowboys of the 90s, 49ers of the 80s, Steelers of the 70s, and Packers of the 60's. Yet, as soon as the Patriots fell to the Giants, this discussion ended. Why? The '72 Dolphins are not on this list. No team listed above ever went 16-0 (or 14-0 for that matter, or 12-0 in the strike shortened season). No team has ever defeated 8 of the 11 other playoff teams in one season! No team has score more points, recorded more touchdowns, spread the touchdowns among as many players, had more net points, or won as many games in the regular season (to name a few attributes of the 2007 Patriots.) I'm not declaring this team the greatest ever. But the discussion should still be open.
I'm still recovering from the only loss the Patriots experienced this season. I've been tossing around the conundrum of would I rather they went 15-1 and won it all? Or is it better that they've gone 16-0, but lost in the Big Game? As crushing as the defeat in the Super Bowl was, and as notorious as it will become, the 2007 Patriots are the only team to win 16 consecutive regular season games, the only team to win 18 consecutive games in the same season, and the only team to win 19 consecutive regular season games over the course of two seasons (and counting. They won the last 3 of 2006, all 16 of 2008, and can keep their streak alive in the beginning of 2008.) I was asked if Brady got hurt while trying to beat the Giants the first time if it would have been worth it. My answer: Yes. An unbeaten season is an amazing feat. The Super Bowl is a tournament, and as any NCAA 8th seed will tell you: upsets happen in tournaments. Upsets happen on the football field. And I think it will be a long long time before we see another team hit 16-0!
Go Patriots!
Why, oh why, did he wear this sweatshirt, when all we know him in is this one?
Why didn't we execute the quick passes, short passes that elevated us over the Chargers and makes people think that Peyton is a QB phenom?
Why didn't we attempt the 47 yard field goal?
There were many missed opportunities. The Patriots had three chances to put the game away if their defensive backs could have hung onto the ball. It seems to me that Brady's ankle must have been bothering him. His inability to be accurate down the field was glaringly obvious and completely removed the deep threat. The injury to Kevin Faulk was also a huge detriment to the Patriots. It's hard to win when someone that many picked to be MVP is no longer in the game.
And we can't ignore the amazing play of the Giant's Defensive line. The Patriots are nutorious for not only being able to stop the front four, but picking off blitzers as well. They did neither in this game.
That all being said, how can I comment on a football game without mentioning the men in black & white? I'm going to offer a critique of three questionable calls; all of which had an affect on the outcome of the game. I'll list them from most obvious to least.
2nd Quarter: 3-7, Patriots. Giants driving. Toomer runs down the left sideline. The ball is somewhat under-thrown. Toomer puts his hand on the face mask of the cornerback, extends his arm, pushing the defensive back out of the way. He cut to the sideline and made the catch. Call on the field: reception. Correct call: Offensive pass interference. Result of the play: 1st down on NE 19, rather than 3rd and 20 on NY's 28.
2nd Quarter: 3-7, Patriots. Giants have the ball. Eli muffs a hand-off to Bradshaw on NY 33 yard line! The ball falls and the Patriots fall on it. The Patriot who fell on the ball is the only man within 3 feet of it. He lays on it for a few seconds and then Bradshaw rolls him over and takes the ball from him while he is on the ground. Call on the field: Giants recovered the fumble. Correct call: Down by contact, Patriot's ball, short field. This would have been a fantastic opportunity for the Patriots to go up by two scores. It was denied because, for some reason, referees like to see who comes away with the ball. Rather than call the person with the ball down by contact. (Of course, if every play were refereed the way a fumble is, then you could strip the ball from a running back while he's on the bottom of the pile and, as long as you come away with it, it's your ball.) This is not a reviewable play.
4th Quarter: 14-10 Patriots. Giants driving. 3rd and 5 from the NYG 44 yrd line. Well out of Field Goal range. Manning scrambles. Grabbed by several Patriot defensive lineman. He escapes and throws the ball 32 yards to Tyree keeping the drive alive. Call on the field: Completion. 1st down. Correct call: Sack, forward progress ended. 4th down. The Rules clearly state "Officials are to blow the play dead as soon as the quarterback is clearly in the grasp and control of any tackler, and his safety is in jeopardy." They never should have allowed him to continue the play. This is the single biggest blown call of the game.
That being said, I will not go as far as some who claim that the NFL did not want the Patriots to go 19-0. Had that been the case, the last team they would have orchestrated them playing would have been the New York Giants.
It is unfortunate that the better team did not win this game. Man for man, position for position, the Patriots are, without a doubt, the better team. How can anyone claim that a team that is 10-6 is the best team in the NFL, when there were three teams that went 13-3, two that went 11-5, and one that managed 16-0? And let's also consider the strength of their schedules. The Giants were 1-5 against teams with a winning record. All of their opponents had a combined winning percentage of .515. Their 10 wins came against teams that had a winning percentage of .375! The Giants played 6 games against teams that went to the playoffs. They lost 5 of them and were out-scored 137-188 through the course of all six. The Patriots also played 6 playoff bound teams (avg winning percentage: .688) and defeated them by a margain of 234-116.
I have a solution that would make it more likely the team that emerges triumphant from the NFL playoffs would be the best team of the season. Here's my idea (Hear me out before you start hating it.): When teams face off in the playoffs, the team with the better record starts the game with points. The points they get at the beginning of the game would be equal to the number of games they are over their opponent. A match-up of a 13-3 team vs a 10-6 team would provide the 13-3 team 3 points at kickoff. Not insurmountable, but recognizes that one team played better all year, compared to another team that might have struggled, snuck into the playoffs and finally started clicking. With this scoring system, the 2000-2001 Patriots would not have won the Super Bowl.
It's amazing that people were asking "Is this the greatest football team ever?" Comparing them to the Cowboys of the 90s, 49ers of the 80s, Steelers of the 70s, and Packers of the 60's. Yet, as soon as the Patriots fell to the Giants, this discussion ended. Why? The '72 Dolphins are not on this list. No team listed above ever went 16-0 (or 14-0 for that matter, or 12-0 in the strike shortened season). No team has ever defeated 8 of the 11 other playoff teams in one season! No team has score more points, recorded more touchdowns, spread the touchdowns among as many players, had more net points, or won as many games in the regular season (to name a few attributes of the 2007 Patriots.) I'm not declaring this team the greatest ever. But the discussion should still be open.
I'm still recovering from the only loss the Patriots experienced this season. I've been tossing around the conundrum of would I rather they went 15-1 and won it all? Or is it better that they've gone 16-0, but lost in the Big Game? As crushing as the defeat in the Super Bowl was, and as notorious as it will become, the 2007 Patriots are the only team to win 16 consecutive regular season games, the only team to win 18 consecutive games in the same season, and the only team to win 19 consecutive regular season games over the course of two seasons (and counting. They won the last 3 of 2006, all 16 of 2008, and can keep their streak alive in the beginning of 2008.) I was asked if Brady got hurt while trying to beat the Giants the first time if it would have been worth it. My answer: Yes. An unbeaten season is an amazing feat. The Super Bowl is a tournament, and as any NCAA 8th seed will tell you: upsets happen in tournaments. Upsets happen on the football field. And I think it will be a long long time before we see another team hit 16-0!
Go Patriots!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)