Saturday, November 10, 2007

NFL Power Rankings Week 9

We're half way through the regular season and it's been another stellar week for Just My Opinion: Just the Facts! Every team but one was the victor over the opponent that they were expected to defeat based on this power ranking! That makes JMO:JTF 19 for 20 over the past two weeks! The loss by Jacksonville will cause them to fall from 7th. Where did they land? Read on to find out:

1)New England (9-0) Last week: 1
    And then there was one! The Patriots have faced and defeated 3 teams this season that had not yet experienced the bitter taste of defeat this season until they faced off against New England. That, in itself, is quite a feat. But overcoming Manning, the Colts, and the zebras* was no small task either. So the Patriots have two games left that concern this writer: Pittsburgh (A saving grace is that it's in Foxboro) and the Giants (If it were the Giants in week 10, I wouldn't be worried, but it's the final game. The game Belichick is notorious for not playing his starters when they are headed to the post season). Once the Steelers are sent packing you may hear the mention of 16-0 on this list. But not before. With a bye next week, the 72 Dolphins will have to keep the Champaigne chilled until much later in the season.
2)Indianapolis (7-1) Last week: 2
    It was the latest in any previous season that two undefeated teams met on the field. They are the defending Super Bowl Champions. It was on their home terf, and yet they were 3 point underdogs. Even with the help of the men in black, they were unable to overcome the juggernaught that is New England. I expect that when these two teams face off again in January, the winning team will remain the same, but the margain of victory will be much greater. The game will be in Foxboro and the refs will be unbiased.
3)Dallas (7-1) Last week: 3
    That is how it's done. You showed everyone how to man handle a team and leave no question that you are superior. You effectively clipped Philly's wings and kept the post season on the endangered species list for them. Well done!
4)Green Bay (7-1) Last week: 4
    I've heard some say that KC is a formidable opponent this year. I've yet to see much evidence of that. It was another come from behind win, but you overcame by 11. That'll do to keep you in the fourth spot.
5)Pittsburgh (6-2) Last week: 5
    Handly defeated the Ravens. Prevented them from scoring the entire second half! Now, if I thought you could win over Green Bay that would have jumped you up a notch. But I don't think you can, so you stay where you were before: rounding out the top 5.
6)New York Giants (6-2) Last week: 6
    (to the tune of "Bye-bye love") It's your bye week/ you didn't lose, so to speak/ I think you will lose, next week/ Hey do not harbor malice/ it's 'cause you're playing Dallas.
7)Detroit (6-2) Last week: 8
    I debated on whether or not to bump you up over the Giants, and at 6-2, that certainly isn't out of the question. But I'm not totally sold that you can be consistant. Seems like you're beating teams you shouldn't be beating and losing to teams you should be walking all over. Display some staying power in the next few weeks and we'll see what happens.
8)Tenessee (6-2) last week: 9
    You held Carolina to a single score. Now-a-days that's not so difficult, but you made it look easy. Let's see how you fare against Jacksonville next week, there's the real test. I see your two teams as fairly evenly matched, but I've got you to win, don't let me down.
9)Jacksonville (5-3) Last week: 7
    You fell to New Orleans, pretty badly, too. Granted, NO isn't as low as they were, but they aren't on this list, and they probably sit somewhere below TB and SD. Putting them in 13th at best (even that might be too generous). A 41-24 loss should have been enough to plummet you to tenth, but considering what Washington did, you only drop two spots. You're welcome.
10)Washington (5-3) Last week: 10
    Ok, you lost 52-7 against NE, then you barely beat the crashing 1-7 Jets by three points? You won, so you stay, but this is your last chance. Make a statement or one of the teams waiting in the wings will take your place!
Off: once again, Nobody: Sure, there are some teams that are inching they're way closer to the list. However, none, as of yet, warrent being a new addition. Once we get this far into the season, there are less teams moving on and off, and more teams moving up and down. Of course, those with the greatest risk of falling off of the list are the ones at the bottom. Watch for Jacksonville vs Tenn this week as the game of the week!

Anyone think that Miami or Saint Louis will win at least one game this year between the two of them?

*I'd just like to point out that not only did the Patriots defeat the Colts, they also defeated the back judge who obviously had money on the game! Someone explain to me how pass interference can be called on the cornerback being taken down by the wide receiver? Or on the wide receiver in the air with his back to the defender? Just wondering.

Wednesday, October 31, 2007

NFL Power Rankings Week 8

What a week Just My Opinion: Just the Facts had! Every team that was ranked last week won except the one team that played another team in the top ten, and the higher ranked team came out on top of that match-up. JMO:JTF was perfect for week 8! There's some reshuffling of the rankings, but, for the first time this season, no one falls off the list:

1)New England (8-0) Last week: 1
    This is it. NE vs Indy. Battle of the Titans (no offense TN.) Ares vs Mars, Sasquatch vs Big Foot, Coke vs Pepsi. The winner of this weeks match-up will immediately be the recipient of a miriad of predictions regarding an undefeated season. To be perfectly honest, seeing what NE has done this year (including holding the 'skins scoreless until the final 3 minutes of the game) vs what Indy's accomplished (like beating TN by 2). I no longer see it as a question of who will win. The question I pose now is by how much will the Patriots win? My answer? 20 points.
2)Indianapolis (7-0) Last week: 2
    A convincing win over Vinny T and Carolina. After week 9 you shall be among the top ranked teams at 7-1 unless you are able to locate and exploit a weakness in NE that many better minds than my own have been unable to recognize.
3)Dallas (6-1) Last week: 4
    You moved up on your bye because someone above you moved down. See if you can stay here next week.
4)Green Bay (6-1) Last week: 3
    You only needed one play in over time to beat Denver. Why couldn't you get it done during regulation? You did what Pitt did last week, you allowed Denver to hang around late and it nearly burned you. Not being unable to buck off the Broncos in 60 minutes drops you a notch this week.
5)Pittsburgh (5-2) Last week: 6
    Not so much what you accomplished as it is what a team above you failed to accomplish. You did what you should have done, beat a weaker team by at least 10 points. Good job.
6)New York Giants (6-2) Last week: 5
    Ok, I understand you had to play football in front of 10,000 people who don't understand it. I understand that you had to play in the rain, and I understand that you had to play in a stadium that's named after a Fraggle. But, come on, you played Miami! You couldn't beat them by more than 3 points?! Be glad you didn't fall more that one spot!
7)Jacksonville (5-2) Last week: 9
    Wow. Tampa Bay has been my big "new guy" killer. I put a team on the list and Tampa Bay takes them off. You managed to hold off the curse by defeating them by 1 point. Truthfully, though, they are basically the 11th team on the list so it's no small task to send them home with a loss.
8)Detroit (5-2) last week: 10
    Just as the Bears were starting to heat up and you were starting to cool down you hold them to a single score! Granted you only had 16 points of your own, but that's why you only rose to the eigth spot. Still, good win, keep it up.
9)Tennessee (5-2) Last week: 7
    Oakland held you to 13 points?! You, who came within less than a field goal of beating Indy, were held to 1 TD by the silver and black? And you only beat them by 4? That'll cost you a few spots on this list.
10)Washington (4-3) Last week: 8
    Many will question this ranking. You were beaten 52-7 and yet you get to stay? The problem is two fold, I can't fully fault you that you were knocked silly by a team that's taking their aggression out for the whole Jets filming debacle on everyone they play and I think that you'd beat any team that's not on the list. There's nothing else for me to do but place you at the bottom of the best.
Off: Nobody: I'm still surprised by that. (and I didn't keep Washington on just so I could say it. Which team not on the list would Washington fall to?) What a week, let's see if the list can hold it's own against the constant surprise called the NFL this week!

Still counting down the days till NE v INDY! I can't wait!

Monday, October 29, 2007

World Series : more thoughts

A few further World Series thoughts:

Did anyone else notice how fast the baseball wound up in Jason Varitek's back pocket once the game was over?! I couldn't help but wonder if he had dollar signs in his eyes like Doug Mientkiewicz did after the 2004 championship. Well, showing the class which he is known for, 'Tek has already handed the ball over to the team.

I was thinking today that yesterday I certainly wasn't thinking like a pre-2004 Sox fan. There wasn't any panic when Okejima gave up the two run shot. I wasn't concerned that it was all starting again. Who ever would have thought that I'd be able to be calm (not relaxed, but certainly not frantic) in such a situation. Gone are the days of Buckey Dent, Mookie Wilson, Aaron Boone. Now are the days of Dave Roberts, Jonathan Papelbon, and the World Champion Boston Red Sox. (I just looks so nice!)

During the game, the announcers posed the question of which team was better, the 2004 Sox or the 2007 Sox. (Which the reporter on the feild was stupid enough to ask of 'Tek after the win. It was a crazy dumb question that did nothing but waste our time listening to the answer we knew was coming, "they are so different, you can't compare.") See, but I can. So I thought I'd compare the two teams to come to a conclusion which was better:

Pos...2004.........2007........Edge
1B......Millar..........Youk........2007
2B......Bellhorn......Pedroya...2007
3B......Meuller.......Lowell......Push
SS......Cabrera.......Lugo........2004
C.......'Tek.............'Tek..........Push
CF......Damon........Crisp........2004
RF......Nixon.........Drew........2004
LF......Manny........Manny......Push
DH.....Ortiz...........Ortiz........Push
SP......Pedro..........Beckett.....Push
SP......Schill..........Schill........Push
SP......Arroyo........Dice-K......Push
SP......Wake..........Wake........Push
SP......Lowe..........Lester........2007
CP......Foulke........Papelbon...2007
BP*....See list........See list.......2007
BH^...See list........See list.......Push
TD#...See list........See list.......2004

*BullPen
2004.......2007
Timlin.......Timlin
Embree......Tavarez
Lesckanic...Lopez
Myers.........Delcarmen
..................Okajima
..................Gagne

^Bench
2004.........2007
Reese..........Elsbury
Roberts.......Hinske
Youk...........Kielty
Mirabelli.....Mirabelli
Kapler
Mientkiewicz

#Trades
2004............2007
Gone.............Gone
Nomar..........Minor leaguers
In..................In
Roberts.........Gagne
Mientkiewicz
Cabrera

So there you have it. It looks like the 2007 team just barely edged out the 2004 victors. Of course, this is merely academic as both pulled off amazing feats and will hold a special place in our sports lore for years to come!

Bring on 2008!

Just a minor side note, Scott Boras (A-rod's agent) claims that it was not his intention to over shadow the World Series, that word got leaked to a reporter who announced it. That's why everyone who reported it said that Scott Boras sent an email to the AP, it was an accident...(I can't stand that guy!)

How Sweep it is!

The Boston Red Sox
are 2007
World Series Champions!


For the second time in 4 years the Red Sox are the World Series Champions! Looks like they are back to their winning ways when they won 5 of the first 15 contests of the best.

Like the White Sox two years ago, and the 2004 Red Sox before them, this years champs proved that pitching wins championships! The Sox pitching staff had an ERA of .250 holding the Rockies batters to a team average of .218, while Colorado's pitching racked up a 7.68 ERA and Boston got a hit once every three at bats! Let's not forget that certain bats came alive when they were needed. I don't have the stats in front of me but I know I'm not the only one who feels that David and Manny didn't really do much this series. The Sox relied on the speedy Elsbury, Lugo, and Pedroya (and the big bats of Youk (in Fenway) and Lowell) This just goes to show that this team is the best built team in the majors. David and Manny carried the team through the early part of the post season, then they got to rest and the remainder of the lineup took over (Even Bobby Kielty got in the mix with what turned out to be the game winning home run tonight!)

I'd like to go on the record saying that I still don't agree with Francona's decision to start Ortiz at first at Coors Field. While he didn't prove to be the liability in the field that everyone expected him to be (quite the contrary, truth be told, making several plays that I expected him to be unable to complete, including saving an error when Lugo made a terrible throw in tonight's game.) But his bat wasn't what we expected and Youk was on fire, batting over .400 in the series to that point and better than .350 in the playoffs. Whose to say that the Sox wouldn't have lost had Kevin been at first, but I think he might have been more productive at the plate than David was.

Looking back at the scoring that I had postulated pre-series, it looks like I was a bit off:

Game 1: 5 - 2 Sox
Actual: 13-1 Sox
Game 2: 8 - 3 Sox
Actual: 2-1 Sox (my game 5 happened, with a diff winner)
Game 3: 3 - 2 Rox
Actual: 6-5 Sox (One run...)
Game 4: 5 - 4 Sox
Actual: 4-3 Sox (Hey, 1 run and right team!?)
Game 5: 2 - 1 Rox
Actual: Unnecessary
Game 6: 11- 4 Sox
Actual: Unnecessary

But I'm not complaining!

Before the MVP award was bestowed, I had a list of possible recipients. I'd like to share that now:

Papelbon: Saved 3 out of 4 of the games. All three saves were more than one inning, one was a six out save, something he'd been unable to accomplish during the regular season. Little Pap's ERA for the series? 0.00.

Elsbury: Hit after hit after hit. Moved into the ever important lead-off spot when Youk had to sit in the NL park and shone! Had some game saving plays in the outfield and game winning hits at the plate. Set a record for most hits by a rookie in a World Series Game during game 3.

Pedroya: Willing to move into the #2 spot in the NL park and it didn't affect the effectiveness of the little man's huge swing. Lead off the series with a round-tripper. Gold glove performance in the field and you'd never know he was a rookie when he stepped up to bat. Better be American League Rookie of the Year!

Lowell: When David and Manny's bats cooled off his stayed consistent with key hits and huge RBI's. Unflappable defense (including handling the awkward throw by Lugo to get the lead runner at third yesterday) combined with clutch hitting is why Mike was my choice for MVP so I was thrilled when he was handed the trophy. (I still say that he'll finish third behind A-rod and Ordonez in the AL MVP voting. Though he should be second as A-rod did have a career year!)

Once again, I find myself admitting something a little out of the ordinary. I was ever so slightly hoping that the Sox might maybe possibly lose this game so there would be another one to watch. As I am not a member of cable-nation or satellite-ville it's been quite the treat to be able to watch every game. But the Sox outscored the Rox 25-10 in four straight games to take home the multi-flagged hardware. So really, I'm not complaining!

And leave it to A-Rod to try to overshadow the Red Sox victory. He's opting out of his Yankees contract and, barring some amazing turn of events, he will not be in pin stripes next year. With so few teams that can afford him and with the fans practically demanding that Lowell be signed (He's a free agent), unless the Sox trade Lugo it looks like A-Rod will be a Met next year. Maybe Texas will take him back, at least then they'd be paying themselves 21 million per year instead of the Yankees. (In case you are unaware, the Rangers paid the Yankees $21 million per year to go towards A-Rod's contract. Yeah, go figure!)

So, look for the Yankees to disintegrate this off season and, unless Toronto does something amazing, watch for the Sox to be the AL East champions next year too! Great young talent and talented veterans means that this team should only get better!

On a final note: my brother-in-law purchased a new couch on opening day during a promotion that promise that if the Red Sox won the World Series, all purchases that day were free. Yeah, he just got a free leather couch!

NFL Power Rankings Week 7

Well, I typed this before the weekend but never got a chance to post it... For those who are curious, here are my comments regarding last weeks power rankings after this weeks games. Without further delay, here's Just my opinion: Just the Facts for week seven:

1)New England (7-0) Last week: 1
    Next week: 1. The week after: 1. It's like watching the Varsity team intersquad against the freshman, every week! Often, I feel that I can see the weakness in the team that keeps winning and can't understand why others don't exploit it. I have yet to see your weakness. I don't think Washington, Indianapolis, or Pittsburgh will be able to find one either.
2)Indianapolis (6-0) Last week: 2
    You may end up with one loss this year, too bad you have to play the Patriots every season. At least you seem to get home field advantage. I just learned that Vinny will be the QB for the Panthers. You'll be undefeated when you match up against the Pat's in two weeks.
3)Green Bay (5-1) Last week: 3
    Boring! Bye
4)Dallas (6-1) Last week: 4
    You keep winning, but so does your competition! Giants are on a roll, Philly's none too shabby, and Washington's been proving to be pretty tough. Don't get comfortable just because you can roll over Minnesota!
5)New York Giants (5-1) Last week: 7
    Five in a row. That's enough to pop you into the top five. Welcome. With this week's game against Miami, it shouldn't be to hard to stay there. Too bad you have to go to London to do it. What, NFL Europe is doing about as well as Euro Disney?
6)Pittsburgh (4-2) Last week: 5
    Killer loss to Denver in the final seconds of the game! That's what you get for letting them hang around. Let that be a lesson to you. Though Cinci should be an easy target this week.
7)Tennessee (4-2) Last week: off
    welcome back. it's like a sick joke, I add someone to the list, they lose a game they shouldn't the next week. You lost to TB, I added TB, they lost to Detroit. I'll add Detroit, they'll lose to the Bears, just you watch!
8)Washington (5-2) last week: 10
    Ok you beat Arizona. And you go up because everybody else lost. You've got NE this week. No one is expecting you to win, but show up to play and you might stay on the list. If New England makes you look like Hobbits (Like they have with everyone else) don't bother checking to see if you made it.
9)Jacksonville (4-3) Last week: 6
    Yes, you lost, but you lost to Indy. Can't really fault you for that. It wasn't a killer loss (see Pitt/Seattle or NE/SD). Do better next week and you'll start to climb again.
10)Detroit (3-2) Last week: off
    Ok, you've been on and off and on again. Just please please beat the Bears next week! (for me?!)
Off: Baltimore: You cannot lose to Buffalo and stay on the list. Better luck next week. Off: TB: I did you a favor and finally gave you some respect, what do you do? Throw it back in my face by losing to a team I'd taken off JMO:JTF. It'll be harder to get back on next time!

Counting down the days till NE v INDY! I can't wait!

Friday, October 26, 2007

This post could cost each reader $0.02!

Just a quick rant:

I was reading a headline the other day that stated that the "Wars could cost each American $8,000." Not surprisingly, this really riled me up! Not for the reason that was intended by the headline (Which was obviously designed to burn some britches), but for another, far less obvious reason.

My first point: This is a total cost. You see, the wars are temporary. This is why we can put a price tag on them. So, we've been fighting for 5 years. That's roughly $1,600 per person per year. But the wars will end. We will be able to say, "that war cost the American taxpayer $X Trillion."

My second point: Don't you love it that it costs the "American Taxpayer" so much to fight a war, but when it's something the liberals want the government to "provide" it's "free?" "Free" healthcare. "Free" preschool and kindergarten. "Free" abortions for underage girls. "Free" hypodermic needles for addicts. "Expensive" war. Really? Is the money coming from two different places for these expenditures? No. They both come from my pocket.

My final point: You will never see a headline that says, "Government healthcare program costs each American $9,700." Why is this? Well, for one thing, it's a hell of a lot more expensive than fighting a war. The (approximately) 2.4 Trillion dollars this war has cost is over the course of five years. Any universal healthcare program would certainly cost more than $48 billion per year (the average cost of the war) and it would never end. So instead of reading "cost each American $8,000" any headline would have to read "cost each American $3,500 per year!" And this, of course, is not something the liberals in government or the media want you to consider.

"What liberal Media?" You ask. That one.

Tuesday, October 23, 2007

2007 World Series Sox v Rox

What an interesting match up the baseball muses have created for us. One team merely 14 years old, the other well over 100. One team has the second highest payroll in the league (and the only of the top 10 to ever win it all), the other is 27th out of 30. One team took the lead early and held on to it the entire season, the other came on very late needing to force a "play-in" play-off just to get to the post season and has won 20 out of the last 21 games. One team finished with the second to worst record for teams in the playoffs, the other with the best. One team was nick-named "kid Rock" and the other has players in their 40's. One team was picked to win it all in April, the other was picked to get a high draft pick. And now they must face off!

It's odd to see the things that the Red Sox used to do happening to their opponents. In 2004 vs the Yanks it was a key ground rule double that prevented the runner on first from scoring preserving a tie game. Against the Cards it was Suppan miss hearing the 3rd base coach and not only not scoring, but being so bamboozled that he was gunned out trying to go back to third by a cannon of a throw from Ortiz! This year it was Lofton's listening to the "Dale Suaine" of the Indians and not scoring on the base hit down the third base line. It feels funny, like the ball went under the 1st baseman for the Mets, or Rivera threw the 11th inning bomb in 2003.

I've been impressed that we've won the games against Cleveland using all of the players in the line-up. When Manny and David couldn't do it, Dustin and Kevin stepped up. Even Jacoby and Lugo got into the mix in game seven. And who can forget J.D.'s heroics along with 'Tek's and Lowell's consistency! Now if our pitching can continue to be lights out, I think we have a good chance.

Colorado is a very young team! One could say that their success in the post season already shows that they aren't easily flappable by the big stage. But they haven't been to the World Series in Fenway yet!

I think that it takes Colorado a few games to settle down, dropping both in Fenway to the Sox. I think they take two out of three in their home park, but drop game six to come in second.

Game 1: 5 - 2 Sox
Actual: 13-1 Sox (Only a huge homer would've guessed that score!)
Game 2: 8 - 3 Sox
Actual: 2-1 Sox (see game 5, with incorrect winner? Schill strikes again!)
Game 3: 3 - 2 Rox
Game 4: 5 - 4 Sox
Game 5: 2 - 1 Rox
Game 6: 11- 4 Sox

Watch for some officiating assistance in game three to ensure that FOX gets at least 5 games out of the series.

I must admit, I'm a little embarrassed to add this, but it must be said: I was ever so slightly minutely minusculy disappointed that the Red Sox won against Cleveland. Watching the losses was so difficult and hoping that they would win was so stressful, that my body was nearly ready for the roller coaster to be over. One can't actually expect a sweep in the series. Both teams are there for a reason and will put up a good fight. Mind you, come the 8th inning of game 7 (once Dustin hit the two run jack) I was very excited that the stress from the ALCS was over and I had a few days of rest before the stress from the WS began.

Here is my line-up card that Terry will never use (along with some of my reasoning on the side)

1st Dustin 2B (ALROY, little man, big swing. Deserves this spot)
2nd Kevin 1B (I'd play him over Ortiz in the NL park)
3rd Ortiz DH (If he's hurt, I drop Lowell into this position)
4th Manny LF (Don't mess with what's working!)
5th Lowell 3B (if he's in for Ortiz, 'Tek here)
6th J.D Drew RF (He's finally hitting here, don't move him now!)
7th 'Tek C (w/Ortiz out, DH Hinske here. Get Tek in all 3 in CO)
8th Jacoby CF (He's got the bat and the glove, use Coco for late D)
9th Lugo SS (Get on base in front of the powerhouse front 5!)

As long as it doesn't jeopardize my marriage, ministry, or mental health (in that order) I will endeavor to watch every inning of the 2007 World Series.

(And don't forget, the last time the Sox won it all, so did the Pats! Will history repeat itself? I sure hope so!)

Friday, October 19, 2007

NFL Power Rankings Week 6

It's like a city bus! Two jump off and two jump on! Or like a variety show: You never know whose going to appear on JMO:JTF! Let's take a look at this week:

1)New England (6-0) Last week: 1
    If there was ever any doubt (just for the record, there wasn't any here on JMO:JTF) there can be none now. Or will the Pats-haters say that Dallas isn't really a good team, just like SD wasn't either? Now we can all hold our breath for two weeks when the Pats travel to Indy (please note, the only tough team the Pats got to face at home was SD.)
2)Indianapolis (5-0) Last week: 2
    Bye week. Still undefeated. 'Nough said.
3)Green Bay (5-1) Last week: 5
    As I look around and see the teams you've beaten (Wash, Philly, NYG) You've actually taken out more big guns than the team that follows you on this weeks edition. Congrats on cracking the top three. By the way: Favre, I've always liked you (except when you were playing against Dallas for the NFC Championship) so feel free to continue making me look like a buffoon for suggesting that you retire (but don't give away any more games like you did against the Bears!)
4)Dallas (5-1) Last week: 3
    You didn't look terrible against the Patriots. You showed some good D and some great heart. But you did allow the most points that NE has scored all year and as we look back over your victories (NYG for example, Buff) you do tend to give up a lot of points. Keep winning and cut back on that and you'll regain your previous post in the top three.
5)Pittsburgh (4-1) Last week: 4
    Bye
6)Jacksonville (4-1) Last week: 6
    Second week in a row at number 6. Do something, will you? I know you can only play your schedule, but show some power. Blow a team out!
7)New York Giants (4-2) Last week: 7
    You defeated a team you should have defeated. This is a lesson on how to stay exactly where you were last week. Next time try making it look easy, or try beating a more difficult team.
8)Baltimore (4-2) last week: off
    Welcome to the list. You've made it on here, not because of who you've beaten (as you've won over teams you should've lost to and lost to teams you should've beaten) but rather how you've done it. Many of your scores more resemble a baseball game than football. 9-7 over SF (The Red Sox/Indians games 1 & 2 had more points than this one!) and you held St. Louis to just 3!
9)Tampa Bay (4-2) Last week: Off
    Here is another team that has found a way to sneak in the back door that's been left open by the absence of such teams as San Diego, Chicago, and Cincinnati. Big wins over TN, CAR, and a tough loss to INDY. You do not have the easiest schedule in the world, that's for sure!
10)Washington (3-2) Last week: 9
    Yeah, you lost, but you hung tough against a team that's pretty high in the power rankings. It wasn't enough to drop you from the list entirely.


Notable removals: Tennessee: One word: youlosttoTampaBay! That's why your off the list and they're on it. Cardinals: We all knew it wouldn't last. A loss to Carolina knocks you from the top ten.

Honorable Mentions: San Diego: Another step in the right direction. But still not enough to regain a ranking.

Go Red Sox! 1 down, 2 to go! Take'em one at a time! Remember, you're in Fenway! You don't have to do it on the road like in 2004!

Oh yea, and one more thing: Good for you Torre for not taking what would've been the worst deal in baseball! A pay cut and incentives only if you take the team all the way?! Well, when you leave and A-Rod, Posada, Rivera, and Petit do the same, I'd like to see how the next manager fares! (more like fails!) Hold your head hi Joe, I'm with you!

Thursday, October 11, 2007

NFL Power Rankings Week 5

What a year it's been already! So many teams climbing on and so many falling off! Just My Opinion: Just the Facts may set a record this year for most different teams listed in a single year! (And the list isn't even using any performance enhancing drugs!) Here are this weeks top 10:

1)New England (5-0) Last week: 1
    It'll be very difficult for you to play the "no respect" card this year. While the win over Cleveland wasn't perfect, it was still a win, and still a convincing win at that. Second big test (SD was considered a test at the time, even though they've tanked since) is next week in Dallas. Someone has to walk away with a loss!
2)Indianapolis (5-0) Last week: 3
    Classic Indy. Early lead + no mercy = Colts win. But one must admit, you've got a very easy schedule. You're first big test isn't until the Patriots visit the dome in two weeks. Even then, you've got them at home.
3)Dallas (5-0) Last week: 2
    I really wrestled over where to rank you this week. 9 points in the last 40 seconds could be deserving of a #1 spot for resilience and ability under pressure. But the fact that you needed to score 9 points in the last 40 seconds in order to sneak a win past Buffalo is what ended up dropping you to 3rd. A win next week could catapult you to #1. A loss with a good showing could keep you at #3. I can't wait for that game!
4)Pittsburgh (4-1) Last week: 6
    Handing out the first shut-out of the season brings you back into the top five. Especially since it was against a team that made it into the power rankings last week (you'll note their conspicuous absence this week!) Strong D so far this season. And we all know it's the Defense that wins championships. The question is: can it get you to the post season?
5)Green Bay (4-1) Last week: 4
    I wanted to send you farther than fifth for the game you handed to Chicago (which wasn't Favre's fault, by the way. It's tough to make a difference in a game when your offensive Co-coordinator won't let you throw the ball, but would rather run using a talentless back running against a D that hasn't allowed it all game) but I couldn't determine who to put above you. Even though you lost a game you should have taken easily, you're still a very talented team. Still in JMO:JTF's top five.
6)Jacksonville (3-1) Last week: 8
    Held KC to seven points: Respectable. Only scored 17 against them: somewhat troubling, but the victory moves you up the ladder.
7)New York Giants (3-2) Last week: 10
    Another come from behind win. Playing in the only NFL game where both teams are the home team you managed to over come a late deficit to the Jets (who are none too shabby.) Welcome to the highest you've been on the list since week 1.
8)Tennessee (3-1) Last week: 9
    You didn't climb like Jacksonville because you had way more trouble with Atlanta than you should have. But, in the end a win's a win and it ticks you up one notch.
9)Washington (3-1) Last week: Off
    You've one loss, and it's to division rivals the Giants. You easily defeated Detroit (another JMO:JTF dropout), not to mention a victory over NFC east enemy Philly. You're not looking to bad right about now.
10)Cardinals (3-2) Last week: Off
    What a year! The Cleveland Browns have been on this list. The Detroit Lions have been as high as #7. I was totally wrong about Favre. Now the Arizona Cardinals are in the top 10 of the NFL. I checked your schedule. You've beaten some tough teams (Seattle and Pittsburgh) and, at least for right now, you deserve it. (Don't make me regret it by losing to St Louis or anything like that!)


Notable removals: Detroit: What is up?! One week you lose by a land slide to Philly, then you beat Chicago like they are a Powder Puff team, then you lose to Washington like you needed a map to the end zone? Inconsistent play does not warrant a spot on the list! Seattle: Don't I have egg on my face. And it's Seahawk egg. The week after I induct you onto the power rankings you go and get shut out by a team I'd ranked lower than you!? How could you do this to me? Now straighten up and flight right!

Honorable Mentions: San Diego: Wow, you looked like your old self again! But one good win does not a season make. You shall have to spend another week in shame on the sideline. Chicago: Well, you took advantage of GB's game plan of "we're not trying to win, we're trying not to lose." Which never works. But that doesn't mean we should let you back on the list with your friends. Let's see another big win and then we'll talk about it. Maybe.

Don't forget: Red Sox try to take the first game of the series against Cleveland on Friday!

Tuesday, October 09, 2007

Sox in, Yanks out!

The Yankees Loooose! Theeeeee Yankees Lose!

Alright, that's out of my system! And thank goodness I no longer have to hear "An A-bomb, from A-Rod," "theeeeee pitch," and "There's a strike." Not to mention that Susan is the Madden of baseball! Some select quotes: "They're losing because they are swinging at pitches that they aren't hitting." Because that never happens in baseball. "It's Mientkiewicz's job to determine if the pitch is going to be a ball or a strike, because you don't want to swing at it if it's a ball." Really? Wow, no kidding. Who is she broadcasting to? Preschoolers? Aliens? Cricket-lovers? Yeah, that and she was crying in the clubhouse after the game. I'm sure we all know: "There's no crying in baseball!" I hope one of the Yankees off season moves is to trade her for an announcer to be named later.

Further Yankees thoughts: It's been rumored that if the Yankees lost in the first round that it would end Joe Torre's relationship with the Evil Empire. As a Red Sox fan, I'm thrilled about this. There is no manager that I fear or respect more than Mr Torre. As a sports fan, however, I have to say this is probably one of the stupidest things I've heard in a long time. Torre has been with the team for twelve years. During his tenure, they've had twelve post season appearances (that's 100% for those not paying attention), they've won the division ten times, they've had eight ALDS victories, six world series appearances and four championships. If that isn't a manager who needs to be fired, I don't know who is! (Dungy and Belichick better watch out, they're next!) He dealt with injuries, slumps, and inconsistent players and still managed to bring the team to the playoffs yet again! But this idiocy is all part of Steinbrenner's lunacy and lust for power. Let him make the mistake. Maybe Lou Panella or Ozzie Guillen will be available!

How'd the AL MVP do in the series? Well, he was 0-5 in the first two games. Went 2-4 with a 1B and a HR tonight. Sounds like typical A-Rod October ball.

Hey Roger: Why'd you go to New York, again? The chance to win it all, right? Oooo, so sorry. Why don't you retire again for about eight months and then come back and earn 15 mill for four months of work? Sounds like a plan. Oh, one more thing, don't call us, we'll call you.

Ok, now that the ALDS's are over, baseball is no longer just for the elite! (I can actually catch some games now!) What the heck was MLB thinking putting all of the games on TBS?! Not only did this alter the way the games were called (Game two of the Yankees/Indians matchup was running long, so suddenly everything became a strike. It was either TBS putting the pressure on the umps, or the man behind the plate had a roast in the oven!) but it meant that your blue collar fan (the "average American" baseball is supposed to be aimed at) couldn't watch his team unless he subscribed to a cable package that offered TBS. The SuperStation must have paid a SuperFortune for MLB to have made as SuperHuge of a SuperBlunder as they did. I'm SuperIrked! Go FOX!

So we have the next step of the playoff picture in view: Boston vs Cleveland and Arizona vs Colorado. Colorado is on fire, winning 18 of their last 20 (which means it's gotta end eventually, I see Arizona taking this series in 5). Boston took the regular season series against the tribe and I expect them to take this one as well. Watch for Boston in 6.

Now for some straight Boston thoughts: If there ever were a time for Manny and David to find their groove it's now! I swear, Mike Lowell has been carrying the power load for this time all season and now he's got some help! Cleveland may have Sabathia, but Boston has Becket, Dice-K, and Schilling (who ever would have thought that Schilling would be the third pitcher for the Sox!) Then who? Lester? Four and oh. Buchholz? No-hitter. Wakefield? 18 wins. I'm not cocky, I'm not even confident. I am very very hopeful.

Sunday, October 07, 2007

The "S-Chip"

The record truly must be set straight regarding this despicable political situation. President Bush recently vetoed the "S-chip" bill that was designed to provide health care for our nation's children.

SNL tonight on their "Weekend Update" segment spoofed that the President vetoed the bill because "he hates children."

It is hard for me to describe just how mad I am regarding this turn of events. I hope you'll join me in my outrage.

Am I mad that the President killed the "bi-partisan" bill? No. I am mad that the bill passed in the first place and I'm even more livid that it's been labelled as being "for the children."

This bill is nothing less than an attempt to take the first step to a national healthcare system.

I'm crazy, you say? Ask yourself this: If you were designing a bill that was to provide "free" healthcare coverage for the nation's neediest children, what stipulations would you put on it? Age restrictions? Good. Income restrictions? Excellent. Citizenship requirements? Certainly. I'd probably craft a bill for children 18 and under coming from low income families of citizens or legal immigrants living just above or below the poverty line. I think that sounds reasonable to ask the American tax payer to pay for (as nothing the government does is truly free. It's just paid for in your pay check, or, if you don't get a paycheck (or if you don't pay your taxes) your services are paid for by your neighbors.)

What about the bill? According to this bill that is "for the children," a child is anyone age 25 and younger. You didn't read that wrong, and I didn't mistype: 25 Twenty-five! And the income restriction? Couples making $80,000 per year would qualify. (that's correct too, Eighty Thousand Dollars) And citizenship restrictions? None.

So, here is a young, married, illegal couple, making $78,000 per year. They are both 24 years old. They would get free government healthcare! But clearly, this bill is for the children!

If this were to pass, it wouldn't be very difficult to slowly increase the age of eligibility and income limits. Before you know it, we'd have free healthcare for everyone!

Why is this even desired? When was the last time a government "service" actually worked? Social Security? Medicaid? Medicare? How about Welfare? Isn't there a constant discussion on why all of these government programs need to be "revised?" Do we really wanna give the government another essential service to screw up? And think of how happy we are when we have a service where we don't get any competitive choices! Auto Insurance in MA, anyone? Cable? Phone? Electric? Are we all thrilled with our service from these companies? Or do we wish we had some competition that we could choose from?

The politicians who want the government to run healthcare don't hate "big business." They just want the government to be the only "big business." After all, it's the one they are employed by! Imagine how Pepsi would fare if Coca Cola could make laws that they had to abide by!

I'm more than glad the "S-Chip" bill was sent packing. Not sure what it even stands for, but my guess is "Screw Citizens However Indelibly Possible." Buy, hey, that's just my opinion.

Tuesday, October 02, 2007

NFL Power Rankings Week 4

It's nearly unrecognizable from when it started. But JMO:JTF is about the facts, not about trying to look like a preseason prophet! Here are your top 10:

1)New England (4-0) Last week: 1
    Dominating the league by scoring an average of 37 points per game, out scoring your opponents by an average of 25 points per game, and holding the highest net points at +100! The real tests are coming up next week at #2 Dallas and two weeks from now in the dreaded dome of #4 Indy! If you start 6-0 people will begin to speculate about a perfect season.
2)Dallas (4-0) Last week: 2
    Powerhouse of the NFC! TO looks like a new man (except for the same old celebrations) Romo looks like a mobile Aikman and your D continues to stop explosive offenses. What a great match up this week as you take on NE at home!
3)Indianapolis (4-0) Last week: 3
    Still not looking like the Indy of old. Looking more like the Patriots of the past, doing just enough to win. It served NE well, but can you keep it up?
4)Green Bay (4-0) Last week: 4
    I've learned my lesson: never doubt your elders. I ragged on Favre because of his age, saying he should have retired two years ago. Now that he holds the career marks for wins and TD passes, I understand why he didn't. And it's looking like it wasn't entirely selfish. The Packers are off to a perfect start as they've sent every opponent packing! No one is more surprised than I am!
5)Seattle (3-1) Last week: 9
    You finally beat a semi respectable team! Sending the 49ers packing got you a spot in the top 5. Can that Campbell's soup carry Hasselbeck through the rest of the season?
6)Pittsburgh (3-1) Last week: 5
    Now the true colors start shining through. A loss to Arizona doesn't look very good on your resume. With the schedule you've had you should easily be 4-0. The 3-1 start has you out of the top 5.
7)Detroit (3-1) Last week: off
    I'm a touch reluctant to add you to the list after you got slammed by Philly last week. However, with an impressive win over a preseason favorite (and current season dud) Chicago has you joining the power rankings.
8)Tennessee (2-1) Last week: 8
    You can't climb on a bye week, and you can't drop unless another team truly surprises my socks off. Didn't happen and so here you stay at number 8.
9)Jacksonville (2-1) Last week: 9
    See my thoughts on #8 Tennessee. The only reason you're at 9 and they're at 8 is they beat you.
10)New York Giants (2-2) Last week: 10
    So Umenyiora beat the Eagles. I guess that makes your record 1-2 & Umenyiora 1-0. Hey McNabb, try putting a running back on your left, or a tight end, or double team him! How difficult can it be. Coaches always talk about adjusting so they don't lose more ground. I guess Philly uh just wanted their QB on the ground! Eli, you failed to take full advantage of the myriad of opportunities you were given! Hence your 16-3 win over Philly keeps you at 10!
Notable removals: Houston: Losing to Atlanta you look like the Texans of old. Remember the Alamo? You lost there, too. I don't have a ton of faith in you, so it'll take some key wins to stay on the list. You're gonna have to sit this one out.

Friday, September 28, 2007

The Voting Booth, Volume II

Welcome to the next exciting edition of The Voting Booth. In today's episode, we'll discuss the debate that just ended in Maryland between all of the GOP candidates known as "I'm sorry, your name again?" and "I didn't know he was running." And let's not forget "I wish he actually had a shot." (in fact, as I search the Internet for articles regarding this debate, I find that I may be the first to respond!)

Those present were: Sen Sam Brownback of KS, Rep Ron Paul of TX, Form Amb Alan Keyes of MD, Rep Tom Tancredo of CO, Rep Duncan Hunter of CA, Form Gov of AR Mike Huckabee. Those missing (conspicuously signified by an empty podium for each candidate) Mitt Romney, Rudy, McCain, and Fred Thompson.

Allow me to attempt to highlight the main talking points of each person:

Form Gov of AR Mike Huckabee: (He should absolutely be using the movie I <3 Huckabee in his campaign!) Definitely the most gentle spirit on the stage. Which means I don't remember much of what he said. He's not a fan of the death penalty, but sees it as a necessary evil in our society. He's very against the three strikes and you're out law, calling for more alcohol and drug rehabilitation rather than prison time. Oh yes, and when the question was about the Sudan, he managed to get in an anti-abortion sound byte.

Rep Ron Paul of TX: He is clearly the Libertarian in Republican clothes. He spoke most of allowing people to "keep the fruits of their labor," questioning our "world cop" mentality, arguing against the war on drugs, and tightening up our boarders. He sounded like Kerry when speaking about the war, how we needed to simply get out, we went in on false pretenses and now were mired in a five year battle with no end in sight. He said that when we fight wars, "They should be declared, we should go in with strength, with the thing and get out." He seems to be waaaay right in regards to the economy and waaaay left when it comes to the war. Good luck with that.

Sen Sam Brownback of KS: Somehow, on a stage of nearly all white candidates, Sen Brownback looked the whitest. I don't know what that means, but he seemed most out of place at this debate that was targeted at the African American voter. He proposed a reform to drug laws, said that we should support the people of Darfour with food and medical supplies, but not boots on the ground, and he had a solution for Iraq: Split it into three sections. The North for the Sunis, South West for the Kurds, and South East for the Shiites with Bagdad everyone's (or no one's) right at the hub where the three meet.

Rep Tom Tancredo of CO: It's unfortunate that ___ thinks so much faster than he can speak. He had many good things to say, not the least of which was regarding actually enforcing our laws against the hiring of illegals, questioning why it is believed that a black student would learn better if he were seated next to a white student, and his plan to "bring back the family doctor" through tax incentives. However, frequently, he "pulled a Mammet." (Watch Oleana, Glen Garry Glenross, State and Main, Heist, or Spartan and you'll understand.) Every time he answered a question, he began a sentence, then changed his mind midstream and would began an new sentence before the previous one had been completed. It was sadly distracting from many of the excellent points he had to make. Not the least of which was how illegals hurt workers at the "lowest rung" of our society by working for less than minimum wage.

Rep Duncan Hunter of CA: While he was the most personable debater, the "Friendship Ditch" from Speechless could have been the brain child of this candidate. He proposed a 800+ mile fence along our southern boarder stretching from Texas, through Arizona & New Mexico, ending in California. However, he also raised the solution of soaring health care coverage as capping malpractice suits in order to lower the insurance that doctors have to pay simply to practice what they spent 12 years learning. He also had a viable (though somewhat scary) plan for "leaving Iraq in victory." He proposed that we cycle the Iraqi soldiers through the most dangerous places in order to make them "battle tested." Once they are battle hardened, we can leave knowing they can handle the security of their country. Oh, yes, and he actually quoted Jack Kemp when he said, "A rising tide lifts all boats."

Form Amb Alan Keyes of MD: The only African American candidate at this debate focusing on "black issues." His primary focus was on the disintegration of the African American family and how that's lead to the high drop-out rate, high unemployment, high prison population, etc. Keyes was without question the most talented and passionate speaker. (If I call him eloquent, am I being racist? congrats to those of you who caught that reference) It seemed to me that the moderator always gave him less time than the others, maybe that's just because I liked hearing him talk.

Some of the topics that were discussed were:

The War: Everyone talked about getting out, some sooner than others. Paul and Hunter held the farthest opposing views on this one, with Paul playing the cut and run card and Hunter the stay till the job is done, then get out. And let's not forget Brownback's dividing of the country. (Just imagine if England made such a demand on us! We'd be outraged!)

Illegal immigration: No amnesty here! One of the topics they agreed on. Some delved into their plans more than others, including Huckabee's fence (which he mentioned after saying, "we should be thankful that we still live in a country people are trying to break into, rather than trying to escape from!"), Tancredo's "enforce the laws we have," and Keyes' "illegals help raise the unemployment level of blacks."

If DC should be allowed to have representation in Congress: More dissension ranging from Hunter's "if they want to be represented, give the land back to the states it came from and they can be represented." to Brownback's give them a representative. Most discussed the need to alter the Constitution to make this happen.

Photo ID cards for voting: No one really seemed to be against this one. Huckabee suggested a "voter photo" card, when you register you get your picture taken. Paul liked the idea of photo ID to vote but was obviously afraid of a "national ID card" saying he would veto any such measure (what exactly is my passport then?) Almost all of the candidates tied this into illegals voting and the need to prevent that.

The Death Penalty: Very split. Hunter did try to claim it was a deterrent. Tancredo wanted to reserve it for treason. See Huckabee's comment above. Paul's answer was not memorable, but I think he was against it. Brownback wants a "culture of life." Keyes had an interesting take saying that it was necessary so that when the crime was black on black, the perpetrator wouldn't think that the life they took was any less valuable than any other, he was for it.

Integration of Schools: Hunter said the population of the school should reflect the population of the community and shouldn't be too far for mom and dad to come in if necessary. Tancredo talked about needing more options and a voucher system.

Welfare/Unemployment: Paul somehow tied minimum wage into the reason that there are more unemployed African American High School graduates than there are unemployed white High School drop-outs, but not very well (I didn't get the correlation). But he also suggested making certain professions tax exempt if someone is taking it to "get back on their feet." He specifically mentioned waitstaff. Huckabee and Tancredo both blamed racism in the workplace and Keyes blamed the down fall of the black family unit and the fact that the welfare system pays people not to work.

Healthcare: Hunter wanted people to be able to purchase healthcare "across state lines" similar to car insurance. "A CA policy might cost $90/month and an NJ policy might cost $300/month but the NJ resident can not purchase the CA policy." Huckabee wanted federal assistance for healthcare to be equal to the percentage of the ill in each people group. For example, if 60% more black have heart disease, then they should get 60% more assistance.

Economic Growth: This was tied into the welfare and unemployment section but there were some interesting ideas that were shared. Paul, of course, had somewhat of a laize faire attitude. Hunter sounded a bit like Reaganomics. Brownback suggested location specific tax breaks. So the places that need the economic growth would benefit from exemptions for their town/city/zip code.

So, I know you are dying to hear you I would support. This is a tough one. There were aspects of each candidate that I really liked. I suppose, overall, I'd have to choose Alan Keyes. He's very likable. I think he could win votes from across the ailse. His statements make sense, they are well thought out, and not so much of an emotional appeal as they are simply logical solutions. I really liked a lot of what Tancredo had to say, and if Paul weren't such a leftist kook when it came to the War on Drugs and the war in Iraq he might have taken my #1 spot. Alright, just because I've been posting on sports so much, here's my "power ranking" for the candidates who debated tonight:

1)Keyes
2)Tancredo
3)Paul
4)Hunter
5)Huckabee
6)Brownback

Don't miss our next installment of "the Voting Booth." Coming soon to a blog near you!

Wednesday, September 26, 2007

NFL Power Rankings Week 3

Lots of movement this week including the biggest fall in JMO:JTF history!

1)New England (3-0) Last week: 1
    Big wheels keep on rolling! Three games, three wins, three times 38 is on the scoreboard! Some are prematurely saying 19-0, but I'm pretty comfortable saying "Look out Post Season!"
2)Dallas (3-0) Last week: 5
    Go go go Romo! What evasive techniques against a typically crushing Bear's D! Has America found their team again?
3)Indianapolis (3-0) Last week: 2
    Hobbling over a hurt Houston? Not the powerhouse of years past, yet you still find ways to win.
4)Green Bay (3-0) Last week: 6
    Sit down San Diego!
5)Pittsburgh (3-0) Last week: 4
    yeah, yeah, yer three and oh, but you've beaten KC, Buffalo, and the 49ers. Granted convincingly (which is why you're number 5) but the only team that even had a shot was SF. The key to your power ranking is the number of TDs scored against you: 1!
6)Tennessee (2-1) Last week: 9
    As I expected, defeated the Saints on Monday night. Nearly handed Indy their first loss, you are on the way up!
7)Houston (2-1) Last week: 8
    You almost handed Indy thier first loss. They handed you your first tally in the loss column, but you'll pull out of it. I expect a second place finish from you!
8)Jacksonville (2-1) Last week: off
    Surprising surge. Surprised Denver as well, I'm sure. Keep it up and keep climbing!
9)Seattle (2-1) Last week: off
    Sent Cinci packing (just like Cleveland) Not sure that it will last (hence the 9th ranking) but it looks like you should be able to handle most of the teams coming your way... There just not very good.
10)New York Giants (1-2) Last week: off
    What a comeback against Washington! So you DO have some life left! Let's see it next week to, you've gotten back on JMO:JTF, now let's see you get higher than 10!


Notable removals: Chicago: Talk about a fall from grace! From the third spot to off the top ten. At 1-2 if you wanna get back on, maybe a new QB is the answer. San Diego: 1-2? 1-2? Ok, you beat Chicago (the team which has the opposite of your problem.) Where's your D? (of course, the Bears gave up over 30 against Dallas..) I'm really disappointed in you. What are you gonna do to come back from this terrible start? Cleveland: Props for getting on, but no one really expected you to stay. Maybe if you'd handled Oakland with ease, but not if you lose to them. Sorry.

Friday, September 21, 2007

Here's my free speech

Alright! Finally something non sports related that has captured my interest!

Florida State Student Tasered by Police!

I'm sure we've all seen the video by now. A FSU student at a John Kerry speech confronts Kerry on why he hasn't impeached President Bush and tosses a query regarding Kerry's membership in Yale's Skull and Bones club (of which Bush is also a member). Then proceeds to not allow the Senator to answer the questions. Apparently he sees the 15 seconds he's been given to pose his questions as a soapbox for the spewing of his own political agenda. Once he exceeds his time limit, the AV folks cut his mic. He becomes livid. Irate. After watching his erratic behavior for several moments, the campus police begin to attempt to escort him from the room. He resists. Finally, about seven officers have him pinned to the ground where he continues to resist. One of them gets out the taser. The student sees this and, while still resisting, admonishes the officer that tasing him is not necessary. The officer disagreed and we got the above headline.

So questions arise: What about free speech? Why didn't Kerry demand that the police unhand the poor boy? Did they use excessive force? I read one person refer to this incident as "the death of freedom in America."

Are you kidding me?! The death of freedom in America? Look, if you are going to ask a question, let the subject of your inquest answer it! If you are going to attend a function that has specific rules and regulations, follow them! If you are going to make an ass of yourself and the police think that you're behavior is too erratic for public safety, obey them!

Look, if the kid wanted to spout off he should have found some other way to do it. Stand outside with a megaphone. This way you aren't subjecting yourself to their rules. Get a column published in your school paper. There's no way you can be too left in a state university! Or do what some other intelligent people do: Blog it!

Kerry had no jurisdiction there, either. I've heard a few people talk about how weak he looked that he didn't say anything. He'd have looked even weaker (and foolish) if he were demanding that the police let him go and they were ignoring him. These weren't his secret service (not that he has any, and even if he did, they probably wouldn't listen to him either) they were campus police. Kerry made the right move by remaining silent during the incident.

Oh, and about those charges that have been levied against the boys in blue regarding "excessive force," they're ludicrous. I'd like to submit two questions for you:

1) What if the student were a Republican asking why Kerry thinks the government knows better how to spend our money? Or if he had been the descendant of a swift boat veteran, asking why Kerry choose to aggrandize his service record? What if someone with that type of worldview began acting in a similar manner? Would the tasing have been excessive? (I still say "no" by the way.)

2) What if (God forbid) the student went Virginia Tech on the audience? Would we not be saying, "Why didn't they stop him? Why did they allow him to go over his time limit? Couldn't they see he was losing control?" Aren't way too many people trying to blame VT's decisions of that day for the tragedy? Seems to me the police would be the favorite target if they didn't do anything as well. Sorry people who daily put their lives in jeopardy so that I can feel safe while I sip my $8.57 (not including tip) grande mocha latte complaining about the war in another country that I'm not really feeling the effects of while I offer zero solutions to solve it, you're wrong no matter what you do.

So, children, what can we learn from this? ("And so what we have learned applies to our lives today...") Read my lips: Never resist arrest! He wasn't tasered for his political opinions. He wasn't tasered because he went over his time limit. He wasn't tasered because he was disrespectful to an elected official. He wasn't even tasered because he started acting like an idiot. He was tasered because he resisted the authorities. Look, if you're right and their wrong, you'll look like even more of a martyr when the truth comes out and people see how compliant you were. This kid has some sore wrists and two red welts somewhere on his body right now. He could have avoided them, but he asked for them and he deserved them.

(And on a totally unrelated side note: If a "politicians" job is to make laws. Why don't we just refer to them as law makers? What's the difference between a "politician" and a "law maker?" Seriously, I want to hear the connotations that those words carry for you)

Wednesday, September 19, 2007

A Brief Memo to Terry Francona From Every Citizen of Red Sox Nation Who Bleeds Boston:

For the love of all things good and pure, and for the hope of the playoffs and winning the division: Cease and desist putting Eric Gagne in the game close and late!!

Thank you.

Tuesday, September 18, 2007

NFL Power Rankings Week 2

Some new faces and some fall of the chart entirely on this weeks JMO:Just the facts! No one is safe!

1) New England (2-0) last week:2
    Who needs cameras?! They made SD look like KC! And how many times did LT see the zone? Zero! Granted, this was at home, but it was an amazing show of power. Indy better watch out!
2) Indianapolis (2-0) last week:1
    Almost toppled by a tepid TN? Perhaps the strong showing against NO last week was because they're pretty bad, not because your D has suddenly arrived.
3) Chicago (1-1) last week:4
    Winning because your defense can score. You do what you gotta do. This isn't the offensive power rankings, it's the whole team that counts. Keep finding ways to win and maybe Rex will contribute as well.
4) Pittsburgh (2-0) last week: off
    Two games, 10 points against! That's not something to sneeze at. Plus, convincing wins both weeks. Now let's see if you can continue against teams other than KC and Buff...
5) Dallas (2-0) last week:5
    Looked like you could have used TO's recording of MIA's D! Looked like you struggled a bit against a pretty poor team. I've no doubt you'll climb as the weeks roll on, but there were other's better than you in week two.
6) Green Bay (2-0) last week:7
    A surprising win against Eli and the G-men sending them to 0-2. Special teams getting it done as well. Favre looked superb. I guess it really is age before beauty.
7) San Diego (1-1) last week:3
    Chicago held you to 10 points at the half. NE held you to 14 for the game and LT has 1 rushing TD over two weeks. Where's the offensive powerhouse we were told to expect? (And why does LT get to wear a tinted visor? Is it migraines? I'd think six 250+ lbs men slamming into you at full speed would cause more migraines than a little light. Or is it so that the D can't see your eyes. Just wondering, because it didn't seem to matter last week.
8) Houston (2-0) last week:10
    Looks like ATL should have let Schaub play last year! They might have done better than the sub .500 season they had. Off to a great start and defeated a not-too-shabby CAR! What's next? Indy?
9) Tennessee (1-1) last week:off
    Two points. Two points from beating Peyton and the Colts. An excellent showing, welcome to the top ten.
10) Cleveland (1-1) last week:off (32)
    Yes, Cleveland, I had you pegged as the worst team in the NFL and no one is more surprised than me that you've made it on to JMO:JTF. However, I cannot ignore 51 points scored against the Bungles. Sure, you gave up 45, but you still won! Because of this, I now vow never to bet on football, ever!
Notable removals: NO (0-2) last week: 9. Tampa Bay?! You lost to Tampa Bay? I'm disgusted! Cincinnati (1-1) last week: 6. No. seriously. That's not funny. You were my lock of the week. I will never trust you again. New York Giants (0-2) last week: 8 Hurt or not you've gotta find a way to win or I'm going to have a very sad brother-in-law!

Honorable Mention: New York Jets (0-2) Hey, New York has a Clemens that can throw! Too bad they don't have receivers who can catch. The rookie tied the game three times against a tough BALT D, only to have his wide outs drop the touchdown passes. Whoops, next time he won't hit you in the hands.

Friday, September 14, 2007

Patriots Caught Spying?


Has JMO become solely a sports blog? It may appear as much, but fear not, the other topics will return shortly. In the meantime, we do have other sports topics to discuss.

I have a few other thoughts regarding the way that Major League Baseball records the stats for pitchers. For starters, in the 30-3 win that the Rangers celebrated over the Orioles, a Rangers pitcher recorded a save! Yes, a save was awarded when the pitcher had a 27 run lead! Why? Did he somehow allow the tying run to come to the plate without allowing a run to score? Nope, it's because he pitched the last three complete innings. How ridiculous! Also, if it's a pitcher's fault, a save shouldn't be awarded if the pitcher allows the tying run to come to the plate. I'm alright if the pitcher comes in with a four run lead and the bases loaded, but if he allows the runners and then saves the game? You gotta be kidding! It's almost a way for pitcher's to pad their stats. "Let's see, it's not a save for me with a four run lead unless the tying run gets to bat. So I'll get these two outs and then load the bases..." Additionally, if a pitcher allows a runner to reach and then is pulled from the game, if that runner scores because of the performance of the reliever, it's charged to the pitcher who allowed him to reach! So if Petit walks the bases loaded in the ninth after pitching a no hitter, Rivera comes in, allows those three runs to score and then gets three outs. Rivera's ERA for the game is 0.0, Petit didn't allow a hit, gave up three walks, yet his ERA increases by 0.33 and if his team scored 2 or fewer runs, he gets the loss! Some statisticians have begun to record "inherited runners allowed to score" and "holds" (which is when the pitcher prevents inherited runners from scoring when it's not a save situation), but they still score ERA the archaic way. Add these thoughts to my previous ones regarding MLB Pitching stats and you'll see that something really needs to change!

Ok, now for the main reason for this post: The Patriots seem to be in some hot water. It seems that a Patriot's lackey (Matt Estrella) was caught videoing the Jet's Defensive Coordinator as he sent signals into the Jet's D. (Didn't the Patriot act allow this type of activity?) The punishment has already been handed out. $250,000 fine for the Patriots, $500,000 fine for Belichick personally, and the Patriots lose a first round draft pick! (1st round if they reach the playoffs, 2nd and 3rd if they fail to make it to the post season!) This is a huge fine for something that's nearly useless! How is it useless? Allow me to elaborate:

  • Vous parlez francais? Si vous ne parlez pas francais, cette mots vous n'aide pas. Si le Patriots ne comprend pas le signifacations le Jets avont pour lui "D", le video est aussi inutile! Basically, what I'm saying is that unless the Patriots have the Jet's defensive play book and know what each gesture means, the video is pointless. Our little Full House is learning sign language, his grandmother isn't. She was baby sitting one night and our little guy was trying to tell her that he wanted his stuffed elephant. Grandma didn't know what he was saying and he got his stuffed lamb instead. It's the same situation here. If New England doesn't know what it means when the coordinator bangs his fists together, then videoing him doing it is pointless.

  • I heard an insider who knows what goes on in the NFL say, "It's no big deal. It's kinda like Bonds: It's not like the Patriots are the only ones doing it." (So where is the punishment for the baseball players who cheated?) Apparently, the flying Elvises on the side of the Patriot's helmets are actually targets (which we all knew were there anyway. You'll notice the only difficult team they play at home is the Chargers, and it's on week 2! (Anybody else remember that Shawn Merriman tested possitive for steroids last year? I guess that means it'll be the New England Stealers vs the San Diego Juicers.)) I bet it stops now. You'll not hear about another team doing this. It's just too bad the Patriots had to be the example.

  • Even former Patriots players said that they never saw this while they were on the team. And they didn't receive last minute changes from the sideline after their opponent sent in their defensive play. If you are going to video in order to study it and use it later, wouldn't it make sense to actually use it? Wouldn't your players notice the changes at the line? You can't radio into the QB once a certain amount of time has ticked off the play clock. How do you use this information? Why don't any players (current or former) have any evidence of this being footage being used? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

  • Let's say the Patriots were doing this to steal signals. Check out what Mike Shanahan (former head coach of the Denver Broncos) said five years ago: "Our guy keeps a pair of binoculars on their signal-callers every game. With any luck, we have their defensive signals figured out by halftime. Sometimes, by the end of the first quarter."

  • I think that Aaron Schatz said it best on Bill Simmons column:
    "On the other hand ... the negative reaction to this is just completely overblown. The Patriots were breaking rules because they are obsessed with getting every minor strategic advantage, but that doesn't change the fact the strategic advantage is minor. The idea that suddenly all three Super Bowl championships are tainted is ridiculous. If they caught Tampa Bay doing this, would people be suggesting that the Bucs' 2002 championship was tainted? Terrell Davis actually suggested on NFL.com that the league should ban the Patriots from the playoffs for two years. You know, since that's how the NFL became the most popular sports league in America, by sending a message to every sports fan in six states that they should go away and stop paying attention for two seasons."

  • Here's my final thought on the matter (which is my suggestion that Belichick didn't know that it was happening): The head coach for the Jets is Eric Mangini. He used to be a defensive coach under Belichick. If Bill has been doing this for the number of years that other teams allege, why would he do it against a man who used to be in his inner circle? Mangini would have known that this was something that was a regular practice of New England. Just look at the picture. The guy who's videoing is not trying to hide it! It's not like it's a pen camera! It's a huge shoulder camera! He's on the Jet's side of the field! Why would you do this? Was this a $750,000 practical joke that also cost a draft pick? Mangini was a Defensive coordinator... They only videoed the defense... Was it a gag? Was Big Bill just trying to get into Mangini's head? Did Belichick not know it was happening? (Bill's a big fan of film... was Estrella trying to get into his good graces? Has he been fired?) It just makes no sense.


  • The Patriots "cheated" in a manner that in no way assisted them for that game. My only supposition (if this were truly strategic) is that they were hoping to review the video of the defensive coordinator with video of the game and try to match them up. It just seems so pointless. I am ashamed that my team acted in this manner and I'm mad that they lost a draft pick. But I also feel that the punishment was way too severe. It didn't help them in that game and didn't guarantee an edge in a future game. (And if they've been doing it in the past, it clearly didn't help last year against Indy in the AFC Championship game.) (Is this why the Patriots don't lose to the same team twice in one year?) All in all, I'm pretty irked.

    Don't forget to tune in next Tuesday for week two of JMO:Just the Facts.

    Tuesday, September 11, 2007

    NFL Power Rankings Week 1

    This (I hope) will be a weekly post on JMO. Some of you may remember my power rankings last year (not posted) as "Just the facts", and so they shall remain. So, let's get started:

    JMO Power Rankings: Just the facts
    Week 1

    1) Indianapolis (1-0):
      Wow! So there is a "D" in Indy! They held the Saints powerful running game in check and didn't allow them back in the game through the pass. The defending Super Bowl Champions are a force to be reckoned with.
    2) New England (1-0):
      "Brady to Moss: TOUCHDOWN!" Whew! Get used to hearing that! The Patriots continue to prove that they are a powerhouse. The Jets aren't a bad team but the Pats made them look like one.
    3) San Diego (1-0):
      They overcame the best D in the NFC. LT threw for another TD. As you can see, there's at good team in SD. Watch out next week, when they play NE!
    4) Chicago (0-1):
      They held the Chargers to only 14 points! Seven points in the first half! Not many teams will duplicate that feat. Now if they can just find a way to win in spite of Rex.
    5) Dallas (1-0):
      45 points! And it got to the point where it was as though the announcer would say "And it's third and who cares for the Cowboys." They seemed unstoppable. I guess you have to be if you are going to score 45 points.
    6) Cincinnati (1-0):
      A come from behind win over a very good Baltimore team. Was it in Ocho Cinco that they were last in the Super Bowl? (Actually, it was Ocho Nueve) Well, Ocho Cinco might just lead them back!
    7) Green Bay (1-0):
      I'm not above eating my own words. Green Bay held a decent Eagles team in check and managed to pull out a victory. Maybe Favre's hair is actually silver, can they bring the big silver trophy back to Lambeau?
    8) New York Giants (0-1):
      Nearly came from behind against Dallas. Shrank a 16 point deficit to three. Too bad the injury bug has bitten (and hard). We'll see how you fair with a back up QB and RB. (by the way, when Tiki was on NBC talking about the Giants, he kept saying "we" and "us" and "our." Hey Tiki: You retired! You're not on the team! (Or are you? They don't have a RB, remember?))
    9) New Orleans (0-1):
      The Colts made them look average! No running game (Bush didn't seem to have an exit strategy on how to get out of the backfield!) and no defense. Better turn it around if you wanna stay on this list!
    10) Houston (1-0):
      Houston, welcome to your first ever appearance on JMO:JTF! Schaub brings a big victory to the Texans. Can it continue?

    Tune in next week to see where your favorite team ends up on Just the Facts!

    Thursday, September 06, 2007

    NFL Preview

    Better late than never it's the JMO NFL Preview!

    So, with only 1/2 hour to spare before the opening kick-off of the 2007-2008 NFL season, here's what I see happening this year in the NFL:

    NFC:

    (Let's start with the boring league in the hopes that you'll read all the way through to the end!)

    East
    Dallas, Philadelphia, New York Giants, Washington
    Not nearly as competetive as last year. Watch for a humbled and hungry Tony Romo to lead his team to the top of this division. Without Tiki Barber the Giants will end up cut from the post season. It'll be a close shave, but Philly will edge them out for the wild card spot. There certainly won't be three teams from this division in the big dance like last year.
    Winner: Dallas


    West
    Seattle, San Fransico, Saint Louis, Arizona
    This was a difficult division to determine a victor in. Frank Gore impressed a lot of people last year! But Shawn Alexander is still Shawn Alexander and while Hasselbeck is not Brady or Manning, I'd take him if the others were hurt. The Rams and Cardinals remain peranial bottom feeders. That, and how could I pick a team who's star is named Gore?! However, I think the supreme court will hand a wild card berth to the Niners.
    Winner: Seattle

    North
    Chicago, Green Bay, Detroit, Minnesotta
    Talk about an easy pick! I submit that there should be a rule that no one with grey hair should be allowed to start at QB for an NFL team. The only reason I think the Packers will finish in second is because Kitna and Bell won't be able to lift the Lions out of the slump and the only name I recongize on the Vikes roster is Ryan Longwell (But I'd hate to have been TE Visanthe Shiancoe in 1st grade! He probably has trouble spelling his name now! "Defense wins championships" is the old adage. It needs to be updated to include a disclaimer regarding the QB. But with their ability to stop the run and the addition of Benson, the Bears will waltz into the postseason.
    Winner: Chicago

    South
    New Orleans, Carolina, Tampa Bay, Atlanta
    With out Vick, the Falcons will be Vicktory-less. Tampa may have a Cadillac, but they need a Hum-V. Foster and Smith are still good, but DelHomme is still a toss and hope QB. No question, New Orleans is very happy about one man named Bush as he'll lead the Saints as they go marching into the playoffs.
    Winner: New Orleans

    AFC

    East
    New England, New York Jets, Buffalo, Miami
    It's tough to not sound like a homer when the rest of your division is so bad. Patriots had no losses they can't over come, and with the Moss threat their WR core is so good they released Caldwell, their leading receiver last year! Don't get me wrong, the Jets will be surprising, not a threat, just surprising. They'll grab a WC spot while Buff and Miami both have sub-five hundred seasons
    Winner: New England

    West
    San Diego, Denver, Kansas City, Los Angeles
    LT, Rivers, Gates. If it weren't foolish to have so many people from one team on a fantasy league, I'd start all three of them. Denver's D will lift them over and aging LJ in KC. There's no division where it's easier to pick the team that will finish fourth than this one. The Silver and Black will slither back to LA in last place.
    Winner: San Diego

    North
    Baltimore, Cincinatti, Pittsburgh, Cleveland
    I think it's fitting that the Bengals wear orange. That way when the players who are arrested are serving time, they can still show some solidarity with their collegues. Palmer continues to recover and Big Ben's bell's been rung. Watch for Baltimore to sneak into the lead near the end of the season. Cinci snatches a wild card spot.
    Winner: Baltimore

    South
    Indianapolis, Jacksonville, Houston, Tennessee
    Even though both Manning brothers were in the top five among QBs with errant passes last year, this brother will still be able to get to the post season. Teams need to learn that the way to stop the Colts is to run the ball. They gave up a league worst 5+ yrd/carry last year, it keeps the clock running and Peyton off the field. (Watch for the Saints to prove that opening night!) With the addition of Shaub to Houston, the Texans will elevate over Young and the Titans. Jacksonville will continue to depress their fans by narrowly missing the post season again this year.
    Winner: Indianapolis

    Playoffs:
    AFC
    round 1
    NYJ @ INDY winner INDY
    CIN @ BALT winner CIN
    NE Bye SD Bye

    round 2
    CIN @ NE winner NE
    INDY @ SD winner SD

    round 3
    SD @ NE winner NE

    NFC
    round 1
    PHI @ SEA winner SEA
    SF @ CHI winner CHI
    DAL Bye NO Bye

    round 2
    CHI @ DAL winner DAL
    SEA @ NO winner NO

    round 3
    DAL @ NO winner DAL

    SUPER BOWL

    NE vs DAL winner NE

    (Just in case you missed it, the order in which the teams are listed in each division is the order in which I think they'll finish.) There you have it. So, where am I right? Where am I wrong? lemmie hear your opinion!

    Wednesday, August 15, 2007

    The Voting Booth Volume I

    I'm not sure why the supposition is that I am hiding my current political leanings. When have I ever been known to not disclose my political views?! The largest reason I've not indulged your queries as of yet is my limited posting time. This, of course, is only one reason why I've not informed my readers of my candidate du jour. A secondary reason is that if I had a candidate du jour, he'd be just that "du jour" (of the day) and he'd change from day to day and week to week. Unfortunately, this year, I am one of the people that political campaigns are aimed at: The Undecided Voter

    (For those of you savvy enough to read between the lines will discover one candidate that I will not be voting for: Mrs. Hillary Clinton. Because Condi Rice is not running, if I had a candidate, I can guarantee, that candidate would be a "he.")

    This is "The Voting Booth Volume I" because I completely expect my views to change as time goes on. (Look for further volumes in the future.) For volume I, here's what I'll do: I'll list each Candidate and give my current regarding them as they currently stand:

    Dennis Kucinich : I'm sorry, I cannot vote for a man who has a campaign platform that states that all Americans should be required to learn Spanish. How can he campaign on this when he wouldn't even require all immigrants to learn English?! Exactly whose vote is he hoping this campaign talking point will win? This is just one of the several places where I truly believe Kucinich to be a bit nutty. Definitely not Dennis.

    Obama: I'm not sure I understand his plans for winning the White House. Especially with his assertion that is military plan is to pull all of the troops out of Iraq and then turn around and send them into Iran! Maybe this is something you say once you've won your primary, but the leftist commie peaceniks aren't going to vote for you if they believe that more Americans will be dying on Vietnamese soil! Sorry, we tried that once and it didn't work too well! Find another way to look tough on terrorism. Just like you look tough on the unborn Americans! No partial birth abortion ban for you! Heck, why not just say that as long as the umbilical cord hasn't been cut we can kill them willy nilly. "Well, Ms. Campbell, I'm about to cut the cord, or should I move the scalpel up a few inches and cut the throat instead?" Sorry Barack, try finishing a term in Congress before running for the White House next time.

    Hillary: I've issue with the chameleon. How can I trust someone who speaks with a different accent depending on who she's talking to? Of course, this is just the first of a laundry list of issues I take with Mrs. Clinton. How about how the first lady used to be the loudest megaphone for healthcare reform. Now that she's in Congress, she never mentions it. Could that be because she's second on the list of politicians who receive the most money from the Pharmaceutical and Health Care companies? Lobbyists already own her. Not to mention that her political ambitions have never been hidden. She's had her target on 1600 PA AVE ever since she left (and I'm gonna guess that it's not because of the China set she left behind). How NY was dumb enough to elect her in the first place I'll never know. I'm not blinded to her blind ambition and, frankly, it frightens me.

    Edwards: Why wouldn't I vote for a man named John Edwards? He and I share the same view of Gay Marriage, (That's about it though), but if I were to vote for a democrat, this is the one. Too bad he's third in the polls. Get those bumper stickers ready with Edwards on the second line. Get out of the way! Beep Beep, he's running for V P!

    Rudy: "America's Mayor" only has a chance because of 9/11. As a libertarian, I have to be wary of a "Republican" who served several terms as NYC's Mayor! I'm grateful for what he did in September 2001. When the Federal Government was hiding in bunkers, he was on the front lines. That, however, doesn't make him qualified to be President. I know the crime rate went down while he was in office, but I need more than that. Without knowing more I'll have to say, sorry, Rudy, you may have to stick with Notre Dame.

    McCain: Because he McCan! Here's somebody that nobody owns (which is why he would never win) His seat might as well be right in the middle of the aisle! He so rarely votes with the party line that his party doesn't want him and the other party won't take him. Former P-O-W turned to political W-O-W! Yes, I'd vote for McCain.

    Mitt : Here's another Republican elected in the Democratic heartland! And what did he do? Well, nothing fantastic socially, however, he was able to get MA out of a huge budget deficit and I'm all for that! I'd have liked to have seen him run again rather than leaving the state to Duval Patrick who refuses to allow the people he appoints to have background checks done on them. Anyway, for purely financial reasons, I'd vote for Romey, but I don't think the nation would elect a Mormon, man of faith or not.

    Others: To be honest, I've had difficulty learning what I have about the candidates that everyone knows about. I know that Tommy Thompson recently backed out (uh, yeah, we'll miss him) Is Sharpton running this year? (what the heck does he do, anyway!?)

    If the election were held today, I suppose I'd vote for McCain. Ask me tomorrow, it'll probably have changed. Please feel free to let me know your favorite things about your favorite candidates. Try as I may, I've had great difficulty finding actual substance about most of these people. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, most American's don't vote based on the issues anyway. One of my friends recently told me they were going to vote for Hillary because they thought Bill was "sexy." There you have it: The President of the United States elected because "Jon Bon Jovi told me to!"

    Well, there you have Just My Opinion as of right now. Visit again once the candidates have been whittled down a bit more and I'll have more to say.

    Thursday, August 09, 2007

    Bonds: Not too sporting

    Faithful readers, I have heard your wishes and I now respond. I'd first like to congratulate Major League Baseball's career home run hitting king: Hank Aaron! I'm somewhat surprised that I was expected to have reacted immediately to the Barry "Big Noggin"'s surpassing his God-father on the all time HR list. Why would I bother to commemorate a non-event? Someone can break the land speed record for a person on a bike, but if he does it with a rocket attached to his Huffy does anyone really care? I suppose my only quandary regarding Barry Bonds is this: Why did anyone pitch to him? Do you really want to be the pitcher who gave up #756? I think so! It is my contention that the pitcher who threw the 756th wanted to go into the record books as well and knew that this was one of the only ways to get there. No one will remember who pitched 755, but 756? That'll be in Trivial Pursuit Genus XXIX! I submit the following: Ben Johnson (Canada) set both a World and Olympic record and won a gold metal - all of which were later revoked when he tested positive for steroids. It's they if he never ran. There was a marathon runner in the 1920s who also set a World and Olympic record until his picture appeared in the paper. Turns out he'd hitched a ride with a motorist who came forward to denounce the cheater. There was no test for him to fail, yet his record was also expunged. Why then, do we celebrate this Bonds? This man who has testified that he not only knowingly took steroids but also took a masking agent to hide that fact. This man who has had countless people denounce him as a cheater, some of whom face jail time for leaking grand jury testimony! Why should his "record" stand? It should not. There should be no asterisk and there should be no "record." The only man Hank Aaron has to be concerned with is the mitt-slappin' A-Rod. 31 years old, averaging 50 HR/year, just passed 500 HRs. "I-Got-It" A-Rod will hold the top spot by the time he's 37. And here is the difference between A-Rod and Bonds. Few deny that A-Rod cheats, but his cheating is for a moment. Yes, he slapped Bronson's glove, yes he called for a pop up while he was running the bases but he doesn't cheat every time he steps to the plate. He doesn't cheat every time he walks onto the field, he hasn't cheated non stop for the past 6 years. In essence, his cheating is far more tolerable than Barry's. But here is the real kicker: The lucky man who caught #756, the random man who suffered a bloody nose for his prize, the "everyman" who had to be escorted from the stadium under police protection, must pay taxes on his acquisition as though it were income! I am not making this up. He will have to pay the federal government taxes on the value of the ball which is estimated at $600,000! Does this whole situation make anyone else wanna puke? I'm just glad it's over.

    Speaking of baseball, I think it's time for the equation that determines which pitcher earns and win and which one a loss to be changed! In 2003, Tim Wakefield pitched a 1 hit complete game against the Yankees. The one hit was a home run by Jason Giambi that barely squeaked over the short porch. He lost 1-0 and got the L. Completely undeserved! In 2005, Keith Foulke blew a two run lead in the top of the ninth as the Blue Jays came back to tie the game. The Red Sox scored in the bottom of the inning and Keith, though he earned a blown save, got a W by his name, also completely undeserved. Even though I was livid when he said it, I think Pedro was correct when, after a 2-0 complete game loss, he said, "Tomorrow the papers will say that Pedro lost. But Pedro did not lose. Pedro pitched a game his team should have won." (How's that contract looking now, Mudflaps?) Here is what I suggest: If a starting pitcher allows two runs or fewer he should be ineligible for the L. The worst that he should receive is a no decision regardless of the outcome. It's not his fault if his team can't score (especially in the AL). Furthermore, a starter should not be required to go five innings in order to be eligible for the W if he can get the L as soon as he throws a pitch or a reliever can come in for a third of an inning and get the W! If a reliever blows a hold or a save and his team comes back to win he should be ineligible for the W. Finally, all of these revisions require one major change in philosophy in the recording of the Ws and Ls of each game: It will have to be ok if some games don't have a winning pitcher or a losing pitcher! For all of the cabermetrics that Billy Beanites love, why doesn't anyone but me care about this completely misleading stat?

    I turned on the TV tonight and was astonished to see on FOX the following across the top of the screen: "IND 3 DAL 3" As my Yankee friend would say, "Hip hip Jorge!" Football has arrived! It made the fact that it wasn't quite as bright out when I left work today nearly bearable. After settling down and watching about four minutes of this preseason exhibition game I realized that watching 11 scrubs go three-and-out is not my idea of a good time. Bring on the real thing!

    Well, you asked for it. Request sports and you'll get nothing but! Now that you've read JMO, what's yours?

    Friday, August 03, 2007

    Censoring Handy Religion

    A new month: a new post (or so it seems). Let's just get right to it:

    The Boston Red Sox have an 8 game lead and Eric Gagne! Do you hear me complaining? I think not! Especially seeing as Gagne has agreed to be a set up man! So, now the BoSox have three closers pitching one after another: Okajima in the seventh, Gagne in the eighth, Papelbon in the ninth. Have fun everybody! Bonds still sits at 753 and A-Rod at 499, Clemens gave up 8 runs in the second inning, the Sox have added a game to their lead in August, and Randy Moss is at training camp though currently day to day with a "leg injury." (Belichick just loves leg injuries!) All is right in the world of sports!

    Can someone explain to my why the New York Yankees who have a line up with Damon, Jeter, Abreu, Giambi, A-Rod, Matsui, and Posada yet a bullpen that has given up more leads than that of the 2005 Kansas City Royals would trade their only every day reliever for another power bat?! I'm stymied! Buh Bye Proctor, hello Betimit. Buh Bye October, hello golf course!

    I realized the other day that I probably haven't ever posted anything that would cause my blog to be censored in China. I thought that was a shame, so here are the top five reasons China should become a republic:

    5) What are you afraid of? Do you think the communist party won't win the election?
    4) It's done nothing but unite the people of the US
    3) One sixth of the world's population can't all be wrong
    2) It would be unbearably entertaining to hear American news anchors attempt to pronounce the names of all of the candidates
    1) Hilary would have one less country to point to as an example of why her political platforms would be successful

    There you go, Reds: Censor away!

    The other day in a DVD store, due to a miscommunication with my friend Aquinas, the concept for a new movie popped into my head. Pygmalion vs Predator I can picture it now: (in an uppity British accent) "No no no! A prroperr predatorr rrolls his "r"s when he is announcing whom he will devourr!" "Yes, they met a vile and disgusting death, but he was exceedingly polite during the entire endeavor." "I do believe I am the victorious party in regards to our wager: The Predator is now an absolute gentleman of an extra terrestrial as he mutilates humans for no apparent reason." (Please send me any royalty checks if you choose to advance my concept any further, thank you.)

    I recently saw a computer generated children's program called "Handy Manny." It is a Disney show starring a Hispanic handyman named Manuel who has talking tools (also Hispanic) that help him fix things. Harmless, right? Consider the following: There is another main character, a very very white neighbor who doesn't like Manny because the neighbor always wants to do his own handyman jobs. He always fails (and looks like an idiot in the process.) "But that's just one character," you say? Every single person that Manny helps was white. In fact, there was not another minority character in the entire show. Not even the people wandering around in the background on the street. Once Manny is called to a job, his tools hop out of his belt and do all the work while Manny is the one who gets paid. There is no veiled message about how we need "guest workers," right? It's not suggesting that Manny is a legal immigrant getting work for his illegal friends that he's hiding in his crew, right? If I'm so far off base, please supply your speculations as to why every tool is also Hispanic. And why Di(versity)sney suddenly doesn't have an African American, Asian, Inuit or Handicapped person represented in this innocent program. Oh, and did I mention that their oft repeated little song is "we can fix it together"? Need I say more?

    And finally, the ever present political commentary: Have you heard? The left has fooouuuund the LORD! Hallelujah! The political party that once asked how it was Constitutional for the government to deal in a close partnership with faith based organizations is now broadcasting just how spiritual they really are! Why this sudden new-found faith? Why now? Because President George W. Bush (#1 on the left's "most hated" list) has served two terms thanks to the blind, one issue voting of the Religious Right (not to be confused with the blind, one issue voting of the Green party or the gay activists). Are we witnessing a revival in the Democratic party? Is the Lord coming down from the stratosphere? Or is the left conjuring up a strategy? If Ms Clinton is so very religious, why is she only declaring it now, after 18 years in the national public eye? How can Mr Obama be a committed believer and not only vote against a partial birth abortion ban but attempt to justify it in the process? Perhaps Mr Edwards is the only one not putting on a new face for this campaign. When interviewed by TIME Magazine he was the only one who didn't select "Amazing Grace" as his favorite hymn. Honestly, the actual action doesn't bother me. Both political parties pull out all of the stops in an effort to steal votes from the other's main base. What saddens me is that I can foresee a large portion of the American public not seeing this for the farce that it is. It is not a change in lifestyle, it is simply a change in strategy.

    Have I ruffled a few feathers? Sound off in the comments! But never forget, after all, it's all just my opinion.