Hey loyal readers, how is everybody doing? It's been about a month since my last post and have gotten off of my ass to post again.
It's been a rough month. I have come out of hibernation, you non-hobos didn't know that we hibernate during the winter months. I noticed that there are already a plethora of democratic candidates for president and the election is over a year away. That's a lot of politicking. A few of my friends have come out and said that Al Gore should run again. Me, I hope that he does not. Don't get me wrong I really like the guy but that's the reason for my reasoning. You see he was in a little documentary called "An Inconvenient Truth", I really enjoyed it, and if he were to run for president in 2008 then everything he did in that little documentary would be automatically put under campaigning. I would like to believe that it was heart felt and had nothing to do with his political career.
I don't know. I'm usually full of shit so take everything I write with a grain of salt. Oh and I'm also hopped up on meth. Two things that usually invalidate an opinion. But I have a blog and therefore I can type whatever I want.
Take that whoever disagrees with me.
Another thing, I'm beginning to feel like the meth addled version of Andy Rooney, maybe Andy Rooney is meth addled and I just don't know about it. If you know Andy Rooney and know if he's as much of a meth fan as I am then leave a comment. It would be greatly appreciated, it's just something I would like to know.
Have a good easter.
Smarmy
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Thursday, January 25, 2007
The Case for Kicking
I have become cold again, and insensible; nothing is left but a senile love for unbroken calm . . .
Eh, it's not that bad. And thanks to Dan Shaughnessy of the Boston Globe for pointing out the relevance of Kafka in the wake of the Colts 38-34 win over my beloved New England Patriots. But there's one thing that's been burnin my butter for a few years now, and to see it contribute to our loss last Sunday, well I can keep silent no more.
The winner of the coin toss to open the game can choose to kick or receive - whatever is decided is reversed to start the second half. Therefore you must elect to kick to start the game. It has long been standard practice to receive - the reasoning is to get the ball first, score first, and set the tone for the rest of the game. Of course, statistically, you're not going to score on that opening drive. I don't have the statistics, but I'll bet if I did I'd be proven right. This is what the Patriots did last Sunday, and they went six and out and punted. Then the Colts ended the first half with a long scoring drive, received to start the second half and went on another long scoring drive. The Pats went three and out, and the Colts went on another long scoring drive, and the Pats defense was exhausted for the rest of the game. It is my contention that if the Patriots had elected to kick to start the game, the defense would have had that much longer to rest after halftime, and perhaps would have held a little stronger in that devastating third quarter.
But that's just one game. There are so many other reasons to kick as a general strategy: First of all, the second half is the most important of the two, obviously. You've felt out the other team and made your halftime adjustments - that's the time to receive the ball. And especially if the strength of your team is its defense - you send the other team three and out on its first drive, then get the ball with probably better field position than you would have had on a kickoff return, plus you get the ball to open the second half. This is true even more in a home game - the crowd is pumped during the player introductions, but if they're smart they quiet down when the home team goes on offense to make audibles easier. Electing to kick keeps your crowd at full roar for the visitors' opening drive - this is what can truly set the tone for the game.
I can't be the first one to consider these points - surely our genius coach Bill Belichick has carefully measured all the factors and determined his strategy - I know he doesn't need to hear from me. But Richard Seymour's cell number is 401-464-1194, maybe I'll give him a call...
Eh, it's not that bad. And thanks to Dan Shaughnessy of the Boston Globe for pointing out the relevance of Kafka in the wake of the Colts 38-34 win over my beloved New England Patriots. But there's one thing that's been burnin my butter for a few years now, and to see it contribute to our loss last Sunday, well I can keep silent no more.
The winner of the coin toss to open the game can choose to kick or receive - whatever is decided is reversed to start the second half. Therefore you must elect to kick to start the game. It has long been standard practice to receive - the reasoning is to get the ball first, score first, and set the tone for the rest of the game. Of course, statistically, you're not going to score on that opening drive. I don't have the statistics, but I'll bet if I did I'd be proven right. This is what the Patriots did last Sunday, and they went six and out and punted. Then the Colts ended the first half with a long scoring drive, received to start the second half and went on another long scoring drive. The Pats went three and out, and the Colts went on another long scoring drive, and the Pats defense was exhausted for the rest of the game. It is my contention that if the Patriots had elected to kick to start the game, the defense would have had that much longer to rest after halftime, and perhaps would have held a little stronger in that devastating third quarter.
But that's just one game. There are so many other reasons to kick as a general strategy: First of all, the second half is the most important of the two, obviously. You've felt out the other team and made your halftime adjustments - that's the time to receive the ball. And especially if the strength of your team is its defense - you send the other team three and out on its first drive, then get the ball with probably better field position than you would have had on a kickoff return, plus you get the ball to open the second half. This is true even more in a home game - the crowd is pumped during the player introductions, but if they're smart they quiet down when the home team goes on offense to make audibles easier. Electing to kick keeps your crowd at full roar for the visitors' opening drive - this is what can truly set the tone for the game.
I can't be the first one to consider these points - surely our genius coach Bill Belichick has carefully measured all the factors and determined his strategy - I know he doesn't need to hear from me. But Richard Seymour's cell number is 401-464-1194, maybe I'll give him a call...
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
Living With the Big Lie
...the clash of religion and the loaded prayers
information the face of starvation and the state of the nation...
Yep just wanted to start this entry with a little Marillion - that would be from the album Brave, you should all buy it. But that's not what I came here to talk to you about... President Junior will be giving his State of the Union address tonight, undoubtedly trying to bolster his case for escalation in Iraq. Of course, he is still the executive branch, and the legislative branch can't directly steer policy. With the nation in this state, the only course of action available is to cut funding, but anyone who supports this will, of course, be accused of not supporting our troops.
So let's take a moment to step back from Karl Rove and reflect on what it means to "support our troops." One, and this is a big one, you only send them into harm's way when it is absolutely necessary. Yep, that's a basic right there. Two, when you do send them, you don't play politics and compromise numbers like Lyndon Johnson, you send enough to do the job. And three, you send them with the armor and ammunition necessary to bring as many back home as possible.
Well, we're there now, no going back on that. The current escalation of 21,000 is a political number - the public wants out, John McCain wants to send 50,000, we'll split the difference. Unfortunately, if congress votes to cut funding, these troops won't stay home, they'll just have to go without armor.
I really have a sickening sort of admiration for how well Rove does his job. I've known John Kerry over twenty years, he became my senator in 1983, and in the few months of a campaign Rove created the image of a flip-flopper. John Kerry is a good man, a veteran and a man of principle. He's never been very good at sound bites - he deals in the nuances of the real world rather than the black and white of the evildoers. It's an intelligent person who can adapt to a changing situation - when we find we've been living with the big lie, stupidity stays the course. Will Rove be turned loose on the 2008 Democrat nominee? What could he do if he were turned loose on me? I have no idea what I did with my merit badges from Boy Scouts. Maybe I threw them over the fence onto the White House lawn. To protest Lionel Richie leaving the Commodores.
information the face of starvation and the state of the nation...
Yep just wanted to start this entry with a little Marillion - that would be from the album Brave, you should all buy it. But that's not what I came here to talk to you about... President Junior will be giving his State of the Union address tonight, undoubtedly trying to bolster his case for escalation in Iraq. Of course, he is still the executive branch, and the legislative branch can't directly steer policy. With the nation in this state, the only course of action available is to cut funding, but anyone who supports this will, of course, be accused of not supporting our troops.
So let's take a moment to step back from Karl Rove and reflect on what it means to "support our troops." One, and this is a big one, you only send them into harm's way when it is absolutely necessary. Yep, that's a basic right there. Two, when you do send them, you don't play politics and compromise numbers like Lyndon Johnson, you send enough to do the job. And three, you send them with the armor and ammunition necessary to bring as many back home as possible.
Well, we're there now, no going back on that. The current escalation of 21,000 is a political number - the public wants out, John McCain wants to send 50,000, we'll split the difference. Unfortunately, if congress votes to cut funding, these troops won't stay home, they'll just have to go without armor.
I really have a sickening sort of admiration for how well Rove does his job. I've known John Kerry over twenty years, he became my senator in 1983, and in the few months of a campaign Rove created the image of a flip-flopper. John Kerry is a good man, a veteran and a man of principle. He's never been very good at sound bites - he deals in the nuances of the real world rather than the black and white of the evildoers. It's an intelligent person who can adapt to a changing situation - when we find we've been living with the big lie, stupidity stays the course. Will Rove be turned loose on the 2008 Democrat nominee? What could he do if he were turned loose on me? I have no idea what I did with my merit badges from Boy Scouts. Maybe I threw them over the fence onto the White House lawn. To protest Lionel Richie leaving the Commodores.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
