The Sorry Cycle

Another week has passed and another round of sponsors has dropped Paula Deen. The celebrity chef, best known for her Southern style of cooking that adds copious amounts of butter to every dish had been losing sponsors left and right since allegations of racial discrimination and previously using a racial slur came to light. First it was the Food Network quickly pulling her show off the air and they were hastily followed by Home Depot and Caesars Entertainment. While that obviously wasn't great for her bank account I figured she would be fine because, to be honest, I didn't know she had endorsement deals with either of those two companies. However, later in the week was when the hammer really dropped as QVC, KMart, Sears, Target, JC Penney and WalMart all announced they would sell off their remaining inventory of Deen-endorse cookware but then not order any more from her company. Losing those are where she will really feel the pinch. After all, if she can't endorse cookware anymore I don't know what appeal she holds to other American companies. While I admit this looks bad for Deen right now, I vehemently disagree with anyone who says this is the end of the line for her career.

America is a very forgiving society and Deen has already started with the usual steps to rehab her image - a public apology, crying on TV and granting pretty much every interview request. But the bottom line is that even if she wasn't doing all those things Deen would be fine because of basic economics. Pre-sales of her book are actually up since this scandal broke and while it is entirely possible most of those people are buying the book out of some weird sense of humor, the bottom line is that sales are all any book publisher are going to care about. On top of that there are plenty of people who are coming out of the woodwork to say they may not support what Dean has said (and there are people who support what she said, but they aren't helping her cause) but they don't feel like she should be voted off the island for it either. The simple fact is that Deen can still make too many people too much money for her to fade away completely. She'll have to go away for a little while, but I have no doubt that in a few months she'll get a new TV show on another network. It'll be for less money, but definitely more than she is making now and it will get her back in the game, which is the entire point. You can't get back to the summit sitting on the bench, which is where Deen currently resides - but I guarantee she won't be there for long.

Weekly Sporties

-With every passing day things are looking worse for Aaron Hernandez. When he was first arrested and charged with murder I thought it could simply be that he was being charged with a high crime to get him to roll on his accomplices, like when Ray Lewis was arrested for murder but eventually struck a deal to testify against his co-defendants while only pleading guilty to obstruction of justice. Well, as you hear mounting evidence that Hernandez may be linked to a double homicide in Boston last July and another assault in Florida, the chances of this getting reduced to a few minor charges are looking pretty slim. All that being said, I'm still kind of surprised the Patriots released Hernandez in the hours between when he was arrested and when he was formally charged (obviously they knew the charges were going to be a worse than what everyone initially thought). For some reason I assumed that in the cold, business-like world of the NFL the team would hold on to him on the chance charges were altered or dropped. As an expensive investment you would think the Patriots would be more concerned about salary cap ramifications than anything else, but I guess they have already decided to cut their losses. (In an effort to totally scrub themselves of him the Patriots are even offering a free jersey exchange, allowing you to bring in your Hernandez jersey for a different player.) But the real message in his release is just how much the NFL has changed. Ray Lewis never missed a snap the season after he was charged with murder, which is kind of crazy to think about, because in the current climate of the NFL even if Hernandez gets released from jail tomorrow there is no way he would see the field this season, as Commissioner Roger Goodell would end up suspending him anyway. Thus his release is probably for the best. I obviously don't agree with everything Goodell has done in his time as Commissioner, but implementing tougher on-field penalties for bad behavior off it is one thing I can get behind.

-When the Patriots brought in Tim Tebow a couple of weeks ago I was very annoyed simply because of the people in the media who insist on injecting Tim into every conversation about football, even when he doesn't belong. My spirits were slightly buoyed by the first press conference Bill Belichick had in which he slapped down most of the questions regarding Tebow, stating he had said all he was going to say about a third-string player. The problem is that Bill doesn't control all of the media and knuckleheads have this annoying habit of finding their way to open mikes. After Hernandez was released there were several journalists, who somehow have actual credentials, who think Tebow will get a look at tight end of the team. This is, of course, idiotic. Yes, I admit it is kind of ironic that the Patriots went from the tight end position being one of the strongest on the team to having it being one of the thinnest since Rob Gronkowski will also miss some time due to his recent back surgery. However, these people need to realize that this is the NFL, not college which means the Patriots can just go out and sign another tight end, not make due until the next recruiting class comes in. They already claimed Jake Ballard off waivers from the Giants last season and stashed him on IR, a move which caused some tension between the franchises at the time but is looking smarter by the second. And if Ballard still isn't ready there are any number of guys who played tight end before who would love the chance to catch passes from Tom Brady. And trust me, any tight end they pull off the scrap heap of free agency will still be ten thousand percent better than Tebow, a man who has never played a down there in the NFL. Think about it, would you trust just anyone to protect your quarterback's blind side? Of course not. The fact people think Tebow could step in and do this serves as a reminder that some people forget how hard professional football really is. If nothing else I can assure you it is harder to be a tight end than it apparently is to be an NFL pundit.

-After missing all of this season due to various injuries, Yankees third baseman Alex Rodriguez is probably itching to get back on the field. I think by now we all accept he will never make the Hall of Fame, but if he is going to have even the slightest of chances of rehabbing his personal image he will need to get back and start playing well so the Biogenesis scandal is not our last memory of him. That is why it was totally understandable when A-Rod excitedly tweeted out that his doctor had cleared him to start playing baseball again. Apparently, the Yankees were less enthusiastic about the news because GM Brian Cashman said when the Yankees had something to announce they would announce it and until that time Alex "needs to shut the fuck up." Woah. Brian Cashman has been the GM for the Yankees for a long time and he knows better than anyone how important it is to maintain composure when speaking to anyone with a microphone, so this shows just how frustrated the organization has become with Alex. I can't say I blame them, because when they signed him to that massive second deal they thought they were getting a guy who would be chasing the homerun record, not getting wrapped up in multiple steroid scandals and missing time due to injuries. Still, no one forced the Yankees to offer A-Rod that contract and he had always had a reputation of being rather shady, so I have no particular sympathy for them. Also, I find it awfully convenient that the very next day there was a report out that Rodriguez was only trying to hurry back to playing so that he could retire, citing his injuries, which would allow him to get all the money in his contract rather than risk MLB suspending him for steroids, which would void parts of his deal. I'm almost positive the Yankees were the ones who leaked that story and while I don't doubt it has some grains of truth to it, the Yankees would benefit from it as well since they could get insurance to cover some of that amount, so they shouldn't pretend like this is all Rodriguez's scheming. Honestly, as these two side desperately try to out-maneuver one another to make it look like it is all the other side's fault I can't help but feel like they totally deserve each other.

-In my personal pantheon of over-hyped sports moments sits the Billy Jean King - Bobby Riggs showdown, known as "The Battle of the Sexes". Some people claim King's victory over Riggs was one of the crowning moments in women't sports history, whereas I look at it as it really was - a 28 year-old, highly-ranked women's tennis player beating a 55 year-old retiree who was probably smoking between sets. (Ask yourself this - if this was really the moment people seem to think it was would there still be so many persistent rumors that Riggs bet against himself and then threw the match?) Still, there is no denying that it drew a huge crowd and since tennis desperately needs any kind of audience, there have been multiple efforts to revive the event in the last few years. Most of them have involved John McEnroe challenging one of the Williams sisters, but that feels like it would be more of the same (and most people can't stand John McEnroe) so the idea never picks up much steam. What tennis really needs is two current highly-ranked players to face off and they may get it because this week Andy Murray was asked if would like to play against Serena Williams and indicated it would be something he would think about trying. Serena initially said she wouldn't get a point off Murray, but since then her competitive side has come out and changed her mind, with Serena now saying she may be able to get a game. I actually think she would be able to do even better than that. Serena has one of the hardest serves in tennis and even though Murray has been playing well lately he is not exactly Pete Sampras in his prime. If she could hold her own serve I actually think Serena would be able to get a couple of games off him especially if they play on clay, which has never been Murray's best surface. Plus, she would be playing free because she would have nothing to lose, whereas Murray would probably get tight after she won a single game. It would make for interesting television and I know this much - a match like that might actually be enough to get me to watch tennis for once.

-You ever have that one friend who you can tell is living beyond his means but you don't want to call him out on it because you wouldn't want to embarrass them and it is only after they have to start selling off personal possessions that you finally work up the nerve to ask them if they need some help? Well, it is starting to look like the city of Glendale is turning in to that friend and even worse, they are doing so in an effort to keep the Phoenix Coyotes in town. The NHL has owned the Coyotes for about five years and would desperately like to sell them. The problem is that they only people interested in buying the Coyotes want to do so with the intention of immediately moving them out of Arizona. In an effort to buy more time for a local buyer to get the money together the city of Glendale offered to chip in on some of the operating costs of the team. Here's the problem - they didn't really have the funds to back that promise up. Normally this would be the end of the road, but Glendale just paid to build the Coyotes a new area and having it sit empty for 350 days a year isn't going to do them any good (the logic being that a half-empty arena is still better than an empty one). So, what is happening now is that the city of Glendale is seriously considering selling off City Hall to pay for the Coyotes. They would sell the building and the land to a developer who would then lease the building back to them. Is this not the stupidest idea you have ever heard? You know, I love my professionals sports team (even though as I mentioned yesterday, they drive me crazy) but if my local government seriously considered this idea I would immediately demand a recall election and fire them all. I understand that in these tough economic times legislatures have to get create to balance the budget, but I would like to remind you they are doing this to keep a professional hockey team in town. Multiple studies have shown pro sports teams are never the economic boom people claim they will be and that has to especially be the true about the Coyotes, because no one goes to the games. I know the arena will cost the city of Glendale a lot of money, but at some point you just have to take your losses and not make it any worse and I think the Coyotes entered that phase a long time ago.

-Last year the University of Oregon conducted an internal investigation and found their football coaches had been paying a "recruiting agency" to evaluate certain players and that as part of their service this agency would then steered certain players to the Ducks. Obviously, this counts as a recruiting violation and is seen as a pretty severe recruiting violation. The school self-imposed some penalties but the NCAA maintained they would conduct their own investigation and hand down their own penalties. This was not good for Oregon because the NCAA rarely goes along with the self-imposed penalties schools offer up, opting to hand down something a little more harsh (usually a bowl ban since that is their only real weapon). Well, the other day the NCAA concluded its investigation and the school is losing one scholarship a year for three years, former coach Chip Kelly has a show-cause penalty for the next 18 months and the school has restricted recruiting options for a couple of seasons. That's it. So, for the first time I can remember, a school actually handed down harsher penalties on itself than the NCAA. Seriously, this is less than nothing. The show-cause penalty for Kelly is especially laughable. What that means is that if another school wanted to hire him they would have to state their case before the NCAA and get approval before offering him a contract. Ok, but Kelly just signed a five-year deal to coach the Philadelphia Eagles. I don't care how much of a flop he may be in the NFL, he isn't getting fired after one year, which means that penalty is essentially nothing. I can't help but feel like the fact that this is Oregon, Nike founder Phil Knight's (supplier of more NCAA uniforms than any other clothing manufacturer) alma mater, has something to do with all this. If you look at the slanted penalty scale the NCAA seems to use it is not a hard conclusion to draw. I mean, the NCAA regularly comes down much harder on smaller schools for lesser infractions, but Oregon skates with virtually nothing? As the saying goes, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

-Even though they haven't changed the act in a long time, the Harlem Globetrotters do need to keep bringing in fresh talent. After all, their knees take just as much of a pounding as any other basketball player's and the same guys can't do this forever. Mostly they find guys from smaller schools who know they can't pursue the normal path for a basketball career but who have tremendous dribbling talent. That means, like any other basketball team, the Globetrotters need to draft players. However, since they are't exactly drafting against anyone (no idea where the Washington Generals get their talent from), the Globetrotters like to have a little fun with the selection process. Normally the do something like use the last pick on a famous star or an athlete from another sport (this year it was Yankees closer Mariano Rivera), but this year they decided to have some fun at the top as well, drafting former Baylor star and first pick in the WNBA, Brittney Griner. What makes this interesting is that before the WNBA draft there was some talk a franchise like the Dallas Mavericks would invite Griner to training camp, but nothing more ever came of that. Would the Globetrotters be different? Sadly, Griner quickly shot down any talk of going to the Globetrotters as well due to already having a second team in Russia (most WNBA stars play in Europe during the WNBA's offseason and actually make more money there), but I say she shouldn't be so hasty. The entire thing is a big show, so what is the harm is trying it before deciding? I mean, how awesome would it have been if she showed up on the first day of training camp, ready to practice throwing a bucket of confetti? What make it extra funny is that as a center I don't think Griner is the kind of player who can do much trick dribbling, making her the last kind of players the Globetrotters would actually want. It would be kind of a disaster, but the best kind of joke, in that it would turn the tables on the pranksters and at least, for once, the joke would be on the Globetrotters.

An Unworthy Ending

Normally I try to keep all my sports ramblings for Saturday, but sometimes it just can't be helped...

You know, I forget how much I can honestly hate sports sometimes. Seriously, I think people who don't watch sports are blissfully unaware of how often being a fan can be totally awful. They look at sports fans as people who are just desperate to be part of something bigger than they are, not realizing the emotional risk you take putting that much of your faith in team only to have then let you down. Even worse is that they don't understand it is never the games which drive us to these bouts of depression, it's all the crap surrounding the games. I can take my team losing, but it is the reminder of how little control sports fans actually have over the team they have invested so much time, energy and passion into that really makes me think about giving it all up and reading more book in my free time. Late last night I got another reminder of this when the Celtics traded captain Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett to the Brooklyn Nets for assorted flotsam and jetsam. The deal had been rumored for most of the afternoon and with every passing second in which it didn't happen I built up just a little more hope that General Manager Danny Ainge wasn't this stupid or that someone, anyone, would slap him across the head and wake him out of this stupor he had clearly fallen into. But in the end no amount of hoping or wishing was going to derail this trade from happening. The trade can't be official until July the 10th due to league rules, but for all intensive purposes it is over.

Obviously, while I am sad to see a competitor like Garnett leave, losing Pierce is what hurts the most. Garnett was a guy who played for the Celtics, Pierce was a Celtic - there is a huge difference between the two. I was was too young to remember the glory days of Larry Bird, Kevin McHale and Robert Parish, so most of my early Celtic memories are watching the team slowly decay and then fall into a decade of mediocrity. It was only when Paul Pierce came around that it started to feel like the team may be on the way back, but even that journey took longer than expected. No one remembers this now, but the early career of Paul Pierce did not give any indication he would one day be mentioned as an all-time franchise great. He always had the talent - the question was would his maturity ever catch up. Seeing him transform into a tremendous leader these last few years was like watching that screw-up you knew in high school take over the family business and become a responsible member of the community. It's this strange mixture of shock and pride that no one outside of the city can really appreciate. Also, Pierce actually seemed to understand just how much the Celtics and the corny idea of Celtic Pride really means in this city. It may have all been an act, but he seemed to recognize that playing in Boston and for the Celtics was different from about 90% of the rest of the NBA. I really hoped he would have been one of the rare NBA players who spent his entire career in one city and playing for one team.

Now, I admit there is a chance that no trade involving Paul Pierce was going to be good enough for me, but the fact I feel like the Celtics got hosed in the deal certainly isn't helping. Obviously Pierce and KG are near the ends of their careers, but I really have a hard time believing this was the best deal available. I mean, sure, it was probably the best deal the Celtics could have gotten today, but who exactly was holding a gun to their head and demanding this trade happen immediately? The season doesn't start for another few months and you never know who could miss out on free agency and get desperate. Even worse, with this trade the Celtics are still looking at being an ok team. Gerald Wallace, Kris Humphries (although I am keeping my fingers crossed his stay in Boston is as brief as rumored), Jeff Green, Rajon Rondo, Brandon Bass, Avery Bradley and Jared Sullinger are the makings of a fairly solid team. Unfortunately in the NBA solid gets you to about the 7th seed, a first-round exit from the playoffs and no good draft picks. In professional basketball you want to either be over the salary cap but winning or way under the salary cap and contending for the first pick in the draft (given that the last time the Celtics attempt at tanking they landed the third pick in a two-player draft I would avoid this plan). With this trade the Celtics are going to be near the cap and not winning enough. Danny, if you're truly going to rebuild than you really need to blow the whole thing up, not dip your toe in the demolition pool.

There are some in the city who actually like this deal, saying the team had run its course and Ainge had to get something before KG and Pierce retired. I agree with the principle behind the statement, but I'm pretty sure those people don't remember 1994-2007 because if they did the idea of bringing everyone back for one last go would be the more favorable course of action. Rebuilding an NBA team is long, tedious and a hell of a lot harder when you aren't in free agent destination like Dallas, Miami or Los Angeles. Also, if you look at Danny Ainge's history outside of the acquisition of Garnett and Ray Allen, there is not a lot to reassure you that the franchise is in capable hands. The Celtics are looking at a lot of lean years and I have the strong suspicion most of the people in favor of this deal won't be sitting next to me at the Fleetcenter next year (if we're reverting to the early-2000 Celtics, I'm reverting to early-2000s name for the building) when this team wins 30 games. (The only good news is that I should have no problem getting tickets next season.) The bottom line is that this didn't need to happen this way and if fans had their way it wouldn't have. Pierce deserved to have his time in Boston end better than this. But, as is so often the case, last night sports reminded me that I don't get a vote.

Is This Real Life?

Lately there has been an influx of weird commercials. I don't know why it happened but at some point in the last couple of years advertising went from quirky to out-and-out strange. I mean, humor has always been a staple of marketing, but somewhere along the line commercials took a turn from being funny by making a joke to being just being absurd. Personally, I blame the Old Spice commercials a few years back. You may remember them - it was just a bunch of random things which didn't go together and certainly didn't have anything to do with body wash, but their absurdity got people talking. I don't always think strange is the way to go, but there is no denying it makes the ads memorable. Since advertising is more about stealing ideas than coming up with your own, now everyone advertises this way. It is because of the current crop of odd commercials that I probably shouldn't be surprised at anything anymore but then earlier tonight I was flipping around and I landed on the movie "Glory." For those of you who haven't see it, "Glory" is the story of the first all-black regiment during the Civil War. It features some amazing performances by Matthew Broderick and Morgan Freeman and even won Denzel Washington an Oscar. While it may drag at some points it is an extremely powerful movie at points. I had just finished one of those scenes and the screen when blank. Then, this commercial came on.

[Editor's note: upon further review it may not have have been this exact commercial. It all happened so fast my brain wasn't totally paying attention. But, the company is the same, which is more to the point.] For a moment, given the campy nature of the commercial and the Supreme Court's ruling the other day I honestly thought it may have been someone's attempt at a joke. I was only a couple stations away from Comedy Central and for all I know they are owned by the same company. I mean, if you were try to use a fake commercial to make a political point (which happens more than you think) a gay version of a travel sight would be a pretty easy thing to mimic. But, as I waited for a punchline which never came it slowly dawned on me that this was real. That was when my second thought manifested and it was to wonder if they are getting better deal on flights. If that is the case I don't care what the name of the site is - cheap airfare is cheap airfare. Of course, next I wanted to know if they would only fly to certain cities which have a better reputation for tolerance, but I didn't really have time to think too much about it because it was quickly followed up by this.

Seriously, if you saw that would you think it was a real commercial? Those two ads coming on back-to-back were enough to make me think I may have have wandered onto some "World's Most Insane Commercial" show, but then I remember I was watching a movie. Now I was trying to figure out what channel I was on. (Later I would discover I had somehow not noticed that I had flipped from BBC America to something called the Ovation network which is mostly gay programming.) But until that happened I think you can understand my confusion. Look, I'm not going to sit here and pretend that "Glory" is some sacred film experience and that the only things which should be allowed to advertise during it are respectful products, but I'm also familiar enough with how TV works to know it would not be the first time a request like that was made. Certain companies refuse to show commercials when "Saving Private Ryan" is on and when you have spent as much money as advertising firms usually do to investigate who is watching which shows and at what time, perhaps being a little more selective about what commercials you air during movies wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. Either way, I don't think that cat toy commercial can be taken seriously at any point before 1 AM.

Score One For Hoarding

I usually make a real effort to keep my personal spaces clutter-free. I'm not saying that I don't have a couple of things on my desk which serve no purpose other than looking interesting, but what I like to do is try and contain my collection of random items to a few specific areas and then make sure I can hide those areas behind things like closed closet doors. (I actually think having a space with no clutter is impossible and if a person has absolutely no clutter in their house they are either getting ready to move or you should run because they are a serial killer.) The problem is that letting items pile up is getting harder to avoid thanks to fact that increasingly you have to shop for things in bulk. Gone are the days when you could just go in and buy the one thing you needed - now almost everything comes in pairs. On the one hand it is great that consumers are getting a better deal on items the use a lot, but at the same time when it comes to the stuff you use infrequently we only have so many places to put the extras. I like to joke that shopping for only one item is like holding up a sign which says "I am about to use this right now", but I don't feel as though that is always a bad thing. Sometimes you just need one and no where is that more often the case than when it comes to items for your car.

Yesterday I mentioned that I had to take my truck for its yearly inspection. What I didn't mentioned is that it failed... again. This isn't a surprise as I have a really bad track record with this car and inspections. This would be the fourth time my truck has failed in the seven times I have had to get it inspected and three of those times it was for the e-brake not working, which means it has a pretty serious design flaw. I can see why Ford halted production of their Mercury line of cars, because they obviously weren't putting their best people on it. But, that was hardly the only problem as my car actually failed for three reason. (I think this means I can confidently claim that it failed spectacularly. Go big or go home.) Now, two of the problems are beyond my technical reach but one of the reasons the state of Massachusetts hates my car is that I had a bulb half-out. It was one of those multi-function lights which means it would turn on, just not get brighter when I hit the brakes. Upon hearing this I was actually glad there were other things wrong with my truck because had I failed for the brake not lighting up enough I may have decked the kid who was giving me the test. Now, I may not be able to deal with the first two problems myself, but I do know how to change a light bulb. Even better, it turned out that I didn't have to leave my house to do it.

A couple months ago I had a post about taking apart my dashboard and discovering that not only were there way more bulbs than I expected to find, half the ones behind my dials were out and had been since the day I bought my SUV. However, other than that I have to admit I have been on a really good run about lights in my car. I think in all the time I have had it I have only had to change one headlight, which is better than most. (Oddly enough I kind of felt this was coming. My mom's SUV had failed its inspection the day before because there was a license plate light out, which got me thinking about how I almost never have lights out on my truck. First rule of keeping a streak alive? Don't think about the streak.) In fact, the last time I had to change a tail light was way back when I still had my Explorer. When I had run out to by that replacement bulb the only option was buying a set of them. Since I didn't want to waste a bulb on a truck I knew I would be getting rid of anyway I only replaced the burnt-out light and kept the spare in the glove compartment. When I bought the new truck I transferred all the stuff from one glove box to the other including the light, telling myself one day it would come in handy. Wouldn't you know it, not only did the old bulb still work, it fit perfectly into the light socket on the newer truck. Finally a car issue is working out in my favor.

I have to say not having to run out and buy yet another pair of lightbulbs when I only needed one was oddly satisfying. (In all honesty, it probably granted me more relief than it should have considering how close the auto store is to my house. It is not like already having a lightbulb saved me a hike down a dangerous mountain.) Now the only remaining concern is forcing myself to remember this is a rarity which really should be taken as the exception, not the rule. I think everyone out there has convinced themselves to hang on to things they probably should throw away because "someday I might need one of those" and then when the time comes for them to use that item they can't remember where they put it. Usually that is a good thing because you are reminded of that failure the next time you try and keep something, which forces you to get rid of it instead. In my case finally keeping something for years paid off so the fear is that this could really steer me down a path of keeping crap I don't need considering my success rate still hovers around .045. I just need to be careful because is a slippery slope and you don't want to keep everything because that is how people end up on TV with houses full of old newspapers and dead cats.

The Dimensions Don't Add Up

I have never made my feelings towards 3-D a secret - I don't like it, don't see the need for it and the fact that movies studios insist on continuing to make movies using it annoys me. I feel like it is a cheap gimmick designed to cover up a bad movie because no one has ever left a great movie and thought, "Man, if only that was in 3-D it would have been so much better." Also, I feel like America has already rejected 3-D technology many times over so I don't know why the entertainment industry keeps trying to bring it back. I think the biggest problem is that tickets to see 3-D movies cost more and in a time when people can pirate movies the day after they are released and more consumers are staying home to watch movies than ever before, shouldn't the movie industry be trying to make it cheaper to go to the movies, not more expensive? I guess it still works for kids movies because that generation hasn't discovered how useless it is yet, but for the rest of us if they never made another movie in it we would hardly notice. That is why the idea of 3-D TV may have been one of the worst in recent memory. Most TV personalities don't look good in high-def, so thinking they would look good coming right at us is crazy. In fact there was only one place I thought 3-D TV may have a place and that was sports. I assumed it would come in very handy for a sport like golf in which you don't always have great depth perception and the undulation of the greens often can't be appreciated on regular TV. But when ESPN recently announced they were ending their ESPN 3-D experiment I figured that was the end of it. However, it turns out people simply refuse to let 3-D die because now it is getting added in places which don't make sense.

I had to take my truck to get its yearly inspection this afternoon. Because I have never been in a mechanic's shop which was air conditioned, was looking at a wait of nearly an hour and today's temperatures were again well over 90 degrees, I quickly left my vehicle there and headed to a nearby store to pretend to be interested in what they were selling, but mostly to partake in the free air conditioning. While I was in that store I saw this. For those of you who don't feel like clicking through, I will explain what you are missing. It is essentially a slip 'n slide, but the days of the slip 'n slide you and I grew up with are long over. Because the newest idea for toy makers is to take an old, simple toy and add lots of complicated pieces, with the new versions it is all about finding ways to add extra water and most of slides also have a theme involved. To add extra water to the mix on this particular version you end your slide by going through a ring which sprays you with water and this ring is shaped like a shark's mouth to also gives the illusion that the shark is eating you. That would have been more than enough but to make the experience extra complicated the toy comes with a pair of 3-D goggles and the shark's teeth are in 3-D to make it look like they are coming right at you. This may be the stupidest thing I have ever seen in my life.

Are companies so desperate to make 3-D work that they are now applying it to everything? Obviously it wouldn't be the first time people shoehorned their product to fit a fad (I remember when I was a kid and one summer when glow-in-the-dark toys were suddenly cool. For the next year everything had to be glow-in-the-dark or it was useless.), but at least in that situation people were trying to glob their crap in with a successful idea. Here the idea failed and they are still putting it on everything. Normally you would think people would be in a hurry to get away from a public failure (there is a reason Segway accessories never became a cottage industry) but maybe they don't know how many people don't like 3-D. Also, let us not overlook the problem of applying a visual trick to a physical toy, which is idiotic. I really want to know - did the people who pitched this toy not know the difference between 2-D and 3-D? The whole point of 3-D is to give the illusion that something is coming at you - when you are sliding down a slippery piece of plastic towards the shark's mouth the teeth are already actually coming at you in 3 dimensions. Thus, there is no need to put them into 3-D to make them look like they are coming at you. Even the people who put "Dredd" in 3-D would say that is overkill. Apparently the movie makers of America may finally have given up on pushing 3-D movie on us, but they have simply handed the baton off to the toy companies to keep it going.

Seriously, how many bad products, movies and TV shows must we ignore before corporate America finally realizes that forcing 3-D down our throats will not make us enjoy 3-D? You would think the fact almost no one bought 3-D televisions when they were being pushed so hard a couple years ago would have been yet another clear indicator of that, but I guess not. (By the way, how pissed are you if you were one of the people who shelled out a couple hundred extra dollars for not only the 3-D TV but multiple pairs of 3-D glasses? Now you have all this extra technology and with ESPN out of the game almost no programming to use it with. This must be how people who bought BETA players must have felt. Moral of the story? Sometimes waiting to buy new gadgets pays off.) What we are left with are toys which don't even makes sense, all in an effort to keep reminding us that 3-D is a thing and that it is never going away. Hopefully these decisions were made a long time ago and we're just trying to burn through the inventory (the fact this toy was in the discount bin did give me some hope). If nothing else you hope these toy makers learned that if you are going to halfway rip-off a film in the name of making a toy at least go with the original "Jaws" and not "Jaws: 3-D" because that movie sucked.

Looks Can Be Deceiving

One of the first lessons we were all taught as children is that you should never judge a book by its cover. For a lot of obvious reasons this is a very good thing for kids to hear from an early age - people come in all shapes and sizes and if you assume something about a person based on appearance alone you are doing the whole world a disservice. Not only are you closing a door on a person who could surprise you if given the opportunity, but there is no telling how they could improve your life as well. Still, if you are honest with yourself than you probably know that rule can also be one of the hardest to follow. I have been guilty of this in the past and no matter how often I remind myself not to do it, occasionally a few judgmental thoughts manage to slip through the filter. For example, I know there is a chance the guy in the mullet with no shirt on and a beer in his hand screaming obscenities at passing cars actually has a day job as a rocket scientist, but I wouldn't bet money on it. The problem is that when those first impressions are so often proven to be correct it becomes natural for people to assume they will always be correct, which leads to entire swaths of people being treated differently because of how they look. It is also why I am becoming slightly concerned that I may look like an idiot.

This weekend I needed to run some trash which was too big for my bins up to the local dump. It was nothing spectacular - mostly cardboard from the box containing a new storage shed for down at the beach house and a few over-sized bamboo shades, also from the beach house. When I pulled in and met the attendant he informed me that the shades could go into the first dumpster, but the cardboard would have to go into the recycling big at the other end of the yard. Not a problem. If I have learned anything during various home renovation projects it is that you should never mix garbage because the people who work there take it very seriously. So, I had stopped at the first bin and was throwing the shades away when a piece of packing tape from the cardboard box wrapped itself around one of the shades and in pulling the shade out of the truck I brought a chunk of cardboard with it. I was pausing to separate the two when a man in a front end loader pulled up and yelled down to me that the cardboard wasn't allowed in that particular bin, frankly with a little more attitude in his voice than was necessary for the situation. It is one thing to take pride in your work, but it was not like I was throwing it in his personal garbage bin. I thought about responding that I knew that and was trying to separate the two but decided to just nod and continue doing what I was doing because I didn't feel like yelling over the engine of his machine. Instead I tossed the shades away and drove to the other end of the yard to dispose of the cardboard.

Slightly annoyed at being scolded when I wasn't doing anything wrong I pulled up to the recycling bin and began tossing the scraps into the dumpster. This was when a third worker drove passed and reminded me that I couldn't throw any packing material in there because the bin was for cardboard only. At this point I was fuming because I get really annoyed at having people repeat things at me when I heard them the first time as well as being yelled before I have even had the chance to do anything wrong. On top of that I was even more annoyed because the cardboard had gotten wet and was disintegrating in my hand so when I told this guy I already knew that, admittedly, I probably threw him a little more attitude than he was expecting out of the exchange. (Paying the attitude forward, as it were.) That is why I was not surprised that he sat in his truck and watched me like a hawk as I folded and compressed the cardboard before I threw it in the bin so as to not take up much room. There wouldn't be any packing material in that bin - not on that guy's watch. Adding to the absurdity of the situation was the fact that sitting smack dab in the middle of this 'cardboard only' bin was a completely-intact VCR. I guess they aren't always so vigilant about watching what goes in this bin, proving the issue was with me.

This is hardly the first time this has happened. Even though I think I pick up on how things should be done very quickly, apparently no one else shares that faith because I throughout my life I have constantly had people repeating instructions to me before I have the chance to screw them up. I guess they may just be trying to be helpful, but more often it just feels like they are insulting my intelligence. Thus, I can only conclude that most people think I look like an idiot who need constant supervision to stop me from messing up their system. (While this is not desirable, I guess it is better than the alternative, which is thinking I look like the kind of asshole who does what he wants because the rules don't apply to him.) Even worse, there really isn't much I can do about it because short of surgery I don't know of any way to change my face. And even if surgery was an option I don't know how you would alter your appearance to make yourself look smarter. I've heard that a lot of NBA stars wear fake glasses because they believe glasses make you look more intelligent but I actually kind of need my glasses to be real so I can, you know, see. When the glass in your glasses has to be real that tends to cut down on the number of vanity pairs you own. Besides, Albert Einstein is generally considered to be one of the smartest human ever and he didn't wear glasses. I guess it is just a good thing the people who tested his theories didn't hold that against him.

The Don Of HBO

Like a lot of people, I was saddened by the news in the middle of the week that actor James Gandolfini had died in Italy. As so often (unfortunately) happens, Ganfolfini was probably under-appreciated while he was alive and it has only been since he passed away that people have been more open with their praise for his acting skills and for what kind of person he was. Very rarely a leading man on the big screen, Gandolfini still had a habit of popping up in several acclaimed movies and often was very good in them. Still, he was obviously best known for his work on "The Sopranos" and while everyone was talking about that this week it made me think that sometimes we forget just how much of a game-changer "The Sopranos" really was. Before it came on the air in 1998, the majority of original programming on HBO (and most of the premium cable channels) were either comedy show where people just swore because they could or sex shows which were nothing more than an excuse to show gratuitous nudity. "The Sopranos" was really the first premium-cable drama that was also accepted by a mainstream audience and rewarded by the critics. Now those kinds of shows are pretty much the only ones which get nominated. It went from being niche to being the way business is handled.

I didn't even have HBO during that time and I got just as swept up in the phenomenon as the next person, which should tell you all you need to know about how popular this show was when it was airing. Even in its later years it still held a position of power, as evidence by the global freak-out with its controversial series finale. "The Sopranos" proved to television executives that there was an audience out there who not only could handle a little extra violence and the occasional swear provided the writing was good enough but they actually preferred it. At a time when more shows were being cleaned up and watered down it was unapologetically an adult show and if you had a problem with the content that was your fault for ignoring the warning at the start. It also challenged the accepted format which stated seasons needed to be 22 episodes, instead contending 13 was enough as long as the 13 you aired were really good. Plus it came along at just the right time as the quality of TVs were improving and people ran out to buy season after season on DVD. Honestly, it completely altered the way TV operates. Shows like "Breaking Bad" owe their very existence to the success of "The Sopranos." I can only hope someone close to Gandolfini reminded him of his place in TV history because far too often we don't acknowledge these kinds of things until after they have happened.

Weekly Sporties

-Like every other member of the sports media, I have no idea what is going on with Aaron Hernandez. However, unlike the rest of the sports media, I will not spend any time pretending that I do. I know the evidence which has been revealed so far does not paint him in a good light, but I don't know what this could mean for his future. They've been saying arrest warrants are coming any second now, but that has been threatened for a couple days and he remains a free man. It's all very confusing and I have to say the OJ-like helicopter chase around Boston was pretty pathetic for all involved. Still, I have to say the most annoying part of this story is just how many journalists are taking this opportunity to prove that they once got a B+ in that one law class they took in college. I barely trust what they have to say when it comes to free agency and suddenly I'm supposed to trust their judgement regarding the legal system? Also, the blatant stereotyping they are doing is close to making my head explode. I can not tell you how many pundits I have seen on TV bringing up Hernandez's past as if it is even slightly relevant. Yes, he ran into trouble for smoking pot in college but to me that is a totally separate issue. The simple matter is that not all crimes are the same. I have worked with plenty of potheads and none of them were ever accused of killing anyone. And just as many pundits are totally willing to believe Hernandez is guilty because he has a tremendous number of tattoos. Sleeves of tattoos, while not a look I would want myself or for any of my nieces, do not make you a criminal. All of this hand-wringing about who Hernandez may be friends with has once again turned a light on to the tremendous gap between the people who cover sports and the people who play them. I always want to crap on the NCAA because I think it is a bunch of old guys trying to tell a bunch of young guys how to behave but now I see that  problem has managed to work its way into almost every aspect of sports. I know asking for people to wait until all the facts have come in to make draw their conclusions would be asking far too much, but how about we at least only leap to conclusions based on things we do know and not start filling in the blanks with people's insane prejudices?

-At this time last week I thought it was a virtual certainty that Doc Rivers would be leaving the Celtics to coach the Clippers. And I have to say that while I appreciate the job Doc has done here, I would not be heartbroken to see him go. You see, I remember the job Doc did in the pre-Big 3 days (allow me to give you a hint - not great). Thus, knowing this team is going to have a tough season next year because KG and Paul Pierce are probably going to be gone and Rajon Rondo will be out for half the year with a knee injury, I really didn't see the point in paying Rivers $7 million to win 35 games. If the team is going to start rebuilding, may as well go all the way with it. I did think it was a little dickish of Doc to try and force his way out since he had to know rebuilding was coming when he signed a 5-year contract, but if he's not into it than I would rather he leave now. Plus if they could trade him the the team saves a little money, gets an asset they weren't expecting to have and Doc gets to keep coaching a contender - everyone wins. I think the problem for everyone invested in this is that we forgot the other team involved in this was the notoriously cheap and poorly-run Clippers. They don't have a history of paying coaches that kind of money and were probably only in it to keep up appearances for Chris Paul. (Paul's involvement is reportedly what got talks restarted on Friday.) So, things could obviously change but it certainly appears Doc will be around next season. Now everyone is talking about how awkward it will be for Rivers and the Celtics to be reunited, but I actually don't think it will be too bad. First off, guys like Pierce and KG love Doc and will forgive him in an instant. But even more importantly the rest of the team is full of professionals and they will understand this is a business. There isn't a player in that locker room who hasn't been in Doc's position, trying to get out of a bad situation using the only leverage they have. Hell, half of them are probably only mad because Rivers wasn't trying to take them with him. It would be nice if everyone just stayed where they signed a contract but there is no time for loyalty in professional sports and that goes for management as well as the players - this week was just a reminder of that.

-Speaking of coaches trading teams, it is the offseason for most of the teams in the NHL and that means it is time to pass coaches around. I frequently question just how important coaching is in the NHL and the ease at which teams hire and fire coaches does not do much to change my mind. I mean, changing a coach in football can require getting entirely new personnel to run their style of offense and even baseball teams will wait far longer than they should to fire guys simply because they don't want to upset the delicate balance if most of the locker room likes the current manager. Meanwhile, it seems like NHL teams interchange coaches the same way you or I would pass movies or books between friends. It is completely normal for a coach to be fired on Friday and be behind the bench for another team within a week. Somehow it is both the most and least-stable job in sports. It is like being one of Will Ferrell's friends - find your way into one of his movies and you'll never have to worry about landing another acting gig for as long as you live because Ferrell will always give you a cameo in whatever movie he is working on. Thus it feels like NHL coaches never quit - they are just reassigned. Still, I think this one takes the cake - just a couple days after the New York Rangers hired Alain Vigneault (the Vancouver Canucks old coach) as their new coach, the Canucks reportedly hired John Tortorella, who was coaching the Rangers until about two weeks ago. Even though both coaches guided their teams to the playoffs, both were fired because the teams had visions of Lord Stanley's Cup dancing in their heads and came up short. So basically the franchises traded underachieving coaches. And what is even stranger is that it would not surprise me for the move to work out for everyone involved. (Ironically I think Tortorella's big personality will be ok in Vancouver more than Vigneault's under-stated one will fly in New York.) The goods news for both teams is that if these coaching hires don't work out they will have no shortage of candidates, because there are about 22 other NHL teams who could drop their coaches at any second.

-Back in the NBA, one of the lasting images of the NBA Finals will be Miami Heat fans streaming out of the arena during Game 6 when the team was down 4 with about :30 seconds to go. Even though the NBA has started to bring out security for the post-game trophy ceremony that is a lifetime in professional basketball and as you probably know the Heat eventually came back to tie that game, then win it in overtime as many of the fans who had left embarrassed themselves even further by trying to force their way back into the stadium. Basically, this was every stereotype of the Miami sports fan - bandwagon jumpers, quick to quit on the team, only got tickets to say they were there and have no real knowledge of the game or its history which would tell them there was plenty of time left for a comeback - come to life. Now, a lot of people have defended the Heat fans saying it was a work night and those people probably wanted to beat traffic. Normally I would allow you to defend that position. I personally can't think of a reason why I would ever leave a game early (unless you leave in the 3rd quarter you will still sit in traffic), but I will concede there are plenty of perfectly acceptable reasons other people would use to justify leaving a game before the clock ran out. For example, it is not like they play for the team and their alarm clock is going off no matter who wins the game. The problem for all these Heat apologists is that pretty much all of those defenses are rendered moot when you add the context of it being an NBA Finals game. When you have reached this point in the season there is no excuse for leaving a game early. A lot of people hate the Yankees because they feel like they just buy their championships. Well, at least their fans are knowledgeable about the game and stick around to the very end. Most people hated LeBron for "The Decision" based on how he left his old team. I hated "The Decision" based on where they agreed to form this super-team and all Game 6 did was reinforce me feelings. Miami may have another Championship parade coming their way, but all those fans who left the game early don't deserve to be a part of it.

-I've never seen a game there myself, but by all accounts the Coliseum in Oakland is a terrible place for baseball. According to online reviews it has terrible sight-lines and since the stadium needs to be able to also host Oakland Raider games there is not much the team can do to fix the situation. That is why the A's have been trying to get funding for a new stadium for years but simply can't afford it. The team currently has an offer from the city of San Jose who is willing to give them the land and build them a stadium (they even have a naming rights deal lined up), which sounds like just the kind of sweet deal that baseball should want to jump all over. There is just one problem - the San Francisco Giants. You see, the Giants are technically closer to San Jose than the A's and thus have exclusive marketing rights to the area and they aren't interested in all those potential fans switching allegiances if they have a closer option. That is why the Giants aren't allowing the rest of the MLB owners to call for a vote to regarding any A's move (if 23 owners approve the move it will override the exclusive rights the team has to San Jose) and so far spineless Commissioner Bud Selig is doing what he always does - telling the teams to work it out for themselves so he does't have to make a decision and risk making either side mad at him. I'm always fascinated to watch these owner votes because on the one hand thanks to collective bargaining every team makes more money when a team has a full stadium and a sweet deal with their city. On the other, they don't want to set a precedent and allow baseball to plop a team into their backyard. So, the owners aren't in any hurry to address this issue either and that is why this week the city of San Jose sued MLB, demanding they call a vote and allow the A's to move. Ultimately I expect some kind of resolution which allowed the A's to move to San Jose because the teams have been neighbors for this long and fans have made their choice, so it is not like the Giants will see mass defections. This whole situation is about just trying to agree on a price. Still, even though the owners are the ones dragging their feet to avoid any potential conflict, why do I feel like the fans will ultimately be the ones who get screwed over?

-Former Major League slugger Manny Ramirez is still hanging on to baseball, playing overseas in Taiwan. Taiwan has a good baseball culture but I doubt their pitching is the same caliber of the stuff Ramirez has faced for so long, so I think the least surprising news was that Ramirez was playing quite well - hitting for a good average and smacking a few homeruns. The more important aspect was that Manny appeared to be enjoying himself and I think the team liked having him. The problem is that due to some insane Taiwan baseball rules, Ramirez could only sign with his team for 3 months and that time is fast approaching. Therefore, he is leaving his team in Taiwan for a team in Japan, trying to continue his quest to get back to the majors. While still not the same level as over here, Japanese baseball will definitely be a step up in competition for Manny and I think if he proves that he can play at that level a team in America may come calling, at least for a minor league contract. Some say that Manny would never want to play at that level and would only come back for a spot on a major-league roster, but I disagree. Think about it this way - you don't fly across the globe to play baseball unless you really love the game. I don't care how reckless he may be with his money, even Manny couldn't blow through it all this quickly. On top of that I remember when Manny was playing for the Red Sox and had to go down to Pawtucket for a rehab assignment - he had so much fun playing down there he never wanted to come back up, so I bet he would love a minor-league assignment. Don't take this post as an endorsement because I'm definitely not saying the Red Sox should take him back (I think Manny has worn out his welcome in Boston, Los Angeles, Cleveland and Tampa Bay), but if I were a borderline team which needed a DH I would think about it. He could still help a baseball team and if we have learned anything from the history of the sport it is that teams are willing to put up with a lot of quirky traits as long as you hit for power.

-It is totally normal for a recently retired person to look for a new way to occupy their new-found free time once they leave their job. That is why I was hardly surprised that for a couple days after he announced he would no longer play professional soccer there was a rumor that David Beckham wanted to try-out for an NFL team. I'm not totally sure who started this rumor but on the surface it made a little sense because obviously Beckham has a strong leg and that is the main thing you need to be an NFL kicker. While the NFL wouldn't offer the money he would make from soccer it is still a pretty good paycheck and it would give him a chance to grow his brand in America, if that kind of thing was still important to him (the least-talented NFL player is still more popular than the best soccer player). Plus, he's only 38 and guys can kick into their 40s. However, the reason I didn't think this was going to work is that the second thing you need to be a successful NFL kicker is accuracy because goal posts are not nearly as wide as you think they are. Given that a soccer ball and a football are shaped totally different it is actually pretty crazy to assume that just because a person is really good with one that they would be just as lethal with the other. It just goes to show how many people think certain jobs in sports are much easier than they really are. Natural talent does not always translate. It always makes me crazy when pundits try and tell you that guys like Kobe Bryant would be great at football or Russell Wilson could go back to baseball at any time. If that were the case they would have done that, trust me (there is a reason Wilson walked away from football the first time). Anyone who thinks David Beckham could show up to an NFL training camp and start drilling 60 yard field goals has obviously never tried to kick one. (I could't make a PAT when I tried it.) The good news is Beckham quickly shot the rumor down anyway and people went on with their lives. All that being said, I wish we could have seen him try it one time, just to see how he would do.

Too Much Of A Good Thing

Just the other day I was talking about how annoying I find it when mildly funny viral videos spawn dozens of copycats who try and piggyback on the success of that video without having to do any original work of their own. Well, the immensely popular "Drunk History" series found an extremely easy way to work around that problem - they just had all their videos feature insanely famous actors. It is one thing when a viral video featuring a bunch of people you've never heard of gets a lot of views because any copycat video can do that. They just need to round up a few friends with good equipment and no one can tell the difference. But when your video features Will Ferrell, Don Cheadle and Zooey Deschanel that is going to immediately knock a lot of people out of being able to put up a similar video in hopes of getting some accidental views. You certainly couldn't claim to be part of the series when your video is starring nothing but people from your chemistry class. This nearly bulletproof idea means the only way "Drunk History" could screw up this good deal they have created is if they mess it up for themselves and I am slightly worried they are about to do that very thing.

I was watching Comedy Central the other night and discovered that starting in early July "Drunk History" is getting its very own TV show. At first I was very excited for this because I enjoyed every single one of the videos and even though I didn't see all the ones on HBO (because I don't have HBO), the couple I did see were very good. However, if we have learned anything from movie such as "Night at the Roxbury" and programs as "(Bleep) My Dad Says", it is that not every great skit can be stretched out to make a movie or TV show. The danger with sketch comedy is that when it is bad you know it right away and unlike stand-up, where you feel compelled to stick around for a few jokes because there is often no link between them, when a sketch is stupid you can leave and come back several minutes later. In today's world of 900 channels and the internet constantly vying for your attention the last think you want is people flipping away, because they rarely remember to come back. I am fairly confident that the producers of this show know what they are doing and hopefully they didn't order too many episodes because while the premise is extremely funny, it is just the one premise over and over again. At least if it does go bad we will always have the really funny originals to fall back on.

Drunk History 4 - Featuring Paul Schneider from Drunk History

A Hot Button Question

I have no problem ignoring a lot of urban legends. I don't think the Moon landing was faked, I will never spend any time in the wilderness looking for Bigfoot and given the fact everyone working in government likes to blab to reporters I am sure aliens have never visited out planet. However, there is one urban myth which continues to hold my attention - the SAP button. If you have ever watched the beginning of a sports telecast you know what I am talking about. Right as the game is about to start one of the announcers will say the following sentence, "Where available this broadcast can be heard in Spanish simply by pressing the SAP button on your television." Apparently pressing this button will change the audio over to an alternative set of announcers. At least, that is what I think happens - for all I know it changes every channel over to Spanish. You see, I don't know what happens when you press an SAP button because ever since I was a kid I have searched high and low on every television I have ever own and I have never once seen an SAP button. I've even started looking on my remote and I still haven't seen one, so at this point I have no reason to believe they are real. For all I know the SAP button is like the Santa Claus - just something our parents started telling us about years ago and are keeping up the illusion for the younger generation.

Of course, it is not like the SAP button would do me much good seeing as how I don't speak the language, even a little. Back in 7th grade we were given the option of French or Spanish and apparently I thought I would be doing a lot more travelling to Canada when I got older because I picked French. (Obviously, had I known how many people in this country would speak Spanish I would have gone with that. There is a reason the button doesn't take you to the French audio stream.) Anyway, it is because I am not good with Spanish that I was slightly disturbed when one of my cable movie channels randomly switched over to being a Spanish language version a couple of weeks ago. My cable provider has always offered a lot of Spanish channels, but they are usually off in their own block or come after their English counterparts. This one is smack in the middle of the regular movies and I have to say it continues to throw me for a loop when I flip passed. At least they have finally started putting the titles in Spanish, because otherwise it would typically be that I would be flipping around looking for something to watch, the guide would tell me it was a movie I wouldn't mind watching for a few minutes and then when I would click on that channel it would be in Spanish. Muy agravante.

[Sidebar: A couple of weeks ago I had a post about where I explained why I think movies featuring foreign languages should always be dubbed rather than have subtitles because I find subtitles distract from the rest of the action. Well, after a couple of weeks of accidentally landing on the Spanish movie channel I have noticed a pattern. It appears the more expensive the movie the higher the likelihood it will be dubbed. It seems like every big-budget blockbuster the channel shows has voice-overs, whereas the random, straight-to-DVD movies which randomly come up in the rotation are subtitled. I can only assume this means having someone dub your movie in a foreign language is a much more expensive. Still, I think my favorite part of dubbed movies are when the actors need to replicate basic sounds, like a grunting noise when someone is jumping over a wall. That noise doesn't translate? They couldn't leave it alone? I assume they do it so as to not break up the audio file but it is not like we wouldn't know the movie was being dubbed otherwise. I mean, the lips and words aren't close to syncing up, so I think we can figure this one out. Either way, it never fails to make me laugh. I also love it because it always appears as though the voice-over artist feels the need to make even the grunts sound like they have an accent to them.]

Of course, all of these Spanish language channels make me wonder if the SAP button is even necessary anymore. The days on Univision being your only option for Spanish programming are long gone. Now there are so many foreign language channels on my cable guide (pretty much every language has at least one channel somewhere out there) that it has started to feel like you could just watch those and not worry about having to find this magic button on your TV because every channel you could ever want has a Spanish counterpart. At this point it is a little like having a CD burner on your computer. Sure, you could bring burn a bunch of CDs for your roadtrip but isn't it easier to hook up your MP3 player, create a couple of playlists and bring all your music? That is why I am starting to wonder that even if I did buy a TV with an SAP button on it would it do anything or are these announcers just reading this announcement out of habit, like when they tell you not to record the game without the expressed written consent of the league? It certainly wouldn't be the first time society kept insisting on a warning which was no longer necessary. If you don't believe me just ask yourself how many people extinguished their cigarettes the last time you were on a flight and were told the captain had turned on the "no smoking" sign. I'm pretty sure the last time that happened the Loch Ness monster was still a guppy.

Seen This Before

If you watch the news anymore you can see that these days it is all about video. It used to be that if you couldn't tell what you were looking at news directors wouldn't bother putting it on air, but that rule has been tossed aside in the name of shaky camera phone footage. Now they live by the rule that a picture is worth a thousand words, even if it isn't a particularly helpful picture. I guess the idea of seeing the news as it happens, even with poor quality, is better than just hearing someone describe it to you makes sense, but most of the time the videos just give me a headache. Sometimes the video itself is news, which I really can't understand. A few months ago everyone when everyone was making Harlem Shake videos the news ran a story on it in which they just showed a bunch of YouTube clips of people doing the Harlem Shake. How exactly is that news? I know some people think a video going mainstream is the apex of success, but I contend as soon as someone is on the news explaining it your parents you have already begun your slippery slope back to anonymity. The goods news is that there will always be another viral sensation to come along and half of them are easy to understand because they are pretty much rip-offs of a previous fad. I just think it was time someone told the people making the copies that their efforts are never quite as good as the videos they are trying to emulate.

Normally I would be in favor of people copying a good idea because it just leads to more for everyone. I mean, if blatantly ripping off a competitor didn't exist there would only be one kind of car to buy and every manufacturer would only produce one item. The problem is that concept really should only apply to things which would help us all like generic drugs or really good cake. But instead we are all in a tremendous hurry to make yet another video of a guy falling off his roof into a pool to try and grab 15 seconds of fame. Of course, this is even worse in the comedy world because making making a video is super-easy and coming up with an original comedy idea is hard. Plus, unlike a joke where someone can call you out by naming the comic who said it first no one every takes the time to trace the origin of internet videos. That means the copying is here to stay. However, I would like to ask the people thinking about making a copycat video to really ask themselves if they could at least come up with a new branch off that comedy tree, because some of them are really bad. I think the worst offender ever is the "Shit Girls Say" video. The original viral clip was very funny. The problem is that it not only spawned a book, but it gave birth to about 100 copycat videos, 95% of which were not funny at all.

You see, the best rip-off artists are the ones who can at least take the joke in a slightly new direction. They don't reinvent the wheel, but they do manage to put on some nicer rims. I'm afraid the entire copycat process is just getting too fast for that. Rather than take a couple days to think of a creative spin on it, people are doing near shot-by-shot reshoots and putting it online. (It didn't work for "Psycho", it won't work for you.) I bring this up because a couple weeks ago a clip was brought to my attention "Convos With My 2 Year-old." In the video a guy recreates actual conversations he has had with his young daughter, but rather than have her stand there he has another grown man fill in and read her lines. It shows just how absurd that conversation would be if it was between two adults and it is funny enough. The problem is that just the other day I was looking up a DIY project on YouTube and because I had watched that video, YouTube suggested I would like "Actual Conversations With My 2-month Old." That video features and old man doing the baby's part and considering 2 month-olds can't talk it is just as stupid as you imagine it is. I only made it a few seconds in before I couldn't take it anymore. This is exactly the kind of thing I am talking about - I don't really care if you are unoriginal, just don't be unoriginal and unfunny.

Then again, considering how often Hollywood rips off ideas from one another I shouldn't be surprised it is happening on the internet, where anything goes. But, at least with movies the second offering is better because that is usually the one which was worked on first and had a completed script which went through multiple re-writes until it was good, whereas a studio will rushed the copycat through just to make sure it will be released to the general public first. (This is why "White House Down" will probably be better than "Olympus Has Fallen".) The problem is that this is what you will get as long as internet content goes largely untrademarked - anyone can take it and make it their own and they don't even have to change anything. Originality may be coveted but it certainly isn't rewarded. It just seems really unfair to all the people who came up with the idea in the first place. Plus, if you saw how much the quality of the second and third videos in the "Conversation" series had dipped from the original, it serves as a stark reminder that when you base an entire series on one joke that joke is going to get old fast on its own - it really doesn't need any help by being told by 100 other people with almost no variation.

It's Draining To Think About

The last two days have seen a very strange weather pattern in this area. It goes a little something like this - the day starts out sunny and nice, maybe a touch on the muggy side. Then sometime in the late afternoon, without warning, the sky turns black and the heavens open as lightning starts flashing almost non-stop, with some of the lightning quite fierce. (This afternoon I could hear the thunder getting closer, so I started doing the trick of counting after the lighting to try and figure out how close the storm actually was. After one flash I only got to "On-" before thunder was shaking my house.) What is extra nice is that at no point the night before does the weatherman tell you any of this is coming. Anyway, as the rain was pouring down I checked the local Doppler channel to see just how much longer the storms were going to last. (The only good part is that for as strong as they were they were at least fast-moving.) While checking out the radar I also noticed there was a warning scrolling across the bottom. It warned that there was a flash-flood warning in place until further notice, giving me helpful tips like don't wade into a rapidly-moving water. Now, I could lament whether or not this was necessary since the only people who would be able to see this particular announcement would already be in their homes and there isn't much you could do in that situation. Or I could talk about whether warnings like that even matter in quick-moving storms like these. Or even if these warning only exist to keep the graphics guys busy between blizzard and hurricane seasons. Instead I wonder if they would even be necessary if people had designed drains to work a little better.

It feels like every single time there is a bad storm the sewer grates on the streets near my house get overrun with water and flood the nearby street. Believe me when I tell you some of these flooded areas can get very deep (at some point remind me to tell you the story of me and Franny in his sister's new car). During prolonged storms overrun drains can stay that way for days and wash out entire roadways. I just can't help but wonder why we still put up with this? The idea of  paving a street in such a way as to create a low area which serves as a collection spot for the water so the entire roadway doesn't end up under water starts out very smart, but when you aim all this water at one place and then put an inadequate drain at the bottom of that low area the idea stops looking quite so brilliant. If you suggested a system like that in any other circumstance you would be laughed out of the room, so the fact it has been allowed to stand when it comes to public roadways is rather staggering. I mean, shouldn't we have come up with a better system to drain water away from the roads so that this stops happening by now? I'm not asking for anything drastic either - just better. And I think that if we are going to look at fixing this problem the first place we should look at are the drains.

Obviously I am not a civil engineer, but it does seem like we stopped working on better drainage grates about 100 years ago. I'm all for quitting while you are ahead and not wasting time trying to improve on perfection but since they started using this style I don't even know if we tried anything other than making the grates small enough so that little kids couldn't fall through them anymore. Are we really supposed to believe we got the first generation right the first time and then quit, yet we've been making toothbrushes more complicated every year since the 1970s? Human nature compels us to try and fix that which is not really broken and I would think a product like this which actually would help a lot of people would get more attention (plus, it would be a government contract and those are where the money is). It just seems that since the job of these grates is to get water off the street and instead they are actually creating spots where it floods they aren't doing their job very well and could probably stand to have someone take a crack at making them work a little better. And it's not just the sewer drains which have an issue. My gutters apparently don't like it when it rains too much too fast because they also clogged during these storms and caused water to pour over the sides, which is insane when you think about it because getting rain away from your foundation is the only reason you put gutters on your house in the first place.

I completely understand it when a product fails to perform under an extreme circumstance it was never designed to endure. After all, only a jerk would complain that his toaster stopped working after he dropped it in the ocean. I simply don't feel like a severe rainstorm is an extreme circumstance, especially for products which were designed around the concept of dealing with rain. I mean, isn't the whole point of product testing to make sure what you are selling will hold up and give the consumers their money's worth? Have the people who designed a gutter never seen an infomercial? Heck, they should see some of the crazy stuff they do to cars to make sure they will start even in usual circumstances, so why wouldn't products like drains and gutters have the same standards? In all honestly it doesn't even seem like it would be that hard to create a test lab - just turn many hoses on at the same time and watch what happens. When it gets to the moment where the gutter can no longer handle all the water, that is when you should go back and keep working on the design. I know the basic laws of physics aren't going to allow you to make many extreme changes, but after two days of minor flooding for storms that shouldn't have been this big of a problem it feels like any modifications would be a welcome improvement.

Lawn Loitering

Starting last summer my lawnmower began to have a very annoying habit of taking forever to get going. Even when it was primed and ready, I would have to pull on the starter rope 10-15 times before the mower would roar to life... for about 30 seconds. Five pulls later and it would start again... for about a minute. It was only after another 10 pulls that it would start a third time and 20 more would finally get it to run long enough for me to get the lawn mowed. You may be wondering why I never bothered to have an expert look at it and the answer is quite simple - it was still starting. You see, I have the very annoying character trait of being quite willing to deal with things not performing well as long as they eventually complete their task. So, provided I could eventually get the lawn mowed that was all I cared about. Honestly, the only way I would have ever caved and taken it to get a check-up at a professional was if it just refused to start at all. I figured part of it was my fault because I don't mow the lawn nearly enough, allowing the mower to sit for a couple weeks at a time, which probably doesn't aid performance. On top of that, I figured mowing the lawn is supposed to suck a little so taking forever to get the mower started was just part of deal. Still, looking back on all that extra tugging and pulling I guess what happened this weekend was inevitable.

I gave the starter rope a strong pull and to my surprise the mower roared to life. It was the usual routine of only working for a minute before cutting out, but the fact that I had only had to pull once to get to that point made it feel like I was almost skipping a step. I was sure fate was on my side as I pulled the rope a second time... and it snapped off in my hand. It had frayed on the inside and broken at the point of contact. The good news is that in addition to my lawnmower, the tool box is also in the shed so I didn't have to spend time going back and forth looking for the right bolt sizes. Even better, the entire casing was held on by just two small bolts and those came off with relative ease. After that it was just a matter of threading the broken rope through the two guide holes and tying a new knot. [Sidebar: this was not easy and for the first time in ages, the DIY section of YouTube failed me. On the video I watched the expert skipped right passed this part, making it appear to be an extremely simple process, while the reality is that it is only simple if you have long, thin fingers. Add lawnmower repairman to the list of careers I will never undertake.] Fortunately after a couple of attempts I was able to force the rope through and tie a new knot. I figured it was an annoying task, but at least I had repaired the lawnmower and could go about my task. This is where it should be pointed out that I don't actually know anything about lawnmowers.

For you see, on the next pull the lawnmower again roared to life, ran for a second and died. The good news is that is typical. It was also good news that my new knot held firm. The bad news is that I still had all the excess rope in my hands because while I had fixed the rope, I had not fixed the spring which would recoil the rope back in. That meant I would only get one pull before having to take the top of the motor apart and winding the rope back up manually. That didn't sounds like a particularly efficient idea, so I quickly went back to YouTube to see about fixing the spring. Unfortunately there were plenty of videos on the topic, but none which related to my brand of mower. (I'm not sure if this means I have a good mower which never needs repair or a bad one which isn't worth fixing.) Trying not to take too many things apart because it would mean having to put them back together in the correct order, I just tried winding the spring on my own. On the next pull I got a small bit of recoil, enough to get a second pull on the starter rope, but still not enough to convince the mower to start for good. (Even worse I had to untie the knot to do this and then re-tie it when I was finished. I can't not stress that you should not do this strongly enough. Seriously, don't press your luck trying to thread the rope through the guide hole twice.) Now I was just trying to get the mower to stay running and deal with the problem later.

I think the most annoying part of this whole thing is that I was going through all this and I didn't even want to mow the stupid lawn anyway. Normally I like throwing on my headphones and tuning out the world for an hour, but in this particular instance there were plenty of things I could have been doing with my Saturday afternoon which would have been much more enjoyable. There really is nothing worse than when a chore you really don't want to do also becomes a difficult one. The issue is that I had let the lawn go for far too long and it was not like ignoring it would suddenly make it shorter. Besides, as I mentioned the mower likes to go through a series of false starts before finally kicking on for good and I couldn't shake the feeling the next pull would be the one which allow me to get the job done. (I assume this irrational confidence that circumstances will change is what keeps people excessively buying lottery tickets.) Unfortunately that pull wasn't the magic one and neither was the attempt after that. Dozens of pulls are normally just part of the procedure, but when you have to take apart part of the engine casing after every pull it really becomes time consuming. The good part is that every time I took the casing apart I came up with a new idea of what I should try next to fix the spring and while none of them worked, at least I know not to waste my time on them later. Eventually the fifth time was the charm, the mower stayed on and I could finally clean up the lawn.

Sadly, this doesn't really solve my problem, just postpones it and allowing problems with my lawnmower to linger is what got me into this spot in the first place. (Allow me to share something weird - for some reason after the lawn was finished I felt the need to go in and wind the pull rope up one more time. While mowing I had just tied the extra rope around the handlebar to keep it out of my way. But, my particular mower will keep running as long as the handlebar is being squeezed, so I had to undo it when I finished and leave the rope dangling. That seemed very messy to me, so after giving the lawnmower an hour to cool down I took the outer shell off one last time to wind the string up and then didn't touch it. So, from all outside appearances it looks the same as it did before. OCD can be a hell of a thing sometimes.) I just need to make sure I get around to working on this before I let the lawn get out of hand again or else I will find myself up against the clock, tugging and disassembling all over again. The goods news is that I now have another couple of weeks before the lawn should get too long and hopefully I can find a solution to my problem before that. But if I can't it may finally be time to take it in and let a professional take a look at it. If that does happen I may also have him take a look at the starter since he'll be in the area.

Happy Father's Day!

Happy Father's Day to

All the dads out there!

Hope you have a wonderful day!

If your dad is anything like mine (and I have notice this is a very common phenomenon with fathers), your dad enjoys singing. For as long as I can remember, my father has had the habit of walking around the house, belting out whatever tune is in his head that afternoon. What's worse is that they are catchy. If you are around my dad for too long whatever song get stuck in his head is almost guaranteed to worm its way into yours. It wouldn't normally be an issue, except my father's internal jukebox is set to the most random channel ever. Some of the songs he comes up with are way out of the mainstream and a couple haven't been heard on the radio in decades. I would give you the example by making the tune he's been singing for the last couple of days this week's musical interlude, but I don't think anyone ever bothered to upload it to YouTube. When you consider the other music people have decided needed to be available to the masses, it show you just how out deep his memory banks can run. Instead, we're going to the song which is most often stuck in his head. He took this cassette on the family trip across the country many years ago and everyone knew all the words to this song by Pennsylvania. Love you, dad!

Weekly Sporties

-On Monday my worst sports fears came true as quarterback Tim Tebow signed with the Patriots. This had been rumored for a little while, but I had been holding out hope it was just a negotiating tactic by Tebow and his agent to get another team to up their offer. Sadly, that was not the case. Now, it is not that I have a dislike for Tebow the person, I simply find the amount of coverage he gets in relation to the amount and quality at which he actually plays to be very annoying and I just would rather that be someone else's headache. Even worse? Tebow on the Patriots makes a ton of sense. If there was ever going to be a coach who could squash the media crush around Tebow, it is Bill Belichick. He is not going to feed the beast and hint about getting him into the game as a change of pace - if anything he will get annoyed when the media asks about him too many times in a row. (The team has already designated Tebow as one of its two 'star' interviews, meaning he is only required to speak to the media once a week.) Plus, this move reunited Tebow with offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels, who drafted Tim in Denver and clearly likes the kid. But, where this really makes a ton of sense is from a football perspective. Most football experts agree that if Tebow is going to have any chance to grow into an NFL quarterback he needed to go somewhere and essentially act as an apprentice for the position. Well, he will have that in New England. The Patriots are unlikely to mess around with Tebow and put him into all sorts of strange formations so he can concentrate on working out his mechanical problems and because they have both Tom Brady and Ryan Mallett they are unlikely to play him much at quarterback which means he will be under no pressure to start at all. Plus, unlike the Jets no one in New England will be clamoring for him to take over every time Brady throws a bad pass. It will really be like red-shirting in college and give Tebow to rehab his image with NFL coaches, who think he is not worth the distractions. The Patriots represent the best chance to extend his stay in the NFL. So, this truly is the best possible scenario for Tebow, I just really wish it was happening somewhere else.

-This has been a crazy year for coaching decisions in the NBA. I can honestly not think of a year in which more coaches who made the playoffs were fired or allowed to leave when their contract expired. This week we added Grizzlies' head coach Lionel Hollins to the list of guys looking for work after the Grizzlies let him walk. Hollins was in the last year of his deal and wanted to stay in Memphis, but after taking the Grizzlies to the Western Conference Finals he probably wanted a significant pay raise (not a terribly unreasonable request) and ownership was not willing to meet his price. Much like last week when the Denver Nuggets fired George Karl, I wonder if Memphis is truly aware of where they stand in the NBA's hierarchy. Yes, for the first time in years the Grizzlies have a solid roster and could contend for a high playoff spot for the next several years. But apparently they want a big name coach to go with those big expectations and don't think Hollins carries enough name recognition to mobilize the fanbase. However, if Memphis thinks high-profile coaches with championship pedigrees will be lining up to patrol their sidelines they are in for a big shock. This is not like normal offseasons in which there are only a couple of jobs open - the demand for high-profile coaches is much higher than the supply and for once their are open jobs where the team is not in the middle of rebuilding. That means those few coaches everyone wants can be a bit picky and of all the job openings this offseason, I would put Memphis far down the list if we were ranking them by how desirable they are. Nothing against the city, it is just that ownership hasn't proved they will spend the money to keep this team together. The good new for Hollins is that when you win at Memphis it is catches a lot of people's eyes because many coaches have tried and failed there, so it shows he knows what he is doing and he should be able to get a job very quickly. (He is already being mentioned for the Clippers position.) That just makes it worse for the Grizz, because I said this last week but when you fire your coach and 20 other teams in the NBA think about ditching the guy they currently have for the chance to hire your ex-coach, it is a pretty good sign you made a bad decision.

-One place Hollins won't be landing is in Brooklyn with the Nets. Just a couple weeks after retiring as a player, former Nets great Jason Kidd was hired as Brooklyn's new head coach. I have to say, when I first heard Kidd was lobbying for this job I thought he was never going to get it because he has never coached at any level before. It is not that there haven't been good players who can jump right in to coaching provided they are surrounded by the right staff (Larry Bird springs to mind), but it was the circumstances around that team which I thought would prevent Kidd from getting a serious look. The Nets are still trying to establish themselves as one of the glamour franchises in the league. Between moving to Brooklyn, aligning with Jay-Z and re-branding themselves with new uniforms and team colors, every decision they have made for the past two years has been about raising their profile. And with a Russian billionaire owner who has shown he is willing to spend the money I thought they would go after a veteran coach rather than give a rookie his first crack at being a coach on any level. It seems like every high-profile coach that has been looking for a job has been linked to the Nets at one time or another. I mean, Brooklyn is one of the landing spots which was always brought up as a legitimate possibility to lure Phil Jackson out of retirement. Suddenly, we're going from the guy who has coached the most championships in NBA history to a guy who has never coached a day in his life? (Even stranger, Kidd wants to bring back former Nets head coach Lawrence Frank as an assistant. That should create a pretty interesting dynamic, don't you think?) I don't care if he is one of the greatest players in franchise history, that doesn't mean the Nets should have hired him over a guy like George Karl, who hasn't had a losing record since I was 6 years old. You know if the Nets really want to wrestle the spotlight away from the Knicks, I think all future transactions should be done after the following question is asked: is this something the Knicks would do? If the answer is no (and keep in mind the Knicks keep re-hiring Isiah Thomas, so they aren't exactly well-run themselves), perhaps talking to one more candidate wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.

-Pretty much my favorite thing about college athletics is the traditions. I love it when everyone on campus feels they have to do something before a big game even though deep down they know it won't really help the team just because it was good enough for past generations, so it is good enough for the current one. (One piece of advice - never investigate how the traditions got started, because most of them were started for completely stupid reasons. Honestly, this is one of those situations in which knowledge will just ruin the mystique.) Anyway, it is because of this admiration for silly rituals I was a little disheartened to hear vandals broke into Clemson's football stadium (nicknamed Death Valley) and broke off a piece of Howard Rock, the Tiger's good luck charm. The rock, transported from Death Valley in California, sits in the tunnel between the locker room and the field and all players are encouraged to touch the rock before the game. Apparently a few nights ago someone broke into the stadium, got around the Plexiglas case the rock is usually protected by (How did they break through such amazing defenses? They had to have expensive tools... like a pair of scissors. Seriously, Clemson, you couldn't afford something better?) and cracked the rock, stealing a big chunk of it. But, here is the good news for any Clemson fans who think this signals the downfall of their season before it even has a chance to begin - it's a rock and short of stealing the whole thing you can't really vandalize a rock. There is still plenty to rub before big games. In fact, if no one had said anything to me I would have had a hard time telling the before and after pictures apart. Clearly this falls short of the rivalry between Alabama and Auburn in which a deranged Alabama fan poisoned a line of 100 year old trees on the Auburn campus out of spite after Auburn won the National Championship and the trees had to eventually be cut down. It just goes to show you that even when it comes to messing with each other's traditions the ACC falls well short of the SEC.

-Not quite sure if there was something in the air this week but it appears that people in baseball are feeling quite aggressive, as there were a number of fights and bench-clearing shoving matches across MLB during the last few days. The worst one took place in Los Angeles, where the Dodgers and Diamondbacks started exchanging beanballs before benches cleared and even the coaches got in each other's faces. As you would expect, the Commissioner's office was quick to hand down punishments for these actions, mostly in the form of fines and suspensions. But as I was reading the list of names and how long they would be sitting, it showed just how silly the idea of a suspension is for starting pitchers. Every other player or coach gets exactly as many games as baseball thinks they should sit out, but when it comes time to penalize guys who only play every 5th day it becomes a guessing game. The general rule is that if you want them to miss one start you suspend them for 6 games, however it is entirely possible that it would just push them back a couple days and they would get close to their normal turn in the rotation. In other words, their punishment for hitting another human being with a baseball thrown at nearly 100 mph is to get a couple days extra rest. Considering their lack of control was probably what lead to the fight in the first place it certainly doesn't seem like the punishment is fitting the crime. That is why I think baseball needs to start going to extremes when it comes time to suspend starting pitchers. I'm talking double-digit games because that is the only way to ensure they will miss as much time as the rest of the players who took part in the fights. Also, remembering that managers are just as much at fault because they insist their pitchers retaliate as some sort of absurd unwritten rule of baseball, lets make their suspensions longer as well. Maybe if they miss significant time they will finally stop sending players out to do their dirty work. I know baseball is probably desperate to get some attention away from what has been a very entertaining NHL postseason, but trust me when I tell you this is not the way to do that.

-One of the reasons I don't like politics is because I don't like the thought of having to campaign to make people like you. Call me crazy, but I think you should be able to stand on the weight of your accomplishments and let people judge you from those. The only thing I find sadder than people begging to get total strangers to like them? Begging to make people like you concerning something which is totally useless. This year's MLB All-Star Game will be held in New York at the Mets' Citi Field. Because of this the Mets would really like it if third baseman David Wright was voted to be a starter by the fans. Last year Wright held the lead for most of the voting, but was passed at the last moment. Determined not to let that happen again, the Mets have launched an aggressive campaign to get Wright voted in and have even begun reaching out to non-baseball fans. Specifically, they want to talk to older ladies who just find Wright cute. After someone working for the Mets discovered Wright was voted as the cutest baseball player on a cougar-themed dating site, the team contacted that site and wondered if the members of that site would mind stuffing the ballot box for Wright to win another online election. (Funny enough, in my mind being voted a starter for an All-Star Game and cutest baseball player on a cougar dating site are equally prestigious.) It wasn't until the dating site started asking if they could get some cross promotion that the Mets started to see the error of their ways and backed away from the idea. (I have to wonder if they ever ran the idea passed Wright, because I doubt he would have been on-board.) Again, it wouldn't have been that big a deal, except someone had to go and mentioned the story to the papers. It is one thing to do something embarrassing, but broadcasting that mistake to the world actually makes it seem worse. Much like the Nets to the Knicks, it just makes the Mets look petty because it is something the cross-town Yankees would never have to lower themselves to doing.

-I think we all know being a celebrity is weird. Constantly having your picture taken, never having a quiet moment in public and having 'relatives' come out of the woodwork looking for money would be enough for me to never want to get famous. Still, I think the weirdest part of being in the public eye is the idea that everything you touch suddenly becomes valuable. People will buy anything if they think it was touched by their hero. I mean, hearing about super-fans spending tens of thousands of dollars on items like used gum just because it was chewed by someone famous makes me worried about the future of humanity. That is why I was not surprised to hear that an auction house was thrilled to have a new glut of Kobe Bryant memorabilia to sell, including random things like high school trophies and his first Championship ring. There was just one problem - Kobe never gave anyone permission to sell these items. They had been in storage at his parents' house and his mother, who wanted to buy a new house, had decided to sell them to the auction company. Kobe contended the items were gifts and if his mother didn't want them she should have returned them instead of selling them. This lead to the very awkward position of Kobe Bryant having to sue his own mother to get his stuff back. Fortunately the matters was cleared up before things got too ugly as Kobe got some items back, the auction house was able to keep enough items that they should be able to make a profit and Kobe's mom got to keep the money she made. (Kobe has earned hundreds of millions of dollars in his career. You mean to tell me he couldn't give his mom $500,000?) I may not like the guy, but I just feel sorry for everyone involved because this just goes to show you that money has the power to come between family. Oh, and if you ever plan on becoming famous you may want to make sure you claimed all your belongings out your parents' basement first. Otherwise that spelling test you failed in first grade could end up the centerpiece of someone's collection.