February 18, 2010 3

David Foster Wallace Commencement Speech

By MDS in Society

Transcript from David Foster Wallace’s commencement speech at Kenyon College in 2005. One of the only times he ever candidly spoke about life.

“If anybody feels like perspiring, I’d advise you to go ahead, because I’m sure going to. In fact I’m gonna.

“Greetings and congratulations to Kenyon’s graduating class of 2005. There are these two young fish swimming along and they happen to meet an older fish swimming the other way, who nods at them and says ‘Morning, boys. How’s the water?’ And the two young fish swim on for a bit, and then eventually one of them looks over at the other and goes, ‘What the hell is water?’

“This is a standard requirement of US commencement speeches, the deployment of didactic little parable-ish stories. The story turns out to be one of the better, less bullshitty conventions of the genre, but if you’re worried that I plan to present myself here as the wise, older fish explaining what water is to you younger fish, please don’t be. I am not the wise old fish. The point of the fish story is merely that the most obvious, important realities are often the ones that are hardest to see and talk about. Stated as an English sentence, of course, this is just a banal platitude, but the fact is that in the day to day trenches of adult existence, banal platitudes can have a life or death importance, or so I wish to suggest to you on this dry and lovely morning.

“Of course the main requirement of speeches like this is that I’m supposed to talk about your liberal arts education’s meaning, to try to explain why the degree you are about to receive has actual human value instead of just a material payoff. So let’s talk about the single most pervasive cliché in the commencement speech genre, which is that a liberal arts education is not so much about filling you up with knowledge as it is about ‘teaching you how to think.’ If you’re like me as a student, you’ve never liked hearing this, and you tend to feel a bit insulted by the claim that you needed anybody to teach you how to think, since the fact that you even got admitted to a college this good seems like proof that you already know how to think. But I’m going to posit to you that the liberal arts cliché turns out not to be insulting at all, because the really significant education in thinking that we’re supposed to get in a place like this isn’t really about the capacity to think, but rather about the choice of what to think about. If your total freedom of choice regarding what to think about seems too obvious to waste time discussing, I’d ask you to think about fish and water, and to bracket for just a few minutes your skepticism about the value of the totally obvious.

“Here’s another didactic little story. There are these two guys sitting together in a bar in the remote Alaskan wilderness. One of the guys is religious, the other is an atheist, and the two are arguing about the existence of God with that special intensity that comes after about the fourth beer. And the atheist says: ‘Look, it’s not like I don’t have actual reasons for not believing in God. It’s not like I haven’t ever experimented with the whole God and prayer thing. Just last month I got caught away from the camp in that terrible blizzard, and I was totally lost and I couldn’t see a thing, and it was 50 below, and so I tried it: I fell to my knees in the snow and cried out ‘Oh, God, if there is a God, I’m lost in this blizzard, and I’m gonna die if you don’t help me.’ And now, in the bar, the religious guy looks at the atheist all puzzled. ‘Well then you must believe now,’ he says, ‘After all, here you are, alive.’ The atheist just rolls his eyes. ‘No, man, all that was was a couple Eskimos happened to come wandering by and showed me the way back to camp.’

“It’s easy to run this story through kind of a standard liberal arts analysis: the exact same experience can mean two totally different things to two different people, given those people’s two different belief templates and two different ways of constructing meaning from experience. Because we prize tolerance and diversity of belief, nowhere in our liberal arts analysis do we want to claim that one guy’s interpretation is true and the other guy’s is false or bad. Which is fine, except we also never end up talking about just where these individual templates and beliefs come from. Meaning, where they come from inside the two guys. As if a person’s most basic orientation toward the world, and the meaning of his experience were somehow just hard-wired, like height or shoe-size; or automatically absorbed from the culture, like language. As if how we construct meaning were not actually a matter of personal, intentional choice. Plus, there’s the whole matter of arrogance. The nonreligious guy is so totally certain in his dismissal of the possibility that the passing Eskimos had anything to do with his prayer for help. True, there are plenty of religious people who seem arrogant and certain of their own interpretations, too. They’re probably even more repulsive than atheists, at least to most of us. But religious dogmatists’ problem is exactly the same as the story’s unbeliever: blind certainty, a close-mindedness that amounts to an imprisonment so total that the prisoner doesn’t even know he’s locked up.

“The point here is that I think this is one part of what teaching me how to think is really supposed to mean. To be just a little less arrogant. To have just a little critical awareness about myself and my certainties. Because a huge percentage of the stuff that I tend to be automatically certain of is, it turns out, totally wrong and deluded. I have learned this the hard way, as I predict you graduates will, too.

“Here is just one example of the total wrongness of something I tend to be automatically sure of: everything in my own immediate experience supports my deep belief that I am the absolute center of the universe; the realest, most vivid and important person in existence. We rarely think about this sort of natural, basic self-centredness because it’s so socially repulsive. But it’s pretty much the same for all of us. It is our default setting, hard-wired into our boards at birth. Think about it: there is no experience you have had that you are not the absolute centre of. The world as you experience it is there in front of you or behind you, to the left or right of you, on your TV or your monitor. And so on. Other people’s thoughts and feelings have to be communicated to you somehow, but your own are so immediate, urgent, real.

“Please don’t worry that I’m getting ready to lecture you about compassion or other-directedness or all the so-called virtues. This is not a matter of virtue. It’s a matter of my choosing to do the work of somehow altering or getting free of my natural, hard-wired default setting which is to be deeply and literally self-centered and to see and interpret everything through this lens of self. People who can adjust their natural default setting this way are often described as being ‘well-adjusted,’ which I suggest to you is not an accidental term.

“Given the triumphant academic setting here, an obvious question is how much of this work of adjusting our default setting involves actual knowledge or intellect. This question gets very tricky. Probably the most dangerous thing about an academic education—least in my own case—is that it enables my tendency to over-intellectualize stuff, to get lost in abstract argument inside my head, instead of simply paying attention to what is going on right in front of me, paying attention to what is going on inside me.

“As I’m sure you guys know by now, it is extremely difficult to stay alert and attentive, instead of getting hypnotized by the constant monologue inside your own head (may be happening right now). Twenty years after my own graduation, I have come gradually to understand that the liberal arts cliché about teaching you how to think is actually shorthand for a much deeper, more serious idea: learning how to think really means learning how to exercise some control over how and what you think. It means being conscious and aware enough to choose what you pay attention to and to choose how you construct meaning from experience. Because if you cannot exercise this kind of choice in adult life, you will be totally hosed. Think of the old cliché about the mind being an excellent servant but a terrible master.

“This, like many clichés, so lame and unexciting on the surface, actually expresses a great and terrible truth. It is not the least bit coincidental that adults who commit suicide with firearms almost always shoot themselves in: the head. They shoot the terrible master. And the truth is that most of these suicides are actually dead long before they pull the trigger.

“And I submit that this is what the real, no bullshit value of your liberal arts education is supposed to be about: how to keep from going through your comfortable, prosperous, respectable adult life dead, unconscious, a slave to your head and to your natural default setting of being uniquely, completely, imperially alone day in and day out. That may sound like hyperbole, or abstract nonsense. Let’s get concrete. The plain fact is that you graduating seniors do not yet have any clue what ‘day in day out’ really means. There happen to be whole, large parts of adult American life that nobody talks about in commencement speeches. One such part involves boredom, routine and petty frustration. The parents and older folks here will know all too well what I’m talking about.

“By way of example, let’s say it’s an average adult day, and you get up in the morning, go to your challenging, white-collar, college-graduate job, and you work hard for eight or ten hours, and at the end of the day you’re tired and somewhat stressed and all you want is to go home and have a good supper and maybe unwind for an hour, and then hit the sack early because, of course, you have to get up the next day and do it all again. But then you remember there’s no food at home. You haven’t had time to shop this week because of your challenging job, and so now after work you have to get in your car and drive to the supermarket. It’s the end of the work day and the traffic is apt to be: very bad. So getting to the store takes way longer than it should, and when you finally get there, the supermarket is very crowded, because of course it’s the time of day when all the other people with jobs also try to squeeze in some grocery shopping. And the store is hideously lit and infused with soul-killing muzak or corporate pop and it’s pretty much the last place you want to be but you can’t just get in and quickly out; you have to wander all over the huge, over-lit store’s confusing aisles to find the stuff you want and you have to manoeuvre your junky cart through all these other tired, hurried people with carts (et cetera, et cetera, cutting stuff out because this is a long ceremony) and eventually you get all your supper supplies, except now it turns out there aren’t enough check-out lanes open even though it’s the end-of-the-day rush. So the checkout line is incredibly long, which is stupid and infuriating. But you can’t take your frustration out on the frantic lady working the register, who is overworked at a job whose daily tedium and meaninglessness surpasses the imagination of any of us here at a prestigious college.

“But anyway, you finally get to the checkout line’s front, and you pay for your food, and you get told to ‘Have a nice day’ in a voice that is the absolute voice of death. Then you have to take your creepy, flimsy, plastic bags of groceries in your cart with the one crazy wheel that pulls maddeningly to the left, all the way out through the crowded, bumpy, littery parking lot, and then you have to drive all the way home through slow, heavy, SUV-intensive, rush-hour traffic, et cetera et cetera.

“Everyone here has done this, of course. But it hasn’t yet been part of you graduates’ actual life routine, day after week after month after year.

“But it will be. And many more dreary, annoying, seemingly meaningless routines besides. But that is not the point. The point is that petty, frustrating crap like this is exactly where the work of choosing is gonna come in. Because the traffic jams and crowded aisles and long checkout lines give me time to think, and if I don’t make a conscious decision about how to think and what to pay attention to, I’m gonna be pissed and miserable every time I have to shop. Because my natural default setting is the certainty that situations like this are really all about me. About my hungriness and my fatigue and my desire to just get home, and it’s going to seem for all the world like everybody else is just in my way. And who are all these people in my way? And look at how repulsive most of them are, and how stupid and cow-like and dead-eyed and nonhuman they seem in the checkout line, or at how annoying and rude it is that people are talking loudly on cell phones in the middle of the line. And look at how deeply and personally unfair this is.

“Or, of course, if I’m in a more socially conscious liberal arts form of my default setting, I can spend time in the end-of-the-day traffic being disgusted about all the huge, stupid, lane-blocking SUV’s and Hummers and V-12 pickup trucks, burning their wasteful, selfish, 40-gallon tanks of gas, and I can dwell on the fact that the patriotic or religious bumper-stickers always seem to be on the biggest, most disgustingly selfish vehicles, driven by the ugliest [responding here to loud applause] (this is an example of how NOT to think, though) most disgustingly selfish vehicles, driven by the ugliest, most inconsiderate and aggressive drivers. And I can think about how our children’s children will despise us for wasting all the future’s fuel, and probably screwing up the climate, and how spoiled and stupid and selfish and disgusting we all are, and how modern consumer society just sucks, and so forth and so on.

“You get the idea.

“If I choose to think this way in a store and on the freeway, fine. Lots of us do. Except thinking this way tends to be so easy and automatic that it doesn’t have to be a choice. It is my natural default setting. It’s the automatic way that I experience the boring, frustrating, crowded parts of adult life when I’m operating on the automatic, unconscious belief that I am the centre of the world, and that my immediate needs and feelings are what should determine the world’s priorities.

“The thing is that, of course, there are totally different ways to think about these kinds of situations. In this traffic, all these vehicles stopped and idling in my way, it’s not impossible that some of these people in SUV’s have been in horrible auto accidents in the past, and now find driving so terrifying that their therapist has all but ordered them to get a huge, heavy SUV so they can feel safe enough to drive. Or that the Hummer that just cut me off is maybe being driven by a father whose little child is hurt or sick in the seat next to him, and he’s trying to get this kid to the hospital, and he’s in a bigger, more legitimate hurry than I am: it is actually I who am in his way.

“Or I can choose to force myself to consider the likelihood that everyone else in the supermarket’s checkout line is just as bored and frustrated as I am, and that some of these people probably have harder, more tedious and painful lives than I do.

“Again, please don’t think that I’m giving you moral advice, or that I’m saying you are supposed to think this way, or that anyone expects you to just automatically do it. Because it’s hard. It takes will and effort, and if you are like me, some days you won’t be able to do it, or you just flat out won’t want to.

“But most days, if you’re aware enough to give yourself a choice, you can choose to look differently at this fat, dead-eyed, over-made-up lady who just screamed at her kid in the checkout line. Maybe she’s not usually like this. Maybe she’s been up three straight nights holding the hand of a husband who is dying of bone cancer. Or maybe this very lady is the low-wage clerk at the motor vehicle department, who just yesterday helped your spouse resolve a horrific, infuriating, red-tape problem through some small act of bureaucratic kindness. Of course, none of this is likely, but it’s also not impossible. It just depends what you want to consider. If you’re automatically sure that you know what reality is, and you are operating on your default setting, then you, like me, probably won’t consider possibilities that aren’t annoying and miserable. But if you really learn how to pay attention, then you will know there are other options. It will actually be within your power to experience a crowded, hot, slow, consumer-hell type situation as not only meaningful, but sacred, on fire with the same force that made the stars: love, fellowship, the mystical oneness of all things deep down.

“Not that that mystical stuff is necessarily true. The only thing that’s capital-T True is that you get to decide how you’re gonna try to see it.

“This, I submit, is the freedom of a real education, of learning how to be well-adjusted. You get to consciously decide what has meaning and what doesn’t. You get to decide what to worship.

“Because here’s something else that’s weird but true: in the day-to-day trenches of adult life, there is actually no such thing as atheism. There is no such thing as not worshiping. Everybody worships. The only choice we get is what to worship. And the compelling reason for maybe choosing some sort of god or spiritual-type thing to worship—be it JC or Allah, be it YHWH or the Wiccan Mother Goddess, or the Four Noble Truths, or some inviolable set of ethical principles—is that pretty much anything else you worship will eat you alive. If you worship money and things, if they are where you tap real meaning in life, then you will never have enough, never feel you have enough. It’s the truth. Worship your body and beauty and sexual allure and you will always feel ugly. And when time and age start showing, you will die a million deaths before they finally grieve you. On one level, we all know this stuff already. It’s been codified as myths, proverbs, clichés, epigrams, parables; the skeleton of every great story. The whole trick is keeping the truth up front in daily consciousness.

“Worship power, you will end up feeling weak and afraid, and you will need ever more power over others to numb you to your own fear. Worship your intellect, being seen as smart, you will end up feeling stupid, a fraud, always on the verge of being found out. But the insidious thing about these forms of worship is not that they’re evil or sinful, it’s that they’re unconscious. They are default settings.

“They’re the kind of worship you just gradually slip into, day after day, getting more and more selective about what you see and how you measure value without ever being fully aware that that’s what you’re doing.

“And the so-called real world will not discourage you from operating on your default settings, because the so-called real world of men and money and power hums merrily along in a pool of fear and anger and frustration and craving and worship of self. Our own present culture has harnessed these forces in ways that have yielded extraordinary wealth and comfort and personal freedom. The freedom all to be lords of our tiny skull-sized kingdoms, alone at the centre of all creation. This kind of freedom has much to recommend it. But of course there are all different kinds of freedom, and the kind that is most precious you will not hear much talk about much in the great outside world of wanting and achieving…. The really important kind of freedom involves attention and awareness and discipline, and being able truly to care about other people and to sacrifice for them over and over in myriad petty, unsexy ways every day.

“That is real freedom. That is being educated, and understanding how to think. The alternative is unconsciousness, the default setting, the rat race, the constant gnawing sense of having had, and lost, some infinite thing.

“I know that this stuff probably doesn’t sound fun and breezy or grandly inspirational the way a commencement speech is supposed to sound. What it is, as far as I can see, is the capital-T Truth, with a whole lot of rhetorical niceties stripped away. You are, of course, free to think of it whatever you wish. But please don’t just dismiss it as just some finger-wagging Dr. Laura sermon. None of this stuff is really about morality or religion or dogma or big fancy questions of life after death.

“The capital-T Truth is about life before death.

“It is about the real value of a real education, which has almost nothing to do with knowledge, and everything to do with simple awareness; awareness of what is so real and essential, so hidden in plain sight all around us, all the time, that we have to keep reminding ourselves over and over:

“‘This is water.’

“‘This is water.’

“It is unimaginably hard to do this, to stay conscious and alive in the adult world day in and day out. Which means yet another grand cliché turns out to be true: your education really is the job of a lifetime. And it commences: now.

“I wish you way more than luck.”

December 26, 2009 3

Best TV Shows Of The ’00′s

By MDS in Opinion, Television

With 2009 winding down so too are the aught years. So, while everyone else has put together their “Best Of The Aughts” I figured I would whip up something as well.

[NOTE: this list is solely comprised of shows that I have seen. Therefore, do not take it personal that I have not included The Office, The Wire, Firefly, or Deadwood (or any show that barely had an audience to begin with and was thus cancelled to little overall fanfare--hello Pushing Daisies). It also worth noting that The Sopranos does not make this list. Yes, the first season was great, and the second season was very strong. But the last few seasons were laughably mediocre--especially when you consider the huge gaps of time in between some of the seasons. Additionally, the series finale of The Sopranos was so reprehensibly terrible, and was such a thoroughly uncreative cop-out that it made me retroactively hate the entire show. If I were to ever meet David Chase I would demand that he give me those 86 hours back. I bring this up because Mad Men is the product of a former Sopranos writer or producer (I forget which) and, therefore, I will never watch Mad Men. I am not a vengeful person by nature but any new show or movie--if they mentioned that it is done by Chase or someone from The Sopranos--I will not watch it. The series finale was that bad to me. So, all of you people who love Mad Men now: be prepared to drink some Kool-Aid if you want to believe that the last season will be good. Don't say I didn't warn you.]

Anyway, on to the list. First up, some honorable mentions…

12 Honorable Mentions

30 Rock — The absolute best episodes are the first 10 or 12 in the first season when the writers spread the wealth between all of the stars and second-tier characters like Pete and Lutz. The show is still very good but by making almost episode since a constant volley-fest between Liz, Jack, Kenneth, and Tracy (to say nothing of the blatant caricaturization of Jenna, and the over-reliance on guest stars) it has lost a little bit of luster for me.

The Amazing Race — One of the best network TV reality shows. Loses a lot of points in my book, though, because of how anti-climactic the finales usually are. And it would be nice if they had a reunion show every once in a while.

Damages — This would be a no-brainer to be in the top ten if it had more than 2 seasons to its name. But make no mistake, season 1 was outstanding. Possibly the best debut season of any show this decade.

Gilmore Girls — Any show that casually references The Shaggs, The Fountainhead, Stereolab, and The Yearling (seemingly in the same conversation between two characters) gets a thumbs-up from me if they can pull it off. Also, the last 5 minutes of the season 6 episode “Friday Night’s Alright For Fighting” is some of the funniest stuff I’ve seen.

It’s Always Sunny In Philadelphia — With episode titles such as “Dennis Looks Like A Registered Sex Offender,” “Sweet Dee’s Dating A Retarded Person,” and “The Gang Finds A Dumpster Baby,” you will know right away if you will like this show. I like this show.

No Reservations With Anthony Bourdain — Anthony Bourdain takes you all over the world with the goal of finding those non-tourist-y gems amongst the overcrowded tourist havens. It’s one part travel show, one part food show and Bourdain is charismatic enough (and his narrations perfectly written) to be one of the coolest tour guides you could ever hope to find.

Scrubs — Some people might be turned off by Zach Braff’s voice (or presence) but Scrubs was consistently the most inventive sitcom of the decade, pulling out the veritable kitchen sink at any given moment which made it sort of a live-action Simpson’s in terms of surreal, goofy comedy. And even the “serious” episodes were surprisingly touching, especially the last episode that Brendan Fraser appeared in.

Sex & The City — Carrie, Charlotte, Samantha, and Miranda are The Beatles of women in television. Any future show that follows girlfriends around as they make their way through life will be compared to this show. And while I think that show lost a few steps towards the end, seasons 1 and 4 are pretty damn strong.

Six Feet Under — Though this show could be inconsistent at times, the final season was pretty strong (the finale was very good) and each season always had its share of great episodes. The best episode of the show’s run, “The Room,” rivaled anything that was on TV at the time as it perfectly blended humor and death and frustration seamlessly.

South Park — What can you say? When South Park is on, it’s one of the funniest shows on television. It’s really as simple as that.

Survivor — Would be on the top ten for the last couple seasons alone, but I couldn’t put it up there because I got bored by some of the seasons pretty easily. That said, Jeff Probst is still one of the best personalities on TV and some of the obstacle courses they come up with are extremely creative.

Weeds — One of the craziest shows I’ve watched this decade. Some moments from the four seasons I’ve seen: a boy shot a cougar in his backyard, a man had his toe bitten off by a dog, someone inadvertently recorded someone being blown up by a missile, a cross from a church was turned into a large grow lamp. And all 4 season finales have been batshit crazier than this (while also being endlessly entertaining).

Now for the list…

#10 – Big Love

The thing about Big Love for me is that it really is the only show in which every member of this large ensemble was perfectly cast. I mean, Bill Paxton is Bill Henrickson in every possible aspect. I can no longer think of Paxton as someone other than the polygamist husband of three wives who wants nothing but the best for his family, even to a fault as he sometimes falls victim to not thinking things out too clearly. Because Big Love incorporates the mainstream aspects of the Mormon religion as well as the compound aspect of old-school polygamy the show will most certainly not run out of any good ideas and, thus far, the first three seasons have been genuinely engaging and engrossing–capable of bringing healthy doses of emotion at times without ever feeling cheap or corny. The late ’90′s and all of the ’00′s brought to television a new era of anti-heroes or grotesque characters hell-bent on making the viewer constantly swim in a large pool of gray area. While you may be fundamentally against polygamy, Big Love has never aimed to convert opinion; it merely uses it as an updated means of showing a family that is always trying to hold itself together in the midst of external forces. The show outdid itself last season with the episode “Come, Ye Saints” in which the entire family goes on a road trip to Cumorah, NY to go see the Joseph Smith shrine. The episode’s handling of one of the character’s miscarriage is a microcosm of how delicately and profoundly they handle things that should veer hard into gray areas. Instead, it humanizes it to near perfection.

#9 – Veronica Mars

Yes, season two of Veronica Mars was a little too complex for its own good and, yes, season three had its share of misses but the strength of season 1 as a whole and the season 3 episode “Spit & Eggs” were outstanding enough for me to put it in my top 10 list. First things first, season 1. Phenomenal. It had a perfect mix of humor intertwined within the long arc story of who killed Lilly Kane. Its use of flashbacks never felt out of place or corny either. It all culminated up to a legitimately great season finale in which Lilly’s killer is finally discovered, as well as Veronica and her father left beaten up and broke. The season 3 episode “Spit & Eggs” is one of the best episodes in general of the decade. Veronica is a freshman in college and she is trying to find out who on campus is drugging and raping girls (then cutting off all of their hair as a final insult). The episode scrambles the sequencing a bit by starting when Veronica realizes who the rapist is (but the viewer doesn’t know), then working backwards from the night before, and then catching up to everything that later unfolds. Also, the means in which Veronica’s ex-boyfriend Logan gets thrown in jail so that he can stay in the same cell as the rapist is one of the best moments of the show.

#8 – Freaks And Geeks

A show that technically debuted in the ’90′s (1999 in fact), Freaks And Geeks was so spot-on of its portrayal of early-’80′s high school dorks and social retreads that I no doubt believe that many TV and film critics openly weeped while watching the pilot episode, conceding that Judd Apatow hit the nail on the proverbial head and causing all of the weird emotions to surface yet again. The casting of the show was perfect and each episode was handled with such care and nuance that I felt myself believing at times that I attended a high school in Michigan in the early ’80′s. The way that social cliques work (even amongst the stoners) and how delicate communication in any form is when you are in high school are presented with a naturalistic brush stroke. The best episodes are the ones that prey on a high school kid’s worst fear: something extraneously heavy outside of school being introduced. Like the episode when Bill’s mom starts dating the gym teacher (played by the actor who played Biff in Back To The Future), or the episode when someone’s dog is accidentally killed, or when Sam’s friend finds out that his dad is having an affair. None of these are ever played up as Very Special Episodes, but they strike a chord because we feel like we know these kids and their parents.

#7 – Boston Legal

It received critical acclaim only in spurts (even though William Shatner, James Spader, and Candace Bergen all won Emmys) but Boston Legal was, I thought, one of the most consistently smart dramedies on television this decade. Oh sure, some of the cases and plot lines were non-sensical. And, yes, some of Alan Shore’s (Spader) speeches were so soapbox-y that the makers of soapboxes surely threatened to pull advertising from the show. But the core cast of Shatner, Spader, and Bergen was pitch-perfect to the point that not even David E. Kelley’s worst tendencies could disrupt the flow of the show from season to season. Add in a fitting series finale and you have one of the more overlooked shows of the decade. Though the show could sometimes over-rely on slapstick-ish humor (Shatner’s repeated mutterings of “Denny Crane!” and such), it’s aim was always true–to portray the odd friendship of two older, single men (Spader’s Shore and Shatner’s Crane) who genuinely cared for one another.

#6 – Top Chef

One of the most underrated entertainment story lines of this decade is: “How was it that a cooking show on Bravo–a network that only a few years ago was primarily known for Inside The Actor’s Studio–became the most popular cooking show on cable when there is a channel called The Food Network?” On paper, this show should have never stood a chance ratings-wise against Iron Chef America or Throwdown; it seemed like a foodie’s wet dream rather than a mainstream hit. But with each new season of Top Chef comes a new set of varied and talented chefs and an ever-growing, impressive lineup of special guest judges. The best part about the show is that the overall package is never presented in an insiders-only or presumptuous tone; they go to good lengths to succinctly explain to cooking idiots like me why this special guest judge is well-respected, or why this dish failed and the other did not. Oh, and the food more often than not looks mouth-wateringly delicious.

#5 – Project Runway

During the course of its six seasons (season 7 will be premiering in January), Project Runway–alongside the show that precedes it on this list–has set the gold standard by which any reality television show should be judged against. For real. Even if the design industry does nothing for you, this show is flat-out entertaining to watch, mostly because the show intrinsically does not put the designer’s back story in the foreground and the competitions are (mostly) individual so you have very minimal amounts of backstabbing and bitching. And the competitions are wonderfully imaginative: make a dress out of produce, make a dress for the mom of another designer, etc., all with budgets as minuscule as $25. Add to this the cheeriness of Heidi Klum, the likability of Michael Kors, and the never-too-harsh opinions of Nina Garcia and you have a pretty likable group of judges. But the main attraction of Runway is Tim Gunn, a guy so inherently likable that he acts as the perfect bridge between the designers and the judges.

#4 – The Shield

Tony Soprano will forever be the poster child of the modern television anti-hero but Michael Chiklis’ “Vic Mackey” is more deserving of the award. The Shield consistently got better with each passing season and ultimately delivered on one of the best series finales ever made–everything comes to a head, the fallout for a few of the characters is death (both literal and metaphorical), and Mackey somehow claws his way out to the other side, albeit in a neutered role. The show’s strength was double-edged: it routinely put Vic’s Strike Team through an always-changing gray area (i.e.–how do you get away with killing a federal agent looking to break up the team that is mostly keeping the street wars at bay? what is the morality, if any, of working with street gangs in order to keep the peace to innocent bystanders?), and it also had some of the best cameos in recent history (Glenn Close and Anthony Anderson in season 4 as the new captain and a gang leader, respectively; Forrest Whitaker as a monomaniacal IED agent). The Shield also had one of the better character developments of the decade too with Shane Vendrell (Walton Goggins) going from hick sidekick to a multi-layered tragic figure.

#3 – Arrested Development

I think it’s actually a blessing that this show was axed by Fox when it did, because it spared us from ever having to wonder if the show was losing a step (like I’m wondering now with 30 Rock). In any event, to me, there has been no sitcom since Seinfeld that has even encroached the humor and genius of Arrested Development. Even the best episodes of 30 Rock cannot compete with a weaker episode of Arrested Development. The casting is perfect–the subtle sarcasm of Jason Bateman’s “Michael Bluth”; the Bob Newhart-ian delivery of lines by Michael Cera’s “George Michael Bluth”; the over-the-top aggressiveness of Will Arnett’s “G.O.B.”; the dead-pan hilarity that comes from Ron Howard just narrating scenes; every family member was cast perfectly–and the cameos throughout the show’s short-lived history were nothing short of perfect: Charlize Theron’s “Mr. F” and Carl Weathers as himself as a cheapskate were all-out brilliant. The real strength of the show was the insane ability to craft numerous storylines and meta-storylines at any given moment. For example, an episode about marijuana cuts to a scene that takes place 30 years previously about a band who had written a song called “Big Yellow Joint,” which was street code for the banana stand that the Bluth family ran on the side. No other comedy has ever had me consistently laugh out loud like this show. It also comforted me knowing that were also other never-nudes out there as well.

#2 – Lost

A lot depends on how the final season will end but, as of right now, it is amazing that, a, not only did this show get made (its pilot episode is the most expensive pilot episode ever made) but, b, the fact that a show that moved at such a snail’s pace for the first two seasons (the writers essentially kept everything slow until the network gave them an end date) then accelerated the storylines beyond all get-out AND introduced sci-fi elements AND didn’t cause people to run for the hills is nothing short of phenomenal. Lost proved that a show with a gigantic, ever-growing cast with ever-growing plotlines could not only become popular, but could do it in the form of a literature-comic book hybrid sort of way; you didn’t have to resort to David Lynch-ian methods. Additionally, Lost (again, so much of this will depend on the series finale) could go down in history as one of the most important shows of this decade–a cross between The Twilight Zone, M*A*S*H, and NYPD Blue.

#1 – Buffy The Vampire Slayer

Yes, only three seasons of Buffy aired in the aughts but one of them was season 5, also known as The Best Season Of Any Show I’ve Ever Seen. The season starts with Dracula (Dracula: “I am Dracula.” Buffy: “Get OUT!”), the sudden addition of a sister that never existed (and they pulled it off, even if the actress could get annoying), and ends with the show’s only natural death and a sacrifice to stop the world from being destroyed. This season had episodes that were creatively humorous (“The Replacement,” in which Xander is inadvertently cloned), a foreshadowing of how dark the series would get (“Fool For Love,” when Spike tells Buffy that all Slayers have death wishes), a really underrated gem (“Checkpoint,” in which it’s finally revealed what exactly Glory is), one of the greatest episodes from any show dealing with death (“The Body”), an excellent penultimate episode revolving around a catatonic Buffy (“The Weight Of The World”), and a season finale (“The Gift”) that could rival any Icon-status show’s finale. In addition to all of this, you also have season 6′s “Once More, With Feeling,” which was a musical episode that sets the bar for any show that looks to ditch its format for an episode, and you also have the extra-dark and extra-philosophical Warren/Willow arc (and its fallout) of the last four episodes. Season 7, despite the unavoidable anti-climactic nature of the end, still managed to churn out some masterful episodes dealing with morality (“Storyteller”), the meaning of life (“Conversations With Dead People”), and the choices that are made when dealing with the temptation of unfettered power (“Get It Done”). Additionally, the last quarter of season 7 introduced one the most horrific villains in the show’s history (as well as one of the creepiest villains to have ever graced a television set)—Caleb, the ultra-misogynistic fallen priest (“Dirty Girls”).

October 8, 2009 1

If I Were King Of The Sports World

By MDS in Opinion, Sports

[Full disclosure: this idea stems from a Sports Guy article (I believe from a mailbag article or a chat) on espn.com. Ever since I read this idea I have tried to figure out how it could all work and I think I have found out how to do it. The idea is to completely re-vamp the NHL so that there is a "Canada" conference and a "U.S." conference comprised of 12 teams in each conference, with the Stanley Cup Finals guaranteeing that a Canadian team and an American would play against each other. So, that said, if I were ever made King of the sports world, here is how I would change the NHL---a league that is probably bound to become more popular as HDTV becomes more commonplace in all American and Canadian households.]

The NHL currently has 30 teams, 6 of them are based in Canada. How is this possible? Not only that, but some of the teams in America are so wholly ridiculous. 3 teams in California? A team in Phoenix? A team called the Nashville Predators? Too many of these teams seem like bad attempts at fictional sports franchises in uninspired Hollywood movies.

This re-alignment and contraction of NHL teams needs to happen for three reasons. First, Canada should have more teams; hockey is their national sport after all. Second, the Stanley Cup is the greatest trophy in all of sports. Wouldn’t its playoffs be better served if it was shorter (better competition through fewer teams) and if it was always billed as “Canada vs. America”? Finally, this re-alignment would have 12 teams in Canada and 12 teams in America which means that 12 teams would be contracted. Think about how great the level of play across the board would be when the NHL holds a draft of all the players from the contracted teams. Especially when, under my plan, Washington would be contracted and a certain Alex Ovechkin would the #1 overall pick from said contraction draft.

But before I go into the specifics of the contracted teams and new Canadian teams, let me go over some basic ground rules of what the new Stanley Cup Playoffs would look like first. The NHL would be shrunk from 30 to 24 teams–12 in Canada, 12 in the U.S. The Stanley Cup Playoffs would then have the following format:

— The top 6 teams from the Canada Conference and U.S. Conference would play best-of-seven series.

— The #1 seeds would play the #6s, #2s play #5s, and #3s play #4s.

— The winner of the Canada Conference plays the winner of the U.S. Conference in a best-of-seven series, with the team that has the better overall regular season record having home-ice advantage for the Finals matchup

Essentially, the format stays pretty much the same save for the number of teams that would be allowed in the playoffs changing from 16 to 12. Again, fewer teams in the playoffs would mean better overall play because the 6th best team in the conference has a much better chance (on average) of beating the best team in the conference than the 8th best team does.

So… now for the $1 million dollar question: How would this all work?

Currently, the Canadian teams are: Vancouver Canucks, Edmonton Oilers, Toronto Maple Leafs, Montreal Canadiens, Calgary Flames, and Ottawa Senators. They would all stay put. The 6 teams I would add would be in Winnipeg, Regina, Hamilton, Halifax, Quebec City, and Victoria. (For those of you not too familiar with the Canadian Provinces–Winnipeg is the capital of Manitoba, Regina is the capital of Saskatoon, Hamilton is in Ontario, Halifax is the capital of Nova Scotia, Quebec City is the capital of Quebec, and Victoria is the capital of British Columbia.)

This scenario would give the Canada Conference 4 teams out west (Victoria, Vancouver, Edmonton and Calgary), 2 teams in the “Midwest” (Regina and Winnipeg), and 6 in the east (Toronto, Ottawa, Hamilton, Halifax, Montreal, and Quebec City). So, the Western Division of the Canada Conference would be Victoria, Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Regina, and Winnipeg; the Eastern Division would be Toronto, Ottawa, Hamilton, Halifax, Montreal, and Quebec City.

As for the U.S. Conference, the following teams would be contracted outright: Anaheim Mighty Ducks, Atlanta Thrashers, Carolina Hurricanes, Columbus Blue Jackets, Dallas Stars, Florida Panthers, Minnesota Wild, Nashville Predators, Phoenix Coyotes, Los Angeles Kings, Tampa Bay Lightning, and the Washington Capitals. Additionally, the San Jose Sharks (or the Kings, or Mighty Ducks; whichever makes more sense) would be re-located to Seattle.

Why re-locate a team to Seattle? Two reasons: 1) Seattle would be a much better hockey city than any city in California, especially after the hi-jacking of the Sonics has the left the city with only two pro sports teams. 2) By adding a team in Victoria you would have 3 teams (Victoria, Vancouver, Seattle) all within 150 miles of each other. I would even name the new team the Seattle Pilots, as a reverse ode to how Colorado named their MLB team the Rockies[1].

So, with all those teams contracted and a new team in Seattle, what would the newly-formed U.S. Conference look like?

The Western Division would consist of Seattle, Colorado, Chicago, Detroit, St. Louis, and Buffalo. The Eastern Division would consist of the New York teams (Rangers & Islanders), New Jersey, Philadelphia, Boston, and Pittsburgh.

(Note: my first instinct was to get rid of the Islanders and keep the Capitals but… it would be a crime to contract a team that once won 3 Stanley Cups in a row, and, again, by getting rid of Washington you make Ovechkin available for a draft amongst the new Canadian teams.)

So, once everything has been re-aligned you hold a draft of all the players from the 8 contracted teams, which would work like this:

The 6 new Canadian teams would have exclusive access to the first 6 rounds of players from the contracted teams—giving each new expansion team 6 players to start with (i.e.-each team selects one player per round). From here, the remaining players would be pooled into a draft for the other 16 teams. The existing 16 teams can choose to draft or not (some of them might not be interested in any of the talent beyond a certain round). Whoever is left from the contracted teams’ draft becomes available for the expansion Canadian teams, as well as any players that have filed for free agency, or via normal trades between teams. Finally, whichever expansion Canadian team drew the #6 pick in the contracted draft (because it would all be randomly selected, lottery-style) would receive the #1 overall pick in the NHL Draft. And the #5 team would get the #2 pick, etc., followed by the existing team with the worst record the season before getting the #7 pick and moving up from there.

And because the league would have fewer teams the draft in general would see better talent dispersed throughout fewer teams, which should theoretically equal, again, stronger play throughout the season.

Of course, this will never ever happen but if I were King Of All Sports this would be one of the first things I would try. Because at the end of the day the NHL would be the perfect guinea pig to see if all-out contraction of teams and re-alignment would equal an exceptional product. And the whole Canada-versus-the-US thing just seems like an excellent marketing tool, especially since the Stanley Cup Playoffs occur during a relatively slow sports time in the States. (Yes, baseball is just starting but the season is so long that it is hard to genuinely be fully wrapped up in it 20 or 30 games into the season.)

Finally, if you’re wondering what I think the team names should be for the new Canadian teams this is what I’ve come up with off the top of my head, almost all of it simply culled from each city’s history:

Victoria Cougars (name of the Stanley Cup-winning team in ’25)
Hamilton Tigers (name of NHL team of the ’20′s)
Quebec Nordiques (why not dig up that name again?)
Halifax Ospreys (I don’t know, the Halifax flag has an osprey on it…)
Regina Buffaloes (again, I don’t know, there’s a buffalo on the city’s official seal…)
Winnipeg Jets (such a no-brainer there to re-hash that name)

[1] Denver had a short-lived NHL team called the Colorado Rockies from 1976-82 (which would eventually become the New Jersey Devils). And when MLB chose Denver to have a new team, the city decided to dig up the Rockies name for their baseball team instead of coming up with a new one. Conversely, before Bud Selig hi-jacked what is now the Brewers from Seattle, that team was known as the Pilots and they were in Seattle for only one season. Therefore, in an ode to that one-and-done MLB team, I think the new NHL team in Seattle should be called the Pilots.

September 1, 2009 0

“Things You Will Learn From A Substance-Recovery Halfway Facility” Excerpt From IJ

By MDS in Story

“If, by virtue of charity or the circumstance of desperation, you ever chance to spend a little time around a Substance-recovery halfway facility like Enfield MA’s state-funded Ennet House, you will acquire many exotic new facts. You will find out that once MA’s Department of Social Services has taken a mother’s children away for any period of time, they can always take them away again, D.S.S., like at will, empowered by nothing more than a certain signature-stamped form. I.e. once deemed Unfit—no matter why or when, or what’s transpired in the meantime—there’s nothing a mother can do.

“Or for instance that people addicted to a Substance who abruptly stop ingesting the Substance often suffer wicked papular acne, often for months afterward, as the accumulations of Substance slowly leave the body. The Staff will inform you that this is because the skin is actually the body’s excretory organ. Or that chronic alcoholics’ hearts are—for reasons no M.D. has been able to explain—swollen to nearly twice the size of civilians’ human hearts, and they never again return to normal size. That there’s a certain type of person who carries a picture of their therapist in their wallet. That (both a relief and kind of an odd let-down) black penises tend to be the same general size as white penises, on the whole. That not all U.S. males are circumcised.

“That you can cop a sort of thin jittery amphetaminic buzz if you rapidly consume three Millienial Fizzies and a whole package of Oreo cookies on an empty stomach. (Keeping it down is required, however, for the buzz, which senior residents often neglect to tell newer residents.)

“That the chilling Hispanic term for whatever interior disorder drives the addict back again and again to the enslaving Substance is tecato gusano, which apparently connotes some kind of interior psychic worm that cannot be sated or killed.

“That black and Hispanic people can be as big or bigger racists than white people, and then can get even more hostile and unpleasant when this realization seems to surprise you.

“That it is possible, in sleep, for some roommates to secure a cigarette from their bedside pack, light it, smoke it down to the quick, and then extinguish it from their bedside ashtray—without once waking up, and without setting anything on fire. You will be informed that this skill is usually acquired in penal institutions, which will lower your inclination to complain about the practice. Or that even Flents industrial-strength expandable-foam earplugs do not solve the problem of a snoring roommate if the roommate in question is so huge and so adenoidal that the snores in question also produce subsonic vibrations that arpeggio up and down your body and make your bunk jiggle like a motel bed you’ve put a quarter in.

“That females are capable of being just as vulgar about sexual and eliminatory functions as males. That over 60% of all persons arrested for drug- and alcohol-related offenses report being sexually abused as children, with two-thirds of the remaining 40% reporting that they cannot remember their childhoods in sufficient detail to report one way or the other on abuse. That you can weave Madame Psychosis-like harmonies around the minor-D scream of a cheap vacuum cleaner, humming to yourself as you vacuum, if that’s your Chore. That some people really do look like rodents. That some drug-addicted prostitutes have a harder time giving up prostitution than they have giving up drugs, with their explanation involving the two habits’ very different directions of currency-flow. That there just as many idioms for the female sex-organ as there are for the male sex-organ.

“That a little-mentioned paradox of Substance addiction is: that once you are sufficiently enslaved by the Substance to need to quit the Substance in order to save your life, the enslaving Substance has become so deeply important to you that you will all but lose your mind when it is taken away from you. Or that sometime after your Substance of choice has just been taken away from you in order to save your life, as you hunker down for required A.M. and P.M. prayers, you will find yourself beginning to pray to be allowed literally to lose your mind, to be able to wrap your mind in an old newspaper or something and leave it in an alley to shift for itself, without you.

“That in metro Boston the idiom of choice for the male sex-organ is: Unit, which is why Ennet House residents are wryly amused by E.M.P.H. Hospital’s designations of its campus’s buildings.

“That certain persons simply will not like you no matter what you do. Then that most nonaddicted adult civilians have already absorbed and accepted this fact, often rather early on.

“That no matter how smart you thought you were, you are actually way less smart than that.

“That AA and NA and CA’s ‘God’ does not apparently require that you believe in Him/Her/It before He/She/It will help you. That, pace macho bullshit, public male weeping is not only plenty masculine but can actually feel good (reportedly). That sharing means talking, and taking somebody’s inventory means criticizing that person, plus many additional pieces of Recoveryspeak. That an important part of halfway-house Human Immuno-Virus prevention is not leaving your razor or toothbrush in communal bathrooms. That a seasoned prostitute can (reportedly) apply a condom to a customer’s Unit so deftly that he doesn’t even know it’s on until he’s history, so to speak.

“That a double-layered steel portable strongbox w/ tri-tumblered lock for your razor and toothbrush can be had for under $35.00 U.S./$38.50 O.N.A.N. via Home-Net Hardware, and that Pat M. or the House Manager will let you use the office’s TP to order one if you put up a sustained enough squawk.

“That over 50% of persons with a Substance addiction suffer from some other recognized form of psychiatric disorder, too. That some male prostitutes become so accustomed to enemas that they cannot have valid bowel movements without them. That a majority of Ennet House residents have at least one tattoo. That the significance of this datum is unanalyzable. That the metro Boston street term for not having money is: sporting lint. That what elsewhere’s known as Informing or Squealing or Narcing or Ratting or Ratting Out is on the streets of metro Boston known as ‘Eating Cheese,’ presumably spun off from the associative nexus of rat.

“That nose-, tongue-, lip-, and eyelid-rings rarely require actual penetrative piercing. This is because of the wide variety of clip-on rings available. That nipple-rings do require piercing, and that clitoris- and glans-rings are not things anyone thinks you really want to know the facts about. That sleeping can be a form of emotional escape and can with sustained effort be abused. That female chicanos are not called chicanas. That it costs $225 U.S. to get a MA driver’s license with your picture but not your name. That purposeful sleep-deprivation can also be an abusable escape. That gambling can be an abusable escape, too, and work, shopping, and shoplifting, and sex, and abstention, and masturbation, and food, and exercise, and meditation/prayer, and sitting so close to Ennet House’s old D.E.C. TP cartridge-viewer that the screen fills your whole vision and the screen’s static charge tickles your nose like a linty mitten.

“That you do not have to like a person in order to learn from him/her/it. That loneliness is not a function of solitude. That it is possible to get so angry you really do see everything red. What a ‘Texas Catheter’ is. That some people really do steal—will steal things that are yours. That a lot of U.S. adults truly cannot read, not even a ROM hypertext phonics thing with HELP functions for every word. That cliquey alliance and exclusion and gossip can be forms of escape. That logical validity is not a guarantee of truth. That evil people never believe they are evil, but rather that everyone else is evil. That it is possible to learn valuable things from a stupid person. That it takes effort to pay attention to any one stimulus for more than a few seconds. That you can all of a sudden out of nowhere want to get high with your Substance so bad that you think you will surely die if you don’t, and but can just sit there with your hands writhing in your lap and face wet with craving, can want to get high but instead just sit there, wanting to but not, if that makes sense, and if you can gut it out and not hit the Substance during the craving the craving will eventually pass, it will go away—at least for a while. That it is statistically easier for low-IQ people to kick an addiction than it is for high-IQ people. That the metro Boston street term for panhandling is: stemming, and that it is regarded by some as a craft or art; and that professional stem-artists actually have like little professional colloquia sometimes, little conventions, in parks or public-transport hubs, at night, where they get together and network and exchange feedback on trends and techniques and public relations, etc. That is possible to abuse OTC cold-and allergy remedies in an addictive manner. That Nyquil is over 50 proof. That boring activities become, perversely, much less boring if you concentrate intently on them. That if enough people in a silent room are drinking coffee it is possible to make out the sound of steam coming off the coffee. That sometimes human beings have to just sit in one place and, like, hurt. That you will become way less concerned with what other people think of you when you realize how seldom they do. That there is such a thing as raw, unalloyed, agendaless kindness. That it is possible to fall asleep during an anxiety attack.

“That concentrating intently on anything is very hard work.

“That addiction is either a disease or a mental illness or a spiritual condition (as in ‘poor in spirit’) or an O.C.D.-like disorder or an affective or character disorder, and that over 75% of the veteran Boston AAs who want to convince you that it is a disease will make you sit down and watch them write DISEASE on a piece of paper and then divide and hyphenate the word so that it becomes DIS-EASE, then will stare at you as if expecting you to undergo some kind of blinding ephiphanic realization, when really (as G. Day points tirelessly out to his counselors) changing DISEASE to DIS-EASE reduces a definition and explanation down to a simple description of a feeling, and rather a whiny insipid one at that.

“That most Substance-addicted people are also addicted to thinking, meaning they have a compulsive and unhealthy relationship with their own thinking. That the cute Boston AA term for addictive-type thinking is: Analysis-Paralysis. That cats will in fact get violent diarrhea if you feed them milk, contrary to the popular image of cats and milk. That it is simply more pleasant to be happy than to be pissed off. That 99% of compulsive thinkers’ thinking is about themselves; that 99% of this self-directed thinking consists of imagining and then getting ready for things that are going to happen to them; and then, weirdly, that if they stop to think about it, that 100% of the things they spend 99% of their time and energy imagining and trying to prepare for all the contingencies and consequences of are never good. Then that this connects interestingly with the early-sobriety urge to pray for the literal loss of one’s mind. In short that 99% of the head’s thinking activity consists of trying to scare the everliving shit out of itself. That it is possible to make rather tasty poached eggs in a microwave oven. That the metro-street term for really quite wonderful is: pisser. That everybody’s sneeze sounds different. That some people’s moms never taught them to cover up or turn away when they sneeze. That no one who has ever been to prison is ever the same again. That you do not have to have sex with a person to get crabs from them. That a clean room feels better to be in than a dirty room. That the people to be most frightened of are the people who are the most frightened. That it takes great personal courage to let yourself appear weak. That you don’t have to hit somebody even if you really really want to. That no single, individual moment is in and of itself unendurable.

“That nobody who’s ever gotten sufficiently addictively enslaved by a Substance to need to quit the Substance and has successfully quit it for a while and been straight and but then has for whatever reason gone back and picked up the Substance has ever reported being glad that they did it, used the Substance again and gotten re-enslaved; not ever. That bit is a metro Boston street term for a jail sentence, as in ‘Don G. was up in Billerica on a six-month bit.’ That it’s impossible to kill fleas by hand. That it’s possible to smoke so many cigarettes that you get little white ulcerations on your tongue. That the effects of too many cups of coffee are in no way pleasant or intoxicating.

“That pretty much everybody masturbates.

“Rather a lot, it turns out.

“That the cliché ‘I don’t know who I am’ unfortunately turns out to be more than a cliché. That it costs $330 U.S. to get a passport in a phony name. That other people can often see things about you that you yourself cannot see, even if those people are stupid. That you can obtain a major credit card with a phony name for $1,500 U.S., but that no one will give you a straight answer about whether this price includes a verifiable credit history and line of credit for when the cashier slides the phony card through the register’s little verification-modem with all sorts of burly security guards standing around. That having a lot of money does not immunize people from suffering or fear. That trying to dance sober is a whole different kettle of fish. That the term vig is street argot for the bookmaker’s commission on an illegal bet, usually 10%, that’s either subtracted from your winnings or added to your debt. That certain sincerely devout and spiritually advanced people believe that the God of their understanding helps them find parking places and gives them advice on Mass. Lottery numbers.

“That cockroaches can, up to a certain point, be lived with.

“That ‘acceptance’ is usually more a matter of fatigue than anything else.

“That different people have radically different ideas of basic personal hygiene.

“That, perversely, it is often more fun to want something than to have it.

“That if you do something nice for somebody in secret, anonymously, without letting the person you did it for know it was you or anybody else know what it was you did or in any way or form trying to get credit for it, it’s almost its own form of intoxicating buzz.

“That anonymous generosity, too, can be abused.

“That having sex with someone you do not care for feels lonelier than not having sex in the first place, afterward.

“That it is permissible to want.

“That everybody is identical in their unspoken belief that way deep down they are different from everyone else. That this isn’t necessarily perverse.

“That there might not be angels, but there are people who might as well be angels.

“That God—unless you’re Charlton Heston, or unhinged, or both—speaks and acts entirely through the vehicle of human beings, if there is a God.

“That God might regard the issue of whether you believe there’s a God or not as fairly low on his/her/its list of things s/he/it’s interested in re you.

“That the smell of Athlete’s Foot is sick-sweet v. the smell of podiatric Dry Rot is sick-sour.

“That a person–one with the Disease/-Ease—will do things under the influence of Substances that he simply would not ever do sober, and that some consequences of these things cannot ever be erased or amended. Felonies are an example of this.”

August 29, 2009 0

2009-2010 NFL Preview (NFC)

By MDS in Football, Opinion

NFC East (non-division games — AFC West and NFC South)

Dallas Cowboys — There’s really no other way to put this: the Cowboys are officially becoming the porn star or stripper that’s kind of getting unofficially too old. They still make good money to the point that it kind of fools people into believing that they’re really popular, but underneath the veneer the real fans are thinking (if they were being 100% honest), “Ooh, I think their best days are behind them.” How many more December collapses will it take for people to realize that the troijka of Jerry Jones, Wade Phillips, and Tony Romo is not entirely dissimilar to those early- to mid-’90′s Dolphins teams that fooled you to thinking that, because future Hall Of Famers Shula and Marino were steering the ship, that they would always be in contention for the Super Bowl. Yes, they got rid of Terrell Owens, but they still have Tony “I Haven’t Yet Won A Big Game, Ever” Romo and Wade “Doormat” Phillips prominently involved with important roles on the team. And then you have the new $1 billion stadium—an ultra-deluxe whorehouse—to house all of this dysfunction and underachievement. (I don’t want to say that the new Cowboys’ stadium is over the top or anything, but from his grave Liberace even said it was “garishly overlarge.”)

Possibility: winning at least 3 of their 4 games in December would probably cement a playoff spot or an East title.

Reality: those 4 games are @ NYG, SD, @ NO, @ Was (then the last game is at home agains Philly in January) so I’m foreseeing yet another collapse, and a 3rd place finish.

New York Giants — The Giants, even with their perceived shortcomings at WR, are a really good and a really loaded team. Major injuries are the only thing that can stop them. Their organization is really overlooked compared to how the Pats, Colts, and Steelers have been run (and covered in the media) but the Giants kind of remind me of those early ’90′s Bills teams: rosters filled with guys you don’t hear about until the playoffs are around the corner (see: Chase Blackburn, Kevin Boss, and Kevin Dockery).

Possibility: major injuries to Manning, Brandon Jacobs, Domenik Hixon, Shaun O’Hara, or Rich Seubert would significantly hurt their playoff chances, especially when you factor in that their bye week isn’t until Week 10 and they have road games in KC, NO, and Min (the Vikings road game ends the season).

Reality: if they’re healthy, they will win the East and 12 games.

Philadelphia Eagles — Does Andy Reid think he’s Phil Jackson? I can kind of understand the whole taking-a-flyer-on-Michael-Vick thing but in the process Reid has kind of sabotaged the team’s pre-season, what with the media coverage of Vick and the subsequent and future attempts to insert him into an offense that he probably doesn’t need to be put in (I mean, really, you couldn’t have gone out and traded for Anquan Boldin? the team needs wide receivers not another QB). Oh, and no one is certain how long Vick will be suspended. Reid seems like a genuinely smart and likable guy but he’s not a born head coach—he would probably make for a top-tier offensive coordinator—and he seems to be steering a ship that is slowly sinking. It also seems like he is actively trying to see how much shit Donovan McNabb can take. The Eagles have needed WRs for a few years now (they even went to a Super Bowl simply because of Owens) and, yet, year after year they try to find gold in the draft, and if McNabb had any prima-dona tendencies at all he would’ve probably beaten Reid and the front office by now with a piece of a field goal post, screaming “Just give up the #1 and #2 picks for Boldin, God damnit! Fucking do it already! You’re killing me!”

(Separate note: a couple weeks ago the longtime Eagles’ defensive coordinator Jim Johnson died. (I say longtime coordinator because 10 years on the same time nowadays in the NFL is almost equal to 35 years.) Obviously, this has personal significance to the team first before it has any tactical or gameday significance. I have no idea how this will affect the team. This is more just an excuse to praise the guy. Johnson seemed to be the only guy in the league who actively demanded the most out of his CBs and free safeties. In a time where big-blitzing (i.e.-blitzing at least 6 guys) is indescribably risky (i.e.-quick throws to RBs or TEs in the flat will get you more yards nowadays because those guys are so much quicker than they were a decade ago), Johnson not only had a great feel for when to do it but he also had an immense amount of faith that his CBs could hold their own on their islands. I’m guessing that because of this—being on their own islands more than the average CB—almost every CB that has left the Eagles (Troy Vincent, Bobby Taylor, Brian Dawkins, Lito Sheppard) has left the team upset and slighted. Maybe they thought that they deserved to be paid more or something. Their own egos at the time aside, I’m sure that all of them eventually regretted leaving the team and will probably be the first to say that Jim Johnson is one of the greatest defensive coaches of this generation.)

Possibility: a quick look at the Eagles’ depth chart reveals that, at this time, there are only 16 rookies and first-year players on the team. None of them are slated to start and only 5 of them are currently slotted as second-stringers. That’s a lot of eggs in the veteran basket. If they can click this year and get some help from some Giants’ injuries, they can win the division.

Reality: Reid is not good at handling circuses, their bye week is really early (Week 3), and their Week 6 through Week 13 stretch goes like this: @ Was, NYG, Dal, @ SD, @ Chi, Was, @ Atl, @ NYG. Unless they horribly underachieve or suffer major injuries, though, they’ll take 2nd in the division.

Washington Redskins — Just too many red flags with this team: they’ve essentially destroyed any confidence QB Jason Campbell could ever think of having by always publicly looking for another QB (this year it was Jay Cutler) or seemingly never quashing any talk of how Campbell not be right for them, RB Clinton Portis most likely will not stay healthy for a year, their signings of mega-star free agents (this year it was DT Albert Haynesworth) usually end up badly, and LE Phillip Daniels and RE Andre Carter have been in the league 13 and 8 years, respectively. Oh, and they signed CB DeAngelo Hall, who was waived by the Raiders last year. Say that again out loud: he was waived by the Raiders. The Oakland Raiders did not want him. Wow. And now he’s the starting RCB for the Redskins.

Possibility: the world as we know it is really The Matrix, except that a 40 year-old Redskins fan is controlling everything and the ’09-’10 Redskins team is replaced by the ’87-’88 Redskins team, just like you could change it in an exhibition game on Madden.

Reality: short of the above happening, last place in the East.

NFC North (non-division games — AFC North and NFC West)

Chicago Bears — Jay Cutler.

Possibility: Cutler gets hurt and/or the WR corps is really as bad as all of us Bears fans have feared, rendering this team to be exactly like last year’s 8-8 team that was riddled with inconsistencies (I know I had a blast watching a team that could not win 3 games in a row).

Reality: Bears win the North (provided Cutler doesn’t get hurt) and here’s why. Even if the addition of Cutler doesn’t translate into 21 or 24 points per game, the fact that the Bears now have a QB who can sustain drives, pick up 4 first downs before having to punt (which eats up the clock) is huge. Too many times over the last 5-6 years the Bears have had to punt after having the ball for two and a half minutes. Cutler and Forte can now chew up time on the clock consistently, which is huge for an aging defense with suspect CBs that will need as much rest as it can get.

Detroit Lions — It’s a rebuilding year. Again.

Possibility: they become a fiestier team that plays the spoiler role in their last 4 games (@ Bal, Ari, @ SF, Chi) and they take 3rd place in the North.

Reality: but as Beck once sang, “the limitations are limitless,” so too are the dearth of positive possibilities for this team. (It kind of pains me to type that last sentence so harshly because I really do believe that everyone benefits when the Lions field good teams—they have one of the best uniforms in the league, some of the best fans for sticking with them for so many awful years, and their team is synonymous with Thanksgiving. And, yes, I realize that I put their uniforms ahead of their fans and their annual Thanksgiving Day game. What do you want from me? I like the color blue.) That said, last place in the North again.

Green Bay Packers — Look, I know that a lot of people are falling in love with Aaron Rodgers. He’s a very good QB, he’s very accurate, and if memory serves me right he did not throw a single interception in the red zone last year. That said, I just have this nagging feeling that you cannot count on him to be healthy for 32 consecutive games. And the fact that 33 year-old Chad Clifton is still being tasked with protecting Rodgers’ blind side, this may not be a good year for the QB that replaced He Who Shall Not Be Named. Finally, something to be mindful of when you hear about how the Packers had a good pass defense last year: they had a statistically strong pass defense last year (#12 overall, #5 in the NFC) because their run defense was horrendous (#26 overall, #14 in the NFC). Because, you see, when you don’t have to pass the ball to beat a team, their pass defense looks real good. Something to look for as this secondary has probably not had to deal with an opponent’s full passing wrath yet.

Possibility: Packers win the North. Rodgers stays healthy, the RB corps wears down teams and new defensive coordinator Dom Capers’ new 3-4 scheme fixes all loose holes. (By the way, the addition of Capers will most likely be the real success of the Packers this year and not anything Rodgers-related. Unless, of course, the Packers win the division with a #29 overall defense or something.)

Reality: Packers finish 9-7, same record as the Vikings but the Packers will lose the tie-breakers. Thus, a 3rd place finish.

Minnesota Vikings — Oh goodness! The Football Gods have not been kind to the Vikings over the years (two years ago, the Vikings were #1 in the NFL in both rushing and run defense and were still denied entrance into the playoffs) and now they tempt the Gods by signing He Who Shall Not Be Named after much back-and-forth and the media circus surrounding it—and to say nothing of how all of this has potentially poisoned their own locker room. Minnesota Vikings, you jumped through all of those hoops to get a 40 year-old Brett Favre, not a 25 year-old Joe Montana or Tom Brady! The most important part to the Vikings’ game will be the health of LT Bryant McKinnie and LG Steve Hutchinson, also known as “the greatest left side of an offensive line since the tandem of Jonathan Ogden and Edwin Mulatalo.” So, go ahead and heaps lots of praise on Adrian Peterson but, as I have said before, he will instantly become Julius Jones if McKinnie or Hutchinson miss multiple games.

Possibility: no injuries to offensive or defensive line (and the necessary performing of the Football Gods’ demands so that all harmony is undisturbed) will equal a North title.

Reality: too much tempting of the Gods with that QB signing they desired. 2nd place, and possibly not even a wildcard spot—a finishing touch that the Football Gods put on Brad Childress just to remind him of how things work around here.

NFC South (non-division games — AFC East and NFC East)

Atlanta Falcons — Did you know that the Falcons have never had back-to-back winning seasons? Did you also know that the Falcons first round QB selections consisted of Randy Johnson, Steve Bartkowski, Chris Miller, and Michael Vick before they selected Matt Ryan last year? Of course, this isn’t scientific or anything, but, um, if history is any indication there’s a really good chance that both the Falcons and Matt Ryan will hit some bumps this year.

Possibility: the NFC South, while filled with teams that are very tough to beat at home, will be pretty weak this year. If the Falcons win 4 road games, they probably win the South.

Reality: road games at New England, Dallas (early in the year—you know, when the Cowboys are actually awake), and the Giants, and a road game against the Jets at the end of December? This, in tandem with the fact that teams will not be surprised by Atlanta (it’s amazing how a year’s worth of film turns out-of-nowhere contenders into pretenders) will equal the Falcons taking last place in a very competitive South division. (Competitive in the sense that 6-10 will be the worst record, unlike 3-13 or 4-12 in other divisions.)

Carolina Panthers — So, let me get this straight? John Fox and the Panthers front office, after taking into account the implosion of Jake Delhomme in the playoffs, looked around the league and the draft and thought, “We’ll be okay with Jake”? Wow. This Panthers team confounds the hell out of me. One the one hand, their defense will most likely be solid as it always is; on the other hand, you had the Julius Peppers fiasco and if he decides to diva it up it could be semi-toxic. On the one hand, the Panthers offensive line really is pretty good (in spite of the Cardinals owning them last year) and their RB tandem of DeAngelo Williams and Jonathan Stewart is potentially all-world; on the other hand, the WR tandem of Steve Smith and Muhsin Muhammad is starting to get seriously old and when will teams just be able to line up eight in the box against them to kill the run?

Possibility: God only knows—they could win 4 or 14 games… I have no idea.

Reality: 3rd place. Don’t know why; it’s just what I’m going with.

New Orleans Saints — Here are the facts: the Saints are going to pass way too much, the media is going to overpraise Drew Brees and Sean Payton throughout the year, and the Saints are going to be very tough to beat at home (as per usual). Because of that last fact, the Saints are pretty fortunate to have the Giants and Patriots coming to New Orleans and not vice versa. Anyway, the Saints will win some big games this year but I just can’t take them for real because of 5 things. 1) Reggie Bush is their starting RB–the Harold Miner of the NFL. 2) Darren Sharper is their starting SS—yes, the same Darren Sharper from the Packers’ Super Bowl teams. And, yes, he’s 51 years old. 3) Teams that have a QB that lead the league in passing yards (which Brees will most likely do) usually don’t do well in the playoffs, if make the playoffs at all. 4) This team still has Jeremy Shockey on it—I mean, that’s just such a negative intangible as the season goes on. 5) Have I mentioned that Reggie Bush is their starting RB? A guy who can’t really run up the middle and isn’t fast enough to outrun CBs like he could in college? Just wanted to make sure I pointed that out.

Possibility: they win the South.

Reality: they win 2nd place in the South. Pass-wacky teams with no running games should only win divisions if the other teams have insurmountable injuries.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers — Jon Gruden was starting to lose a step last year and Monte Kiffin decided he was bigger than the team and declared, before the season ended, that he was leaving at the end of the year. Now, Raheem Morris has been promoted to head coach and Jim Bates was brought in to handle the defensive coordinator duties. Both are smart, solid moves.

Possibility: QB controversy could derail the team—Luke McCown and Byron Leftwich are both solid QBs but what if whoever the starter is starts to falter for 2 or 3 games in a row?

Reality: I don’t know why but I think Tampa rebounds from last year. And, it may not be scientific but the reason I believe this is their year is that they get a bye week after their game in London against the Patriots (i.e.-they get to soak in everything associated with that trip and not have to worry about flying back for a game in the States 6 days later).

NFC West (non-division games — AFC South and NFC North)

Arizona Cardinals — Teams that lose in the Super Bowl usually have bad follow-up years, per the trend in the NFL over the last ten years or so. Also, a member of the Cardinals is on the cover of the latest Madden game. Uh-oh.

Possibility: the Cards easily win the West because, well, the West sucks.

Reality: the Cards take 2nd place because…

St. Louis Rams — …oh, what, like the Rams winning the South this year is any crazier than an 8-8 Cardinals team being 2 minutes away from winning the Super Bowl last year?

Possibility: the Rams do what the Rams do and suffer a stockpile of massive injuries and fall to the cellar again.

Reality: the Rams’ offensive line is comprised of 2 guys w/ 5 years experience, 2 guys w/ 6 years experience, and 1 guy w/ 7 years experience (all right in that sweet spot of not too young and not too old); Marc Bulger is a sneaky great QB when he’s not hurt and has a line protecting him; Stephen Jackson should be healthy; most importantly, though, is that Steve Spagnuolo will be your Coach Of The Year. This team will be on no one’s radar and Spagnuolo will turn this defense into one that looks similar to his groups with the Giants: a bunch of who-dat’s that wind up kicking teams in the mouth. Rams win the West.

San Francisco 49ers — I look forward to Mike Singletary’s press conferences.

Possibility: 3rd place.

Reality: last place. When your franchise wins 5 Super Bowls in a 16-year stretch, you have to live through some futile years. Sorry.

Seattle Seahawks — I was prepared to write things like “if the Seahawks can stay healthy, they have a legitimate shot with their upgraded WR corps” and “maybe now that Mike Holmgren is gone, a new underdog mentality will make this team a little fiestier.” I was going to write things like that. I really was. But then I saw that Jim Mora, Jr. is the head coach of this team—something that I had completely forgotten about. Instead, I will write things like “Mora will cost this team 2 victories” and “what the fuck were the Seahawks’ front office thinking?”…

Possibility: they go 7-1 or 6-2 at home (their home schedule looks pretty favorable) and win the West with a .500 road record.

Reality: the Football Gods laugh and point at Mora’s face when the cameras pan to it on the TV, made all the more hilarious to them because this is what Seattle must endure for two more years as punishment for complaining about the officiating in the Super Bowl long after the game was over. 3rd place.

____________________

Predictions

2005 playoff teams
AFC: Jaguars, Patriots, Steelers, Bengals, Broncos, Colts
NFC: Redskins, Buccaneers, Panthers, Giants, Seahawks, Bears

2006 playoff teamsAFC: Chiefs, Colts, Jets, Patriots, Ravens, Chargers
NFC: Cowboys, Seahawks, Giants, Eagles, Saints, Bears

2007 playoff teams
AFC: Jaguars, Steelers, Titans, Chargers, Patriots, Colts
NFC: Redskins, Seahawks, Giants, Buccaneers, Packers, Cowboys

2008 playoff teams
AFC: Colts, Chargers, Ravens, Dolphins, Titans, Steelers
NFC: Falcons, Cardinals, Eagles, Vikings, Panthers, Giants

As you can see, teams making repeat entrances into the post-season aren’t a given. And there are always surprises. Always.

So, look at last year’s playoff grouping. In the AFC, I’ll take the Colts, Chargers, Pats, and Steelers to win their division and make the playoffs. Which leaves us with the Ravens, Dolphins, and Titans—will any of them be in the playoffs for another year? I’ll take the Ravens and Miami but Tennessee will be staying home. My surprise team out of the AFC will be the Chiefs.

In the NFC, I like the Giants to win their division and the Cardinals to appear in the post-season again. Otherwise, I like the Bears, Buccaneers, Rams, and Saints to be the new entrants in this upcoming post-season.

As much as I don’t like to pick 5 of the same teams from the AFC to make repeat playoff appearances (and I’m sure I’ll be way off because of it), I just can’t put my finger on who will be huge overachievers this year and make their way in (the Broncos? the Browns? the Jets?). The NFC, though, I think will be crazier. So, here’s how what 2009 playoff picture looks like:

2009 playoff teams
AFC: Ravens, Chiefs, Dolphins, Patriots, Steelers, Colts
NFC: Giants, Cardinals, Bears, Buccaneers, Rams, Saints

Super Bowl Prediction (of which I’m no doubt horribly wrong)

Bears vs. Chiefs

With the addition of Cutler, the Bears lead the league in time of possession and eke out a thriller against the Giants. As for the Chiefs… oh yeah, it’s a gigantic long shot. But, hey, it’s the 50th anniversary of the AFL merger this year and those Legacy Games and throwback jerseys have to help one of those teams out, right? Why not the Chiefs? They’ve suffered through the Schottenheimer and Herm Edwards years and Carl Peterson is finally out of there too (and replaced by former Patriots whiz Scott Pioli, no less). And, besides, how indescribably awesome would it be to see all of that NFL Films clips of Lenny Dawson metriculatin’ the ball down the field during the Super Bowl pre-game? The Chiefs beat the Patriots in New England as Matt Cassell celebrates in Foxboro, and Pioli hoists the Lamar Hunt Trophy (named after the Chiefs’ owner and architect of the AFL) as Belichick and Kraft stare blankly off in the distance.

I know I’m totally wrong here but, whatever, it’s a prediction. And one that would be damn cool to see happen.

August 23, 2009 0

2009-2010 NFL Preview (AFC)

By MDS in Football, Opinion

AFC East (non-division games — NFC South and AFC South)

Buffalo Bills — Quite honestly, everything with this team begins and ends with Dick Jauron. Yes, the Bills acquired an ’01 version of a Nissan Altima in Terrell Owens (somewhat reliable, lots of mileage on it, when it acts problematic it becomes pretty expensive) and, yes, Lee Evans and Marshawn Lynch show legitimate promise. But Jauron is comically inept at managing an offense. If the Bills had gone out and traded for Jay Cutler, Anquan Boldin, and Darren Sproles this year there would still be a decent chance that they would only average 17 points a game. And if you need to win a big game? Jauron is not your man there either. Jauron is a very solid defensive-minded coach but in big games he is susceptible to calling defensive game plans that are way too conservative.

Possibility: if the Bills can overachieve and play above Jauron’s predictable end-of-season bad game plans, they could win 10 games and compete for the East title. A relatively easy schedule (their two non-division, -AFC South, -NFC South games are CLE, @ KC) that ends with Peyton Manning and his history of inconsistent play in cold weather coming to Buffalo in Week 17 and it may actually work out for the Bills.

Reality: they’ll battle the Dolphins for 2nd all year long but ultimately take third because Jauron will play a prevent defense against Manning, thus losing the game 31-14.

Miami Dolphins — Your typical Parcells-run team: a team that most likely has one too many veterans at important skill positions (CB Will Allen, LB Jason Taylor, NT Jason Ferguson, QB Chad Pennington) that could disrupt a lot of things if they under-perform. That said, if their offensive line stays healthy, they’ll be in every game and the Dolphins will be tough to beat at home.

Possibility: they win the East for a second consecutive year and Parcells gives Belichick the shit-eye from his office.

Reality: last five games of the season (NE, @ Jax, @ Ten, Hou, Pit) will take them out of contention for second straight title and they take second place in the division.

New England Patriots — Remember when the Patriots upset the heavily-favored Rams to win their first Super Bowl? And remember how Mike Martz was never the same afterwards? And remember how the Rams as a team were really never the same afterwards? I just can’t help but feel that the Super Bowl loss to the Giants is the Patriots’ Super Bowl swan song for a while. I mean, how does a franchise recover from suffering such a gigantic upset and then loses its franchise QB eight minutes into the first game in the very next season for the entire year? The football Gods tend to toy with high-octane offenses (again, see: Martz, Mike) and, honestly, can New England put it all together for one more run before Brady, Moss, Seymour, and their offensive line begin to enter their inevitable declines?

Possibility: they put it together offensively and their upgraded defense (a healthy Adalius Thomas, the shrewd Derrick Burgess trade, and Jerod Mayo with one year under his belt) and Belichick wins another ring and then steps down.

Reality: they win the East (the only two non-division road games that look unfavorable are @ Ind and @ NO; other than that, their schedule looks really favorable) but fall in the playoffs.

New York Jets — Um, when you have an old offensive line and an old front line in a 3-4 scheme… you should be thankful if you overachieve enough to take 2nd place in any division.

Possibility: they overachieve and, if they stay healthy, contend with the Pats for a little while before falling into 2nd place. They might be able to steal a wild card spot if everything lines up for them.

Reality: their linebacking corps and secondary is definitely good enough to keep them in any game if they stay healthy. But two things concern me: 1) that they’ll have to rely on Kris Jenkins and Shaun Ellis to generate a pass rush and 2) their first 6 games—@ Hou, NE, Ten, @ NO, @ Mia, Buf. I mean, they could easily start the year 2-4 or 1-5. The Jets will claim the cellar this year.

AFC North (non-division games — NFC North and AFC West)

Baltimore Ravens — Solid defense and QB Joe Flacco will be one year wiser after his better-than-exected rookie campaign. What’s not to like? I have no idea. Anything can happen with this team: Flacco could turn into Scott Mitchell; Flacco could improve; their WR corps reminds me of the Chiefs during Vermeil’s last year when they hung onto Eddie Kennison one year too long (I mean, Derrick Mason–the guy who retired a few weeks ago–he’s slated to be the #2 WR as of this moment?); John Harbaugh could be for real; they still have a good RB corps; the secondary is a top 10 unit.

Possibility: they stay healthy while the Steelers take some hits, combined with the fact that their physicality could result in easy wins against the NFC North and AFC West teams and they win the North.

Reality: the Steelers are just a notch better and the Ravens take 2nd place again and a wildcard spot. Either way, we will know definitively if they are for real by the start of Week 7 as Weeks 2, 4, and 6 are @ SD, @ NE, and @ Min respectively. If they 2-1 or 3-0 in those games and they stay healthy then all bets are off as to what their ceiling is this season.

Cincinnati Bengals — In the words of the immortal Mike Singletary: “Can’t do it.”

Possibility: the ghost of Paul Brown sets into motion an epic curse upon the Ravens and Steelers (and all of the AFC, for that matter) that allows the Bengals to win the division and home-field advantage throughout the playoffs.

Reality: tied for last with Cleveland at 5-11.

Cleveland Browns — See: description of Cincinnati Bengals, above.

Possibility: the ghost of Paul Brown… oh, who am I kidding? It’s not even worth it.

Reality: see: description of Cincinnati Bengals, above.

Pittsburgh Steelers — This is a make-or-break year for this incarnation of the Steelers. Something about them just makes me think that they’re the San Antonio Spurs of the NFL—very good team, great depth, but can’t win back-to-back titles because everyone kind of forgets how much luck was involved in their winning the previous title. Last year, they had a great team. But they also had a team that seemed to have like 3-5 plays a game wherein Ben Roethlisberger was completing passes on broken plays and scrambling like mad. Roethlisberger possesses an immensely gifted ability when it comes to intangibles (it makes up 51% of the reason as to why he has two rings) but, like fumble recoveries, you can’t rely on it for a back-to-back title run; the luck begins to run out. That said, barring catastrophic injuires, the Steelers will win the division but I suspect a tripping up in the playoffs a lá the Patriots a few years ago in Denver will occur.

Possibility: the injury to Roethlisberger is more serious than first expected, and/or playing 19 games last season takes its toll on some players.

Reality: the Steelers will win the North, provided their offensive line and running back corps doesn’t get decimated by injuries.

AFC South (non-division games — NFC West and AFC East)

Houston Texans — Ladies and Gentlemen, your new Arizona Cardinals for the next ten to fifteen years! Every year, a small faction of NFL writers/analysts will write/say things like, “You know who I like as a sleeper team this year? The Houston Texans. Think about it: they’re totally under the radar and Matt Schaub is due for a big year… yadda, yadda, yadda.” This fell under the same category as all of those Cardinals-are-my-sleeper-pick-this-year writers/analysts from 1997 up until last year. As Chuck D once said, “Don’t believe the hype.” Even if the hype is only coming from 10% of the sports media.

Possibility: an aging Colts and Titans team gets caught with their pants down and the Texans sneak a division title grab.

Reality: the Texans will be very tough to beat at home, but they will falter on the road; the latter will cement their 3rd place finish, while the former should equate to you not being surprised when they beat the Colts and/or Titans at home this year.

Indianapolis Colts — Love, love, love the promotion of Jim Caldwell to head coach when Tony Dungy retired. The Colts may not have the same amount of championship hardware that the Steelers and Patriots have won this decade but the Colts as masters of consistency: for the entirety of his career, Peyton Manning has had Jeff Saturday as his center and Tom Moore as his coordinator; the Colts ability to draft in the late rounds is surpassed only by the Patriots; they only seem to hire coaches who unequivocally buy into their franchise (i.e.–no one announces that they’re leaving during the year a lá Monte Kiffin). All of this has help add up to the Colts being the first team in the history of the NFL to have won 12 games or more in 6 consecutive seasons. The beauty of this year’s Colts team is that we should be able to gauge how good they’ll be before their Week 6 bye as Weeks 1-5 are as follows: Jax, @ Mia, @ Ari, Sea, @ Ten. Other than that, road games at Baltimore and a Week 17 visit to cold Buffalo–should it be important–are the only other games that could thwart an AFC South title.

Possibility: any sustained injuries to Manning, WR Reggie Wayne, C Jeff Saturday, TE Dallas Clark, or MLB Gary Brackett would severely hurt their chances of a playoff spot, let alone a high seed.

Reality: This team is built to handle the typical spot injuries of a season. They prove that last year’s Titans team was a fluke and win the AFC South by Week 15.

Jacksonville Jaguars — I passively loathe this team and I feel sorry for Jaguar fans. You have a team that constantly underachieves and a coach, Jack Del Rio, who, for whatever reason, just can’t be fired. Del Rio is what I call a “Brian Billick All-Star.” Billick somehow was able to keep his job for as long as he did and I’m not really sure why. Billed as an “offensive genius” (which, coincidentally, meant “I was the o-coordinator in Minnesota when Randall Cunningham simply threw bombs to Randy Moss when worse came to worse”), Billick was mostly a fraud in that respect and he always seem to find ways of turning his dynamic teams into vanilla teams that relied too much on their defense. He was Dick Jauron, Jr., essentially. Del Rio has somehow fooled people into believing that he is some defensive magician, but he has been at the helm of some legitimately good teams over the last few years and they have always found a way to underachieve. (For instance, how many times has a Del Rio-led team won in Indy?) I would be so pissed if I were a Jags fan because it’s like, “Hey, you’ve got a decent team year-in and year-out but a coach who pretty much negates everything…”

Possibility: the Jaguars actually start to click while the Colts and Titans suffer too many injuries, leading to a South title.

Reality: a continuation of last year—a last place finish and, hopefully, culminating in the firing of Del Rio.

Tennessee Titans — Not much to say, really; I think last year was a fluke. Their WR corps makes the Bears’ look like the ’87 Redskins, they are one sustained Chris Johnson injury away from having one of the worst RB corps in the league, and OLBs Keith Bulluck and David Thorton, CB Nick Harper, and DEs Jevon Kearse and Kyle Vanden Bosch have all been in the league at least 8 years—some of them are due for a decline.

Possibility: their defense will be healthy all season long and they will win 12 or 13 games because, if they stay healthy, their defense is a top-5 defense.

Reality: @ Pit, Ind, and @ NE all before Week 7 (as well as back-to-back home games against Miami and San Diego on Weeks 15 and 16) will probably ensure that the Titans will be in the wild card hunt and not the divisional title hunt.

AFC West (non-division games — NFC East and AFC North)

Denver Broncos — Like Seth said in Superbad, “this has been fucked since Jump Street!” My goodness! I completely understood why the Broncos fired Shanahan (I think he is a wildly overrated coach and it was time to move on), but to bring in a guy who almost immediately helps set off a chain of events that leads to Jay Cutler going to the Bears for essentially a new Camry and a stack of Best Buy gift cards? Wow. And they still have an unhappy (and potentially Tracy Jordan-esque) Brandon Marshall. And they still have a lot to be desired on the defensive side of the ball–quick, name the starting 3 in their new 3-4 scheme without looking it up? It still kind of baffles me that the Broncos got McDaniels, rather than making an honest attempt to get Cardinals offensive coordinator Todd Haley. Because, you know, call me crazy, but I know I’d rather have the guy who helped get the freakin’ Arizona Cardinals to within two minutes of winning a Super Bowl over someone from the Bill Belichick coaching tree. But that’s just me.

Possibility: honestly, there’s no ceiling for this team in my opinion. They could finish last, they could win the West outright—even if the Chargers don’t suffer any major injuries. Nothing would surprise me.

Reality: that said, my gut says a 3rd place finish seems about right, especially when you consider how potentially murderous their schedule could be (a Week 4 through 14 stretch that looks like this: Dal, NE, @ SD, bye, @ Bal, Pit, @ Was, SD, NYG, @ KC, @ Ind–yikes).

Kansas City Chiefs — I have no idea why I think this but I have a feeling that the Chiefs will be the surprise team of the AFC this season. Good, young coaches with nothing to lose? Check—Todd Haley, Maurice Carthon, and Clancy Pendergast—combined with Chan Gailey—is an underrated group of coaches. A trio of young QBs with nothing to lose? Check—Matt Cassel, Brodie Croyle, and Tyler Thigpen: the equivalent to a very solid pitching staff in baseball. A team that no longer has the stink and rust associated with the Herm Edwards regime, thus effectively meaning that they have nothing to lose? Check. See where I’m going here? The Chiefs have nothing to lose—everyone’s already picked the Chargers to go to the Super Bowl (and if they falter at the beginning of the year, everyone will still focus on the Pats, Colts, and Steelers).

Possibility: the Chiefs take 2nd place in the West, sneak in to the playoffs as a #6 seed.

Reality: they’re still taking 2nd place in the West (unless Oakland or Denver completely overachieve, K.C. is a much better team), but a playoff spot may hinge more on the health of other teams rather than the inherent talent of the Chiefs (they are, after all, relying on Zach Thomas and Mike Vrabel to make meaningful contributions). Either way, the Chiefs are going to be a tough team to beat.

Oakland Raiders — Aye carumba! What else is there to say really?

Possibility: I have a better chance of running into Reese Witherspoon at a hotel lobby, and her becoming so smitten with me that she simply must have her way with me in her suite than the Raiders have of making the playoffs. (Note to self: if Raiders make playoffs this year, fly to Los Angeles and loiter in hotel lobbies.)

Reality: the Raiders end up in last place, and I never catch a whiff of Reese’s suite.

San Diego Chargers — Beware of conventional wisdom! Oh sure, the Chargers will win the West (unless, of course, they are ravaged by injuries) but this is a flaky team through and through. If I have to say it again I will say it again: never, never, never, trust a Norv Turner-led team. Never. You have been warned. So, when you’re at home watching the pre-game shows for Week 12 and every analyst is falling over themselves talking about how “real” the Chargers are after their back-to-back victories over the Giants and Eagles, just know that it will make their inevitable playoff loss all the more sweet or painful (depending on what your angle is).

Possibility: could get knocked around by the AFC North and NFC East teams to the point of finishing in 2nd place.

Reality: the Broncos and Chiefs are still a year away (in the Broncos case, maybe even 2-3 years away) from making any serious noise so I have to go with the Chargers winning the division just by default. But, mark my words, they will fall apart in the playoffs. And it will be glorious–Norv Turner may even outdo himself this year.

Next week: the NFC preview and my Super Bowl prediction.

August 8, 2009 0

2009-2010 NFL Preview (Introduction)

By MDS in Football, Opinion

Brett Favre Michael Vick Terrell Owens, Owens Vick OchocincoFavre Brett Vick. Michael Vick T.O. BrettFavre? Brett Favre Mike Vick Minnesota Bills T.O. Buffalo Vikings BrettFavre Favre. Tom Brady Vick T.O. Brett Favre. Favre. Brett. Brett T.O. Bills Owens. Favre. Mike Vick Mark Sanchez Jay Cutler Favre. Cutler Owens Ochocinco Vikings Favre. Favre Vick T.O.? Favre. Michael Vick Chad Ochocinco Wildcat Mark Sanchez TerrellOwens.

Needless to say, this past NFL offseason has been brutal in terms of how it was reported. I mean, I am surprised that the above paragraph didn’t get regurgitated word-for-word on live television by an overworked and robotic John Clayton or Mike Greenberg. I mean, there’s beating a dead horse and then there’s killing the horse, having sex with it, burying it, exhuming it, having sex with it again, setting it on fire, digging a new hole for the ashes, burying it, and exhuming it again so that we can all see if all of the ashes are in fact there in the hole. I mean, for the love of God! Brett Favre… again?! Terrell Owens… again?! Michael Vick… again?! Mark Sanchez being declared “for real” before taking any pro snaps? Will Tom Brady be “the same Tom Brady”? Chad Johnson changes his last name to Ochocinco? Denver fans unhappy with Jay Cutler and vice versa? This is news?

No, a thousand times no, it is not news.

To me, the real news is Steve Spagnuolo becoming the head coach of the Rams (if he turns that team around before the CBA is signed—espcecially if they were to become a top-5 defense—it might mean that guys like Billick, Shanahan, and Holmgren may not be able to come out of their “retirements” as quickly as they hoped); whether or not the Chargers will implode (they barely made the playoffs last year and they are seemingly everyone’s sexy pick for the Super Bowl this year, and the concensus sexy picks are almost always wrong—oh, and Norv “I Can’t Believe My Reputation As The Cowboys Offensive Coordinator In 1992 Still Enables Me To Get Head Coaching Jobs” Turner is still their coach); whether or not the Falcons (who have never had back-to-back winning seasons) can actually put together another good season now that they won’t surprise anyone; will the drafting of LT Michael Oher give the Ravens offensive line the same stability Jonathan Ogden did; how if the Patriots, Colts, or the Steelers don’t win the Super Bowl this year they are all likely headed towards a stretch of mediocrity. Those things are interesting and worthy of discussion.

Over the next few weeks I am going to post separate AFC and NFC previews for the upcoming season, complete with predictions. I will most certainly be wrong on the predictions front, but getting predictions right is not my aim. My aim will be to provide a team-by-team analysis that you won’t hear or read about from ESPN or Fox or CBS or NBC. (Okay, you might see some of the things in Gregg Easterbrook’s TMQ column on espn.com–we seem to think the same way.) Some of the teams’ analysis will be short and caustic while others will be more objective. What can I say? The teams that suck don’t deserve a lot of objective insight. If I were a Raiders or Browns fan, I would be disgusted by my team’s front office over the last six years.

So, what will the team-by-team analysis here have to offer that you most likely won’t find on the big sites and networks? Common sense. That is all I can promise you.

You will not find any hyperbolic rantings on the God-like Saviour that is Mark Sanchez, the impact that T.O. will make on the Bills, or the setbacks that the Vikings incurred be trying to woo the future Hall Of Fame quarterback Brett Favre (he of the many-repeated instances in the regurgitation up at the top of this post). What you will get will be nothing more than what I believe to be the truth. Such as: if Steve Hutchinson gets hurt, you will see how completely average Adrian Peterson is as a running back (and if you don’t believe me, call Shaun Alexander and ask him how much fun it was to run without him for a year).

And then after you make that phone call, be sure to call Michael Vick for me too. I just have to know if the Packers have really shown any interest in him.

July 3, 2009 0

The Next Big Bubble

By MDS in Opinion, Society, Sports

One of the greatest scenes in Airplane II: The Sequel is when the flight attendant Elaine (played by Julie Hagerty) tells the passengers that they are headed towards the sun and certain death:

Elaine: “Please, ladies and gentlemen, please calm down. Listen to me!
[the passengers calm down]
Elaine: “We’ve been thrown off course just a tad.
Passenger: “What’s that mean?
Elaine: “In space terms, about 70 million miles.
[the passengers appear interested, nod their heads]
Elaine: “The bumps you feel are car-sized asteroids smashing into the hull.
[the passengers are still quiet and interested]
Elaine: “Also, we’re heading right for the sun and can’t seem to change course.
[the passengers are still quiet and calm, put on sunglasses]
Passenger: “Are you telling us everything?
Elaine: “Not exactly. We’re also out of coffee.
[everyone erupts into total panic]

It so perfectly conveys our nature to overlook huge impending problems that may be complex or built upon something that we are not entirely familiar with, in exchange for the license to freak out over the borderline inane. Which leads me to economic bubbles.

By far, the best thing about economic bubbles is that as they are getting out of hand (you know, stuff like not batting an eye when that fixer-upper Cape Cod is suddenly $304,000) most experts think that everything is okay; nothing is out of the ordinary, no possible doom is looming. But then, when the bubble gets much bigger and then pops… well, then, the same experts usually rail against whomever (or whatever) because “the writing was on the wall” and what have you. Everything was convoluted, we should have seen the doom looming. You do not need me to provide you with recent examples. We all know which bubbles have popped.

Which begs the following question: what sector, right now, seems to be doing good (and, in some cases, really good), has mostly positive press coverage, is constantly expanding into new markets, and has an aura about it that seemingly dictates that it will never encounter a truly disastrous hit? To me, there is one answer that no one seems to be talking about: major American sports, also known as the NFL, MLB, NBA, and the NCAA (specifically, college football and basketball).

I will guess that the typical reaction to the above paragraph will produce one of two responses (be it subconsciously or not) from you. Response #1 would probably fall into this camp: yeah, some pro teams will take some serious hits financially down the line and, yeah, the NBA or MLB may have to contract some teams down the line, but, as a whole, any of those leagues are in good enough shape to weather any financial turbulence. Response #2 would probably fall into this camp: who cares—this is only sports after all. For you Response #1 people, all I will say is that it was dogma that newspapers and the housing market would never fall apart like they did; for you Response #2 people, I ask that you give me an opportunity to explain why you should care. Because if any of the four aforementioned sports bodies were to fall apart (especially the NFL) it would provide, I believe, an excellent glimpse of how we Americans are truly willing to fundamentally change in this new millenium. I will get to why I think that shortly, but first an explanation of why I think one (or all four bodies) will fall apart much sooner than anyone is willing to admit to.

The obvious first answer as to why the potential exists for one of the four sports bodies to fall apart is money. If customers cannot afford to actually go to the games, then one of two things will happen: you will either have empty seats, or concession sales will take a serious hit. Both of things mean lowering prices (or just taking outright losses) and that, of course, means fewer profits (all while the salaries of the players remain roughly the same). Additionally, if corporations cannot set aside money for the suites at the stadiums, promotional knick-knacks and general marketing, and bids for stadium naming rights, the teams, again, start to lose some revenue that they once thought they could always count on.

The second answer is technology. When you factor in a lack of disposable income, why would the casual viewer go out of his or her way to go to a game when you have HDTVs and higher in-game production value at your fingertips (either within the comforts of your own home, or at any sports bar that is all but guaranteed to have at least ten TVs on simultaneously)? Add to this, the freely available sports content on the web, accessible from your laptop, PC, and/or phone, and it becomes completely plausible for a world to exist wherein people are okay with not going to see live games—which, again, hurts the team’s finances. (Yes, the teams will have a revenue stream associated with whatever TV rights deal was signed for them but those TV deals have expiration dates; they are not in perpetuity. Again, revenue from TV and marketing is good, but people coming to the stadium and buying concessions and knick-knacks is always the best-case scenario. This is similar to how it looks great on paper that a band sells 5 million albums when, really, the band would love it if you went to their shows instead so that they could make a much better percentage of money.)

The last answer has to do with college basketball and football specifically, and its death knell will most certainly be overexpansion. Regarding NCAA football, there seems to be an annual we-hate-the-BCS parade that comes out every year. I have already June 28, 2009 0

Reality Vs. Alternate Universe

By MDS in Opinion, Society

Whenever an entertainer (or athlete) dies at a young age, there is always a low-grade curiosity to wonder how their career would have unfolded. Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, River Phoenix, James Dean, Jeff Buckley, Len Bias, Buddy Holly, Heath Ledger, Marily Monroe, Judy Garland, Tupac, John Belushi, Andy Kaufman: all people for whom their fans will always wonder what the ceiling of their career would have been. And while I am inclined to wonder these same things from time to time (I mean, the possibilities are endless with River Phoenix alone: would he have become the definitive indie movie star? Would he have signed on for Titanic and rendered Leo’s career obsolete? Would he have reinvented himself as a Vince Vaughn-type actor? How many Oscars would he have been nominated for or won? Would his resumé have been more varied than Greg Kinnear’s?), I like to think of this from the totally oppposite point of view too.

What I mean is alternate universes.

To the Jim Morrison die-hard, there could be the belief that The Doors still had one or two masterpieces left forever unpenned. Well, what about Mick Jagger or Lou Reed? If Mick Jagger had died in 1972 just after Exile On Main Street was released he would probably be known as the single greatest rock star that ever lived. Same goes for Lou Reed: what if he had died just after Transformer and its single “Walk On The Wild Side” was released? We would always wonder what Reed could possibly be capable of, the man who formed The Velvet Underground and had just released a spectacular solo album.

But here is what really happened: Mick Jagger and Lou Reed did not die in 1972. Jagger and The Stones would go on to make some great singles (and one last great album) but, otherwise, they just became a mediocre rock band who now sells out stadiums by mostly doing live “best-of” songs. Lou Reed’s career trajectory has been anything but fantastic. Yes, he has his die-hard fans but in an alternate universe where Reed dies in 1972, I don’t think his fans then would have seen Metal Machine Music coming.

This all leads me to Michael Jackson and the alternate universe wherein he dies in 1983, rather than last Thursday.

If Michael Jackson had died in 1983—fresh off the back-to-back supernova-level releases of Off The Wall and Thriller—what would the world have thought could have been Jackson’s creative ceiling? Would he have had four consecutive albums released that sold more than fifteen million copies in the US? Seven? Sixteen? Would he have eclipsed Elvis Presley as the greatest and most loved American performer? The proverbial sky would have literally been the limit as to what Jackson’s greatness could have been in our dreams if he died in 1983.

Instead, he lived to be fifty years old. And he and his people colluded with tabloids to print stories that he slept in oxygen chambers, and that he coveted the Elephant Man’s bones. And he admitted on television that he sometimes gives kids wine and sleeps with them in his bedroom. And he built a theme park based on Peter Pan in his yard. And he forever freaked the hell out of us all when he went on MTV News and talked about his penis. And he married Lisa-Marie Presley. And he had a baby named “Blanket.” And he wore surgical masks in public. And his skin got whiter and his nose became more and more gruesome to look at.

He became the most surreally complicated celebrity to follow, probably of all-time and of any future era. He was a guy who was so emotionally stunted and physically awkward that I think I speak for most Americans when I say that it probably confused us all to hell when we would see footage of all of his screaming fans, whether it be at the airport in some other country when he would arrive for a leg of his world tour, or at the courthouse for his trials. For a lot of people, Thriller was probably the one thing preventing them from fully writing Jackson off as an artist and as a person.

I do not really know what to make of Jackson’s death. I was never really a fan of his music. My initial reaction upon learning of his death was that I felt weird that I reaction to it at all. Part of me later wondered if this is what it would have been like had Elvis died during this era, the Internet/Facebook/Twitter/Access Hollywood/E! era.

So, know that this post is not trying to be a eulogy or anything of that nature. It is simply a window into my mind of how I think of alternate universes when I learn of celebrity deaths. For example, imagine going back in time and telling someone in late ’70′s that Farrah Fawcett really never came close to matching her popularity after Charlie’s Angels. Those people would probably tell you, “No way, she’s so hot and gorgeous. She’s gonna be in so many movies.” I am not trying to make light of either of these deaths. But in the case of Michael Jackson, what else can be really be said about it other than bringing up alternate universes?

June 22, 2009 0

And Then Kant Said To Kierkegaard, “Nuh-uh, Apollo Was The Greatest Greek God Ever…”

By MDS in Opinion, Sports

In the last couple of weeks two events have occurred in the sports world—Roger Federer winning a career Grand Slam and tying Pete Sampras’ all-time Grand Slam mark, and Phil Jackson winning his 10th ring—that has led to many hours of “greatest ever” debates between sports-yak lackeys on the radio and on the TV. Now that Federer has 14 Grand Slams and Jackson now has one more ring than Red Auerbach, the question is: are they the best tennis player and NBA coach, respectively?

First, there’s Federer. For me, the case for Roger Federer is still open—mostly due to the fact that I’d like to see how many Slams he ultimately wins before he retires. If he retires with more than 17 Slams (which is a completely reasonable number if he stays healthy for the next 2-3 years) he is, in my mind, undeniably the greatest men’s tennis player ever. No debate. If he finishes his career in the 14-16 range he would still be undeniably be one of the top 5 players ever but I would have these two things gnawing at me as to why I could never consider him the best: 1) the technology of the sport over the last two decades and 2) the competition he was surrounded by.

Regarding the first point, rackets over the last fifteen years are space aged compared to their predecessors and, like golf, I can’t help but wonder how drastically unfair it is to compare someone like Federer or Nadal and the technology they have grown up with in this era and what Connors and Bjorg and McEnroe had when they were in their primes. If McEnroe in his prime had access to ultra-lightweight titanium rackets, would he have won four Wimbledons in a row? Seven? Same with Martina Navratilova—would she have won ten Wimbledons in a row if she had access to those rackets? (The same goes with Tiger Woods. Woods is no doubt a great golfer but he is using clubs and balls that are way more advanced than anything that Nicklaus, Palmer, or Kite had access to. I realize that these are indicative of different eras but it’s worth mentioning because I don’t think it’s entirely fair either to compare the present and the past on a 1:1 basis. When Tiger Woods beats Nicklaus’ all-time major record, there should be celebrating. But I also think, like with Federer, Woods should have to win 3 more than Nicklaus’ all-time record in order to be considered the hands-down greatest ever. Seems like a fair margin of error to apply once you factor in how much more superior the rackets, clubs, balls, and surfaces for each sport are compared to just a couple of decades ago.)

Secondly, there is Federer’s competition—of which he has no control over, but still. Federer never had to play Sampras in his prime, Agassi in his prime, or anyone who encroached upon the same level as Stefan Edberg, Ivan Lendl, or Boris Becker (i.e.—guys who were very tough to beat even in down years or when they were playing badly). Obviously, Rafael Nadal is Federer’s lone rival and is a terrific all-around player. But I will always feel robbed of the spectacle that would be Federer playing Sampras in his prime—Sampras being one of the greatest net players ever and Federer being one of the greatest baseline players ever. Or the spectacle that would be Federer playing against Agassi in his prime—especially when you consider that Agassi had so much trouble against Sampras, it makes you wonder if the troika of Agassi-Sampras-Federer would just take turns beating the hell out of each other in each Grand Slam tournament.

But, alas, it didn’t work out that way.

But here’s my ultimate point w/r/t Federer (and the same would apply to Tiger Woods too): even if he has a technological advantage over his predecessors and his competition wasn’t as loaded as it was in the ’70′s and ’80′s, if he winds up winning 17 or more Slams that means that he is not only a gifted physical player, but also an indescribably gifted mental player. Even if you are in a tournament where the top two players are out due to injury, you still have to play your ass off to win it. And tennis is a hardcore play-your-ass-off-while-keeping-your-head-level sport. You have no teammates to bail you out on a couple of plays. You are all alone and, unlike golf, you are constantly moving: slow down one bit and you concede an array of angles by which your opponent can destroy you. (David Foster Wallace once wrote that tennis “is to artillery and airstrikes what football is to infantry and attrition.”) It’s all about a mental toughness that is unsurpassed.

Which leads me to Phil Jackson.

Critics of Jackson’s championship teams say that the only reason he has 10 rings now is because he’s only coached teams with superstars. I submit to you that this logic is the very reason as to why he’s the greatest NBA coach ever.

Could Larry Brown, Rick Adelman, Chuck Daly, Larry Bird, Paul Westphal, or Rick Pitino have won a championship coaching the Jordan-Pippen Bulls or Shaq-Kobe Lakers? Probably. Would any of those six men (or anyone else that you care to insert here as another choice) won 6 championships with those Bulls teams, or 3 with those Lakers teams? Absolutely not. No, a thousand times no. Never, not ever.

Phil Jackson convinced Michael Jordan to be a teammate for 42 minutes so that he could have the final 6 minutes to do what he really wanted to do. He convinced Jerry Krause that guys like Ron Harper, Dennis Rodman, and Bill Wentington were guys that had value. He convinced Shaq and Kobe—however begrudgingly—that they needed each other in order to win.

When all is said and done, Phil Jackson’s legacy will be that of the “Zen Master” and that he was able to get superstar egos to play together and seamlessly include role guys into the mix. And it all makes sense because that is the image that Jackson, the sports media, and ourselves want to believe in—that he was some kind of mystical basketball sherpa.

Personally, I think Jackson thrived and lived on chaos. His sound bites were always the antitheis of it but his sound bites were also pre-meditated too. I think he loved that Jordan was so hyper-competitive almost to a fault (i.e.—punching Steve Kerr in the face during practice) to the point that it made him that much more inspired to be able to control it, to harness it, so that it could be unleashed in full during important games. Because, I mean, when Jordan wanted to take over a game, who was going to stop him on the court? Phil Jackson knew that, if left to his own devices, Jordan would probably destroy himself and his team in his monomanical desire to win.

Coaches in any sport are more often than not just guys who need to figure out how to get in the heads of their players. Oh sure, you need to have a level of expertise in game preparation and management but at the end of the day you have to know how to push your guys’ buttons to get the most out of them—either for an extended period of time, or to be the focal point of one play, or one drive.

The NBA is a league of retread coaches (how the fuck does George Karl still have a job?) that are just recycled amongst teams. Phil Jackson is so much greater than all of them and those before them. It’s laughable. And if you need any proof, just go back to the 2000 Lakers-Blazers playoff game. The Blazers had a 15 point lead in the 4th quarter of a Game 7 and a slew of star players (Rasheed Wallace, Scottie Pippen, Steve Smith, Damon Stoudamire, Arvydas Sabonis).

The Blazers also had Mike Dunleavy as their coach and they blew the game. Coincidence? Conversely, if Dunleavy (or Adelman or Karl or Carlisle or Bird or whoever) were the coach of that Lakers team, would they have overcome that 4th quarter deficit and won the series? Methinks not.

Bottom line: Jackson is unequivocally the greatest NBA coach ever, and Roger Federer is top 5 all-time right now and will be unequivocally the greatest men’s tennis player ever if he wins 3 more Slams.