If David Eckstein Played NCAA Basketball, Which Current Duke Blue Devil Would He Be?

Small. White. Really White. Frail, at least in appearance. Comically overexposed and overhyped. Considered by millions to be good at his sport. Not actually very good at his sport. And the real clincher- when confronted with facts about his inadequacies, his defenders immediately fall back on the intangibles he allegedly brings to the field/court/surface/area. Hmmm.... who could it be? Come on, keep guessing. You'll get it eventually. Think overrated. Really overrated.

Give up?

Thank you, Gary Parrish of CBSSportsline, for helping me establish the validity of this comparison with one of the worst puff pieces I've ever seen.

Never asking for comparisons, Paulus just wants to be Paulus

You're off to a puffy start- already making excuses for the guy before the article even starts.

Greg Paulus cannot do a lot of things other people can do.

That's not really true if taken literally. If you replace "people" with "college basketball players," however, it's definitely true.

He cannot run like Ty Lawson. Or jump like Derrick Rose. Or see the court like D.J. Augustin. Or lock down an opponent like Darren Collison.

Oh God, no. No no no no no. Combined together, all these things are the equivalent of saying that Woody Paige cannot win a Pulitzer Prize.

And I could spend a long while writing about what Paulus can't do, but hasn't that been done enough already?

As long as people like you keep writing articles like this? Absolutely not. Before I really start trashing on him, let me take this opportunity to explain to the potentially uninformed masses what kind of player Paulus is.

We'll start with his defense, which is sub-mediocre. Then we can get into his offensive numbers. I'll round when possible for convenience's sake. In 2005-06, amidst levels of preseason freshman hype that matched anyone in recent memory save Greg Oden, he went for 7 points, 5.2 assists, 3.3 turnovers, and 37% shooting (!) from the floor in 32 minutes a game. In 2006-07, he went for 12 points, 3.8 assists, 3.1 turnovers (look at that A/TO ratio), and 46% shooting in 32 minutes per game. This year, as a junior, he's putting up a line of 11 points, 3.5 assists, 1.7 turnovers, and 46% shooting in 26 minutes a game. That's paltry at best for a starting PG. I won't list the stats of the four other guys Parrish listed above, but you can look them up if you want. Rose is already marginally better and he's only a freshman. Collison (jr.), Lawson (soph.), and Augustin (soph.) are so much better that it's not even worth comparing them to Paulus.

Who else can we throw into the discussion? Sean Singletary is better. A.J. Price is better. Levance Fields is better. Taylor Rochestie is better. Mario Chalmers is better. Dominic James is better. Kyle McAlarney is better, and he's probably playing high half the time. Do I need to keep going? My guess is that Paulus is somewhere around the 40th or 50th best PG in the country. Does it seem like a guy in that range should get the press he gets? How many of these guys I listed come even close to his level of hype? I know, I know, it's because he plays for Duke. But that's the whole point of this rant. This. Guy. Isn't. Very. Good. Please, if we must talk about THE DOOKIEEEEEEEESSSSSS, can we talk about someone else on their team? Someone who's actually good?

I mean, we've spent the better part of two-plus years discussing Paulus' deficiencies, which is only natural when dealing with the person who plays point guard for the premier brand in college basketball. Paulus gets that. And though it's easy to point out how he's not the second-coming of Bobby Hurley-

This is where the nonsense starts.

it's worth pointing out he never actually staked that claim, never asked for the comparison or the criticism that comes with it.

That's so very relevant to the discussion as to whether or not Paulus is good. Thanks for bringing it up. Let's make some comparisons from other sports. Maybe Ryan Leaf didn't end up being that good. But did you ever heard him claim to be better than Joe Montana? And I'm so tired of hearing people trash on Cedric Benson. Has he ever explicitly said he would be as good as Walter Payton? Everyone can laugh at what a flop Corey Patterson has ended up being. I don't remember him telling the media he was going to make everyone forget about Willie Mays! No, Danica Patrick has never won a race. (And yes, she is much less attractive than advertisers would lead you to believe.) But as far as I know, she doesn't consider herself to be as good as Mario Andretti in his prime. And blah blah blah.

Honestly, that might be the worst puff piece defense ever. A really hyped up player... has never told anyone they were great... and this is supposed to be a big point in their favor? Wow. Just, wow.

"Comparisons will be made," Paulus said. "But if you stay true to yourself and don't try to be something you're not then everything will take care of itself."

"Admitting the obvious. But cliche about being mediocre and cliche about being mediocre, very untrue cliche about results."

Duke entered the Dean Dome with doubters Wednesday night and exited with an 89-78 victory against North Carolina that should finally convince everybody the Blue Devils are the favorites in the ACC.

Despite not being quick enough on the perimeter or big enough on the interior -- those were the thoughts in the preseason, weren't they? -- the Blue Devils will head into their game against Boston College on Saturday with a 20-1 record and a two-game lead in the league standings, and among the reasons is that Paulus character everyone (except Duke fans) loves to hate.

In the sense that he is on the team, gets significant minutes, and plays well about once every four or five games, yes. He is "among the reasons" Duke is cruising though the unusually crappy ACC. Don't forget their impressive non-conference schedule, which included Wisconsin and Marquette (their only quality wins besides UNC), Pitt (their only loss), and... uh... mid-major darling Davidson? Albany? Princeton? New Mexico State?

No, he's not up for All-America honors.

Probably won't make all-conference either.

Nor should he be, and nor should he.

But Paulus is a key component on this team, a veteran part that makes things work.

And heeeeeeeeeeeere cooooooooommmmmmmmmme the intaaaaaaaaaaangiblesssssssssss!

And the wild thing is that while he's generally despised by opposing fans, he's really everything we claim we want our sports figures to be.

You mean, like good at sports? We've been over this. He's really not.

He plays hard and plays hurt.

Oh, I see. You mean he's gritty.

He maximizes his ability, claps his hands and cares.

And gutty.

He laughs when things are great.

He plays the game the way it was meant to be played.

He cries when things are bad.

He's not a robot? He's like Dwyane Wade?

He doesn't get arrested at clubs or suspended for missing workouts.

He is able to maintain his scholarship by not committing crimes or doing things that would get him kicked off the team.

He loves representing Duke while performing for his coach, and you get the sense there is nothing he'd rather do than play college basketball forever and ever and ever.

He brings his lunchpail to the arena every night. He takes the extra base. He gets his uniform dirty. He's a dirtbag. The fans love him because he is small and white like they are. See how the Eckstein comparison works?

So why am I writing this column now?

Because you <3 Duke? Because Paulus reminds you of yourself back when you were playing on your high school's JV team? Because mediocrity intrigues you?

Because it occurred to me while watching Paulus make six of eight 3-pointers to finish with 18 points against North Carolina that the outside expectations on him have always been unfair,

Hooray for small sample size! Furthermore, re: outside expectations. Think back. Way back to November 2005. Do you know what people were saying about this guy? Gatorade National High School Player of the Year. Not for basketball. For everything. (Partially because he was a 2-sport athlete, admittedly. But that's obviously not 100% of the reason.) Um, I think it's probably fair to expect a guy like that to be pretty good in college.

and that the second I typed any kind words about the former two-sport star I would get a dozen e-mails explaining how he's overrated and an arrogant little prick.

I have no idea what his personality is like, but he's beyond overrated. He's basketball's answer to Torii Hunter. Actually, that's an insult to Hunter. Paulus is more like basketball's answer to Juan Pierre.

That's what Paulus can do to your inbox, case you didn't know. He's a polarizing figure. And if the past year has taught me anything it's that when I write something unpleasant about him Duke fans will defend him, and when I write something nice about him everybody else's fans will criticize the point while calling me stupid and insisting Paulus isn't one of the top players in the nation.

Are you implying he is? He isn't. Unless you mean, like, one of the top 250 players in the nation.

But guess what?

You think Greg Paulus is just swell.

He never said he was!

We already went over that. Exactly as relevant to a discussion of Paulus's value or perceived value as what his favorite Beatles album is. (Mine is Revolver, but if you want a dark horse candidate, I'd go with Rubber Soul. See how sophisticated I am? Ooooooh, look at me.)

And that reminds me of a story about Ryan Adams, the acclaimed singer-songwriter from the state of North Carolina, oddly enough.

Ryan Adams? The guy who for some reason bothered to cover "Wonderwall?" Why are we talking about this?

When Adams first broke into the scene in the mid-1990s he was a critic's darling, just a brilliant young performer who wrote smart songs that connected with fans, particularly fans who had ever experienced a break-up.

Becoming the first musical artist in history to endear himself fans in such a way. Poison tried so hard, but they just couldn't quite get it right.

The guy was really, really good. But at some point the perception turned, and the same critics who hailed him were suddenly calling him overrated, insisting he wasn't the next Bob Dylan or anything else.

Adams addressed the criticism in a 2004 magazine interview.

His reaction: "I never said I was any good."

Great anecdote, really. But here's the problem. Ryan Adams doesn't have any statistics. He doesn't have a good song per album average, or a clever lyrics to cliched lyrics ratio. You might think he sucks, but you couldn't really do much to objectively prove it. You might think he's the greatest artist ever to lay hands on a guitar, and you also couldn't objectively prove that.

But Greg Paulus does have statistics. You can see, very clearly, that he's an inefficient point guard. You can see that while he's become a better shooter than he was his freshman year, he still doesn't bring much to the table offensively. And although there aren't any solid raw defensive statistics, you can tell objectively from looking at game film that he's not very good at that. See how that works? You can't compare the value of athletes to the value of performing artists. It's not allowed. Unless that artist is Foreigner, which is objectively the best band of the 80's. Yes, better than Guns n' Roses, The Cure, or REM.

Which brings me back to Paulus, Wednesday night and the verbal assault he endured. It started early and lasted late and included words I will gladly relay as soon as I get a show on SIRIUS Satellite Radio and am thus free of FCC regulations. I cannot repeat them here. The whole thing was nasty and typical, just a bunch of people telling him what he can't do even though he has never spent a minute trying to tell people all the things he can do.

You mean the verbal assault he endured from the fans of his school's most bitter rival? Shock. Flabbergastion. Confusion. Where do those North Carolina ragamuffins get off booing Duke players? How dare they. That is so rude. This reminds me of the time I heard that Texas fans and Oklahoma fans are often less than cordial to each other. What is wrong with the world? It's just a game, people!

"He's not Bobby Hurley," Duke freshman Taylor King said in an attempt to set the record straight. "He's Greg Paulus."

"Two part cliche," said teammate who of course isn't going to say anything bad about player.

Yep, he's Greg Paulus.

Just Greg Paulus.

Just a pretty mediocre and comically overhyped player.

And with any luck, one day that might just be good enough.

Well, he's a junior right now. He's more than halfway though his college career. He probably has less than 50 games left. He might want to get around to being "good enough" to somewhat match expectations reasonably soon.

Or did I take that too literally? I guess when he graduates from Duke and goes into the real world, maybe he'll become an excellent salesman or consultant or something. And in that case, being Greg Paulus would probably be good enough.

Reader Extra Participation Friday: Impending Recession May Hurt Economy

Charley Rosen writes about the NBA for Foxsports.com. He's usually pretty informative and entertaining. I often find myself enjoying his work. His analysis of the recent Miami-Phoenix trade, however, is titled in a fashion that should come off as insulting to anyone who knows how basketball is played and who this "Shaquille O'Neal" fellow is.

Shaq will force Suns to alter run-and-gun style

Really? You think? Subtracting Shawn Marion, and replacing him with a 450 pound center in his mid 30s who runs like he's wearing ski boots, is going to hurt their fast break? Pssssh. Now I've heard everything. Next, you'll be trying to con me into thinking that:

-Adding Santana strengthens Mets' rotation
-Tomlinson disappointed he was unable to play in AFC Championship game
-Crosby's injury will cause problems for Penguins
-Yao enhances Rockets' ability to market themselves in China
-Dropping bid for Republican nomination hurts Romney's chances of becoming president
-Ledger's death mourned by females aged 13 to 60
-TV writers' strike prevents sitcoms from being filmed
-Lil' Wayne releases album focused on drugs, sex, occasional gun violence
-Bloggers live in basements, fear sun

And so on and so forth. Anyone else have any breaking news they'd like to share with the group? I don't think I took too many of the obvious ones.

This week's prize is an unopened Slim Jim. I've got too damn many of these things down here to eat by myself. They really make you thirsty, especially if you try to wash them down with Cheez-Wiz.

Suprise! Celizic Overrated Something!

HatGuy recently wrote this. It's really bad. Like, really, really bad.

Joba off to pen; Yanks should leave him there

Because minimizing the innings pitched of a pitcher with a shot of being pretty damned good is smart, right?

The plan announced by Yankees general manager Brian Cashman is to start the 2008 season with Joba Chamberlain in the bullpen. That should be good news to the team’s fans.

Because they don't want to put a lot of strain on Chamberlain's arm at a young age. That makes perfect sense.

The long-range plan for the season is to move the sensational young pitcher into the starting rotation. That news might not be nearly as good.

Ah. Because of some interesting statistical/scouting evidence that Chamberlain would be less effective as a starter, right? Right? (I'll bet millions that HatGuy gives reasons that have nothing to do with this, if he even gives reasons.)

It’s a tough call the Yankees have, one that I wouldn’t like to make. Chamberlain, Philip Hughes and Ian Kennedy are the kids whom the Yankees have groomed to form the core of the team’s rotation for the next decade or longer. And there’s no question New York needs the lift that strong, young arms can give a starting rotation.

I'm sorry, were you giving an argument AGAINST Chamberlain becoming a starter?

The plan all along had been to use the 22-year-old Chamberlain as a starter, the role in which he excelled as a minor leaguer. But last year he proved to be an exceptional reliever, and in this era of ball, there’s no one more important to a team than a great closer.

Why Michael, you are just, just so totally wrong!

He's more important than a 3B that can hit 54 homers in a season?
He's more important than having a great ace starter, who throws way more innings than a closer?

Ask the Angels if they'll do A-Rod for K-Rod straight up. I bet they'll say no!

The Yankees know that as well as anyone, having had the luxury since 1997 of the services of Mariano Rivera, arguably the greatest closer ever. We spend inordinate amounts of time every year talking about the mighty Yankee offense, but the reason they’ve been in the playoffs every year since 1995 is their closer, first John Wetteland and then Rivera.

No, it's their offense. Trust me. And in the late 1990's, it was good starters supplementing that offense. If like, Rafael Soriano closed every closable game for those Yankees, you think that they don't still make the playoffs every single fucking time? Am I reading this right? Do I need glasses? With all due respect to Mariano Riviera, the inequality "Rivera > Yankees' offense" completely results in the collapse of mathematics as we know it.

I guess other than that, this paragraph wasn't completely and totally horrible.

Rivera got his start as Wetteland’s set-up man, and after the Yanks won the 1996 World Series, they let Wetteland go to Texas and handed the job over to Rivera. He’s done pretty well with it ever since.

And that, friends, is why Joba Chamberlain should be in the bullpen, and not a starter.

Get to the point, please.

But Rivera is 38 years old, and even though the Pinstripes gave him a three-year contract in the off-season, it’s foolish to think he’ll still be the Sandman at age 41. I’ve been wrong on Rivera a lot, and I don’t think there’s been a season in the last three or four when I haven’t said his end is near. So I’m not going to make any dire predictions other than to point out the obvious: he’s getting old and won’t last forever.

What’s notable about Rivera is that the Yankees brought him up through their farm system. They’ve gone everywhere for starting pitching and position players, but Rivera has been there year in and year out.

Still looking for Chamberlain-related information.......

Lord knows where the team would have been if they didn’t have them and had pursued their usual course of hiring over-the-hill free agents with bloated salaries to do the job. But I’d say you can get an idea by checking out what Billy Wagner has done for the Mets — or is that to the Mets.

Billy Wagner, in 2 seasons as a Met: 2.43 ERA, 1.16 WHIP, 74 saves. Time to start earning that bloated salary, Billy. Stop doing things to the Mets and start doing things for the Mets.

(::sigh::, this is truly pathetic, and almost getting boring actually. He's wrong like every paragraph. HatGuy takes all the thrill out of searching the internet 30 hours a week for a dumb sportswriter comment.....there's no suprise element here.)

Last year, as Rivera’s set-up man, Chamberlain pitched 24 innings in 19 games. He gave up just 12 hits and one earned run while striking out 34; his ERA was 0.38. I submit those are better numbers than he would have had as a starter.

You mean that if Chamberlain threw 200 or some other amount of innings that wasn't a ridiculously small sample, he WOULDN'T have lower than a 0.38 ERA? Bravo, Cappy Hattington, you're a king among writers!

And you know what? If Chamberlain stays in the bullpen, I'm sure his ERA will never rise higher than that, because 24 innings is a totally reliable and perfect sample size to determine the true quality of a pitcher's performance in his role.

(I almost wonder if he tries to be stupid this much, because he never gives an interesting viewpoint, and I only read his columns beacuse of said stupidity. Maybe that's how he achieves a following. Kinda like a less angry Mariotti.)

I understand the Yankees thinking. They’re tired of old and overpriced starters like Kevin Brown and Randy Johnson who are no longer reliable and spend too much time on the disabled list.

Equivalent to saying, "Listen Yankees, I understand your thinking. You have tons of past precedent to warn you against using awful, old guys in your starting rotation, but..."

Going into this season, they have two old-timers — Mike Mussina, whose effectiveness has been declining,

That's generous even for Mussina.

and Andy Pettitte, still a premier left-hander.

Above-average. Not premier. Ask me how long he's going to keep a 4.05 ERA with a 1.43 WHIP. Not gross luck, but still lucky.

The rest of the starting rotation will be Chien-Ming Wang, Hughes and Kennedy. Chamberlain is supposed to be there to step in when someone gets injured or proves ineffective.

Read: After Mike Mussina turns in like 5 horrid starts.

The bullpen needs him from the get-go. Rivera is the one reliable arm out there, with the mercurial Kyle Farnsworth as his set-up man. After him is LaTroy Hawkins, signed from the Rockies in the off-season, who returned the favor by signing the Yankees’ reliever Lius Vizcaino.

Except starting pitching is way more important. You forgot that, Mikey. Unless there's something with Chamberlain's style or mechanics that makes him personally a better pitcher as a reliever, he should start if he's good enough to. Except you aren't arguing those things. So I am not required by law to listen to you.

And that’s about it for the Yankee pen. Oh, there’ll be plenty of bodies out there and there’ll be plenty of people who’ll get to try out in camp, but the pen was thin last year and it’s not really better this year. It’s not nearly enough, especially if anything happens to Rivera

The rotation was noticably thin last year too. It's perfectly reasonable to think that randomly, one of the Yankees' 5 relievers besides Rivera will turn in an adequate set-up-man-ish season. It's much harder for a starter to "luck" into having a good season.

As long as Chamberlain is starting the year in the bullpen, why not keep him there? He can set up and he can save Rivera from having to pitch in back-to-back games or in three games in four days. And he can learn at the foot of the master himself.

Alternatively, he can save Mike Mussina or whoever else might be ineffective from causing every 5th game to be a highly probable loss.

If Rivera goes down, Chamberlain’s there. If Rivera keeps rolling, Chamberlain can help keep is that way by taking some of the load off of him. Keep Mo’s innings and appearances down, and the chances that he’ll last to the end of his contract improve.

So that's the motive. Sacrifice innings pitched for a good young pitcher so that a closer on his last leg has slightly greater odds of pitching out his contract. Because Joba might spell him 5 separate instances throughout the season.

I know it’s a huge sacrifice in the short term to put a potentially great starter in the pen at the age of 22 to be a back-up and an insurance policy. But I’m not sure how smart it is to have three kids in the starting rotation of a team that wants to win – now.

It's smarter to have Mike Mussina, who seems to have lost all his talent in the rotation, than to put in a pitcher who would probably do much better than him. The reason? Because of Joba Chamberlain's age. Having 3 young kids in the rotation destroys your team, regardless of pitching ability. Make a note, GMs.

And before you start asking about how smart it is to sacrifice a potentially great starter to the bullpen, ask yourself where Boston would be without closer Jonathan Papelbon, a highly promising young starter who was forced to the closer role by injury and then chose to stay there.

They're still a team with very good offense and very good starting pitching. Then they have Okajima close, and Manny Declarmen/Brendan Donnelly sets up. Where does that put Boston? If it's not the same place, it's damned close.

It’s the most important job in baseball.

Completely and totally false.

The Yankees got a kid who’s showed he can fill it. Leave him there.

I can't wait to see what you write when Chamberlain puts up a 4.00 ERA over his next 24 innings.

Bill Simmons, Your Tears Are So Delicious

You know what I'm referring to. Maybe if he hadn't spent the last five months writing intolerable Patriots column after intolerable Patriots column, he wouldn't have forced me into eff-you Cobra Kai mode. Alas- this is the end result of that sequence of events. And I'm going to enjoy it.

Unfortunately, the article is disappointingly unterrible. He's actually pretty gracious towards the Giants, and doesn't make too many excuses for the Patriots. He points out that the Pats were unlikable (a nice reversal from that column earlier in the year which basically whined "Why can't anyone be happy for us?") and labels their fans as "arrogant." He even admits at the end that he will be forever haunted by Giants fans' chants of "Eighteen and one" from after the game. That's pretty un-douchey for Bill. Still. I came here to empty my bowels on this column, dammit, and I'm not leaving until that happens.

I won't cover anything from the first half or so of the article, but frankly it's ridiculous that he starts out by thoroughly comparing this game to Super Bowl XXXVI. Can we please get an article about someone beating the current Patriots without comparing said victor to a previous championship winning Patriots team? The comparison is really more about Bill's experience than the teams themselves, I guess, but it's still irrelevant and tacky.

It's a dirty little secret, but Super Bowl crowds stink for the same reason that All-Star crowds stink -- more than half of the tickets get chewed up by sports executives, corporate sponsors, people working for the league or the advertising companies that support the league, celebrities and pseudo-celebrities, rich people and neutral fans who just want to be there because it's something to do.

That's not a secret. Everyone who likes the NFL knows that. Everyone. Casual fans in Europe. Ancient guys in nursing homes who were in their 50s when Super Bowl I happened. Five year olds who don't understand most of the rules. Annoying sorority girls who pretend to be lifelong fans of whatever team their current boyfriend likes. Everyone.

Arizona wasn't anything like that. Super Bowl XLII broke the record for "most fans of one team or the other" as well as "most fans wearing jerseys" and "most dead-even split of fans representing both franchises."

The "imaginary broken record" joke is fine in moderation. It doesn't need to be in every column. This particular instance of it should be replaced with either a Karate Kid reference or a story about his daughter.

Because of the unique makeup of the crowd, I became convinced we were headed for something special, even texting a few friends to predict a close and special game.

Ok, Nostradamus. I bet you did. What was the prediction you offered in your column from last Friday?

The Big Pick: Patriots 42, Giants 17.

That's what I thought. Asshole. Bill, three days before the 2007 Fiesta Bowl: "What a joke! Why is Boise State even here?" Bill, seconds before kickoff: "I've got a feeling this one is going to come down to the wire. There's just something in the air tonight. Smells like my own flatulence, which is pungent but subtle at the same time."

Soaking in the atmosphere, seeing the sea of jerseys, hearing the sounds that genuine fans make, suddenly a blowout seemed impossible. This was too good. This was what sports was all about, right?

Cliche, cliche, cliche, contradictory prediction that he undoubtedly did not actually make at the time. Cliche. Epic cliche borrowed from Rick Reilly.

With that said, I never thought the Patriots would lose. I thought they'd be tested, I thought the game would be great ... but lose??? You could point out 10 different instances when the Pats blew a chance to make a monster play or put the game away, and you could point out all the different times the Giants caught a break or had a ball bounce their way,

I'd love to hear about all those times. The only obvious one(s) I can think of is the fact that the Giants twice put the ball on the ground and managed to recover it both times. But how about instead, we point out that arguably the biggest break/lucky play of the game was the Giants' red zone interception Steve Smith perfectly tipped into Ellis Hobb's waiting arms? It cost the Giants a first and goal at the New England 8 (if caught) or a chip shot field goal attempt (if dropped in any other fashion). Manning could throw that exact pass to Smith 100 times, and the interception would bounce directly into Hobb's chest on one of them. Maybe.

but really, everything you need to know about Super Bowl XLII happened on the Miracle Play To Be Named Later -- you know, the third down on the do-or-die drive when Eli Manning ripped himself away from the entire Patriots defensive line (THEY HAD HIS JERSEY!!!!!!) and threw a pass that hung in the air forever like one of those sports movie passes, and even though David Tyree and Rodney Harrison had an equal chance of getting it, Tyree jumped a little bit higher, hauled in the football, trapped it against his helmet and somehow held on while Harrison was doing everything but performing a figure-four leg lock on him.

I've got bad news. That's not "catching a break" or "having a ball bounce your way." Excuse the cliche- that's called making plays. Manning was under pressure. He got away from it. He threw a pass that was right where his receiver could go and get it. Tyree was covered, be he went up and got the ball anyways. Deal with it.

I will forever remember eight things about Super Bowl XLII:

1. Before the pregame introductions, the Patriots were jogging off the field and the Jumbotron caught Brady briefly break stride to shake hands with Pat O'Brien. This bothered me for some reason -- somewhere along the line, the team and the quarterback almost became too famous, as symbolized by that handshake and the fact Brady would have run right by O'Brien six years ago because he would have wanted to flip out in the tunnel and inexplicably head-butt Bledsoe over and over again. Look, I'm not blaming Brady for the handshake. This was the season when his fame transcended sports and morphed into something else, and part of that "something else" involves the occasional random pregame handshake with the likes of Pat O'Brien. You have to do things like this when you're famous, even if you don't really want to do them. At the same time, I thought this was a terrible omen and a defining moment of the season.

Z, O, M, G. Pure hilarity. Really? THAT was your team's defining moment? Not anything else that, you know, happened on the field and made them lose? I guarantee you Eli Manning shook a few hands before the game. Maybe even Pat O'Brien's. Here's a quiz for all you readers out there. Why did Tom Brady have a mediocre game on Sunday?

a) because he was too distracted by Pat O'Brien's sexy man hands to focus properly during warmups
b) because the Giants' D-line was constantly dump trucking him into the turf
c) quizzes with rhetorical questions and sarcastic answer choices are fucking stupid

Understood. We'll move along then.

2. Speaking of Brady, if the Patriots had finished 19-0, I planned to start my column with a scene from the Patriots' postgame party. Through some mutual friends, I had arranged to hang out with Brady's crew for what promised to be a laid-back celebration in somebody's hotel room, probably no more than 15-20 people since Brady's circle is surprisingly and refreshingly small.

If this is true, oh my goodness gracious, how awkward would this have been for everyone except Bill? ("Who is that guy? Why does he keep showing me pictures of his family and asking if he can bring 'Hench' and 'J-Bug' up here?") If this is not true, Bill reminds me of this kid who grew up on my block and claimed to have a hoverboard and a velociraptor in his basement that he couldn't show anyone. Some people are just so insecure about their lives that they have to make ridiculous shit up.

Because it was a rare chance to catch Brady in an unguarded moment -- and an important moment at that -- I spent most of Friday and Saturday thinking about that first paragraph and all the different ways it could start. I kept seeing Brady sitting in a chair with his right ankle encased in ice, quietly sipping a bottle of champagne with a satisfied smile on his face, and Gisele would be there, and everyone would be recapping 19-0 and remembering the incredible season. I liked the thought of a famous person celebrating a historic night in such a totally normal and relatable way.

Imaginary Tom Brady sure is a chilled out guy, isn't he? But had the Patriots won, I bet real life Tom Brady would have kicked everyone out of the room so he could pulverize Gisele after doing lines of blow off her thighs.

And that's what it will remain. A thought and only a thought. It never happened.

Now the healing can begin.

3. First entry in my notebook right after the game ended: "Eli Manning just gave me the Eli Manning Face." And he did.

Reader Ben makes a great point- I think we can now safely say that the Tom Brady face exists. I think it looks something like this. (Thanks to the anonymous commenter from my post on Sunday night.)

4. For the rest of eternity, I will never understand why the Patriots -- a team that broke all kinds of offensive records by attacking teams with an aggressive, run-and-shoot offense that thrived on audibles, checks and the intelligence of the quarterback and his receivers -- became passive in the single biggest game of the season.

Obviously, their genius head coach and his staff of undergeniuses thought that was all they needed to do in order to win. There were no other variables at play. The number of people or decisions eligible for blame are pretty limited.

It's one thing to change styles because it's 20 degrees and windy outside and you're worried about throwing the ball. But indoors? Only on the last drive did the Patriots look like the Patriots. I will never understand what took so long. Ever. I will never understand it.

You coach screwed up his game plan. And also stole some guy's wife, which is even worse.

I wasn't even that depressed after the game, just confused. What happened to the remarkable offensive juggernaut from the first three months of the season?

That juggernaut relied on Brady having ample time in the pocket to make reads and let guys get open.

Where did their arrogance go? What happened to their swagger?

Justin Tuck, Michael Strahan, Osi Umenyiora, and the rest of the Giants defense took that swagger away from them and subsequently used it to beat Brady's face in.

Did the never-ending attention and nonstop pressure eventually get to them?

Not the kind of nonstop pressure you're referring to, but yes. Why is it so hard for people like Bill to understand that sometimes things happen because of very tangible factors? This wasn't a magical mystical performance by the Giants, or a magical mystical letdown by the Patriots. They got flat out beaten on the field.

For most of Sunday's game, it seemed the Patriots were playing not to lose. And maybe they were.

Maybe an even more epic cliche than "this is what sports are all about."

I will say this: Even though Friday's column will probably earn the No. 1 spot on the "Columns I Wish Weren't In My Archives" list before everything's said and done, Super Bowl XLII inadvertently proved my point.

Your point, all season long, has been that the Patriots were an unstoppable juggernaut that was playing with otherworldly levels of teamwork and dedication. Your prediction in the very same column you reference here was that the Patriots would win by 25. You also pointed out how hard it is to go 19-0 many different times, but don't act like you saw this coming. You were blindsided. Admit it. It's like the stunning final scene in "Sleeping With the Enemy."

To finish 19-0, you really need a perfect storm of things to fall your way -- not just off the field when you're building the team, but for 19 straight games over the span of five months, and on top of that, the pressure builds every week because of the streak, so it's inevitable you'll wear down in the final two months. I don't think we'll ever see a 19-0 team. If this particular Patriots team couldn't pull it off, nobody's doing it.

I hope the Colts, Jets, or some other team Bill hates does exactly that in 2008. I hope they subsequently trademark "19-0," "We didn't blow it in the Super Bowl like the 2007 Patriots," and "Mercury Morris is a big dickbag."

5. Much like the Patriots, I choked heading into the weekend: Somehow, I forgot to pack my good-luck Wes Welker jersey and headed to Sunday's game without any Pats gear. Originally intent on buying a Pats hat at the game, once I saw all the jerseys in the stands and in my section, I made the executive decision to fine myself $85 dollars (the price of a white No. 81 Moss jersey at one of those merchandise booths). You can currently find that jersey sitting at the bottom of the garbage can in my hotel room. I might take it home and burn it. I haven't decided yet.

Bill's really taking big steps here to erase the quasi-racist reputation of the Boston area. I mean, Moss only caught the go-ahead touchdown. Why couldn't he be more like WEL-KAHHHHHHHH?!?!?! Obviously I'm not saying Bill is racist himself because of this superstitious reaction, but it's little anecdotes like this that magnify the perception that Massholes hate minorities. Go to Kissing Suzy Kolber and look through the archives from the past few weeks. You'll see how that perception manifests itself on teh blogopages.

7. From the "Now It Can Be Told" department: Everyone blamed me for "jinxing" the Patriots two weeks ago after I posted my Dr. Jack Breakdown of the '86 Celtics and the '07 Pats. (And by the way, I think we have a final verdict. And then some.) Well, a significantly more blatant jinx had already happened: For my father's 60th birthday present at the end of November, I bought him a flight from Boston to Arizona and got him a hotel room and a ticket for Super Bowl XLII, although we took great pains to say "Going to the Super Bowl" instead of "Seeing the Pats in the Super Bowl" on every level. One week later? The Baltimore game happened. Yeah. Exactly. I didn't even write about this because I didn't want to get murdered by a deranged Patriots fan.

You also shouldn't have written about it because nobody cares what you buy your dad for his birthday. We've been over and over this. Please stop.

8. Finally, can you guess the last thing we heard as we were walking (OK, hustling) out of the stadium right after the final play? That's right, it was the sound of euphoric Giants fans chanting, "Eighteen and one! Eighteen and one! Eighteen and one!" Yes, it's safe to say the Boston-New York rivalry has been taken to new heights. As a tennis umpire would say, "Advantage, New York."

Eighteen and one! Eighteen and one! Eighteen and one!

I can still hear them. I will always hear them.

Awesome. If the Yankees win the World Series this fall, I just might have to shift my hatred back towards New York, where it was until 2004. Can't we sell both cities to Canada or something? Maybe try to detach everything northeast of Philadelphia from the rest of the country and let it drift out into the Atlantic? (We're keeping upstate New York because Niagra Falls is fucking badass. Have you ever seen that shit? With all the sun and natural landscape, it's a blogger's worst nightmare. But I was in awe nonetheless.) Just kidding, of course. I love all our readers from the NYC/NJ/New England area. You guys are awesome. Just understand you're not special, that's all I ask.

Overall, I'm not going to lie. I somewhat struggled to get through this column and come up with good material for all of Bill's points. What he wrote, compared to how he's been since September-ish, just wasn't that bad. Which proves a point that thousands of bloggers have made about Bill in the past three years or so- he's infinitely more tolerable when his teams suck. I mean, his references and style are still repetitive. I wouldn't call him a "good" writer, per se. But he's definitely much less worthy of hatred or mockery when he gets knocked down a few pegs by a painful loss or two. This leaves me in a bit of a tight spot- would I rather Boston teams keep winning so Bill keeps alley-ooping me shitty material? Or would it be better for Boston teams to suck again, allowing Simmons to turn back into his old inoffensive self?

I think you can guess which option I'd prefer. After all, Gene Wojceichowski doesn't have any visible team allegiances, and he writes like three columns a week.

Does It Get Any Better Than Lifetime Original Movies?

Before I get going with my actual post for the night, I just realized I didn't award a winner for last Friday's Reader Extra Participation Friday post from Friday. Friday Friday Friday. Anyways, I liked everyone's submissions (especially Jeff's references from Independence Day, which really took me on a trip down memory lane). But in the end only one person can win. So I'm going to declare this a tie between two people. Andrew and BenGoodfella teamed up to produce this dynamic 1-2 punch:

A- "Does it get any better than the middle third of the Lifetime movie To Be Fat Like Me? You have the very hot Kaley Cuoco trying to reinvent herself as a dramatic actress after 8 Simples Rules..., loads of unintentional AND intentional comedy in re: the fat suit, plus you get Caroline Rhea as (you guessed it!) the fat, near suicidal enabling mom. You know eventually she's going to get found out by her new fat friends as a fake fatty, but...you...just...cannot...turn your eyes away from the screen. It's the Karate Kid of movies for kids with eating disorders!"

B- "I think the best part of "Fat Like Me" is when at the end she rips off her fat suit at the party and everyone is shocked that is she is not really fat. That moment gave me chills...mostly because I realized I had watched the entire movie at that point."

Well played, both of you. I definitely need to see that movie so in ten years when I take over Simmons's post at ESPN.com, I can reference it in one of my hundreds of lame articles about Denver sports teams. You two can either share or fight over the prize, which is a box of stale Froot Loops. Thanks again to everyone who commented- only 60 or so hours until you have to begrudgingly humor me with another submission.

What Was the POINT of All That?

Such were my sentiments after reading this shit. I'm at a loss for why HatGuy wrote it. Literally, I could sum it up by saying "Breaking News! Football season ended. Here are a list of sports-related things that are not football that are happening now or will happen soon." But that would be way too lenient of me.

The sun rose this morning — I checked — even in Boston. I suspect more people called in sick than usual on a Monday, but the subways and buses ran and the mail carriers were stayed from their appointed rounds by neither rain nor sleet nor heaviness of heart.

A paragraph of pure quasi-poetic nonsensitudes. Lets search really hard through this entire piece to find something that shows you're qualified for your job. And that usage of "stay" vaguely fits the twelfth definition, but about a billion other, less confusing words would have been better.

In New York, it’s a different story, but we’ll leave those happy folks to deal with the Day after Football in their own way. Somehow, we get the feeling they’ll find a way to muddle through.

People from New York are....happy about the Super Bowl. Press on, analyst!

For five weeks now, the NFL playoffs have carried us, giving us an island of excitement to look ahead to each week and crowning it all with the greatest Super Bowl we’ve ever seen. But now it’s Monday, and while the glow will linger for a while, the stage has been struck on our great mid-winter diversion. And outside our doors, February reigns.

Is this really so dramatic? Honestly, this is the kind of shit that would piss off even a high school English teacher.

Which leaves us with the question raised by Shakespeare in “A Midsummer Night’s Dream:” “How shall we beguile the lazy time if not with some delight?”

The answer shows that old Will was one of us: “There is a brief of how many sports are ripe; make a choice of which your highness will see first.”

What a totally appropriate thing to write in a sports column (this is about sports, right?). I'm getting the image of Celizic standing up in the crowd at like a baseball game or something and saying that out loud. Now I'm imagining the people who heard him say that beating the shit out of him. Ahhhhh. Soothing. All of the anger I felt after imagining Celizic get a paycheck just faded away......

It’s not so bleak as it seems. The end of one passion is followed by the commencement of another. Check the calendars, fans — especially those of you in Boston — it is Feb. 4. In 11 days, pitchers and catchers start reporting for duty.

Pitchers and catchers reporting is sort of like a harbinger of something exciting happening, rather than an exciting event in of itself. I use the word "harbinger", because it's one of those useless words you learn in a high school English class, much like the one that seems to have taken over Celizic's life. So I'm speaking his language. He knows what it means.

So start crossing off the days, and while you’re doing it, you might want to pay a bit more attention to the NBA, where the season has passed the midway point and is starting to get interesting. (This advice does not apply in New York. If you’re from there, don’t bother looking at the standings; it’s too depressing.)

Great advice. We're about to find out how much attention Mike Celizic has paid to the NBA in the past 6 months. Brace yourselves, because this is going to be pretty brutal. He literally looked at the NBA standings and said as much as he could just going off of that. Don't believe me? Read on.

Patriot fans get a break there, thanks to the Celtics, who are leading the world, and, after 44 games still haven’t gotten to 10 losses.

Standing-based fact #1.

OK, the football immortality thing didn’t work out, and that annoying old poop Mercury Morris is drinking champagne at your expense. The Celtics are back from their long sabbatical, and if you look out West, you can start dreaming about the next-best match-up to Yankees-Red Sox. And speaking of that, there’s always pitchers and catchers and another chance to pay back those arrogant fans in New York.

I'm going to assume the role of your current high school English teacher and make a few comments on this paragraph, Michael. Now, you'll just have to pretend that this is appearing in bright red ink.

OK, the football immortality thing didn’t work out, and that annoying old poop Mercury Morris is drinking champagne at your expense.

You transitioned into the subject of the NBA. Once there, you were able to list one fact before reverting back to the Super Bowl. This is just a "space filler" sentence. Also consider replacing "poop", with something that makes you sound a little less.....70 years old. Maybe....."fecal matter"? That annoying old fecal matter Mercury Morris? Eh, it's a little better.

The Celtics are back from their long sabbatical, and if you look out West, you can start dreaming about the next-best match-up to Yankees-Red Sox.

A bit of an awkward tradition, especially if you don't immediately clarify the Western matchup. You know, by specifying teams and such.

And speaking of that, there’s always pitchers and catchers and another chance to pay back those arrogant fans in New York.

This sentence totally doesn't fit. You already talked about pitchers and catchers two paragraphs ago. And you failed to talk about the Western matchup you alluded to in the prior sentence. Desert island

Grade: D-. I'm passing you only because I never want to see "A Midsummer Night's Dream" appear in a sports column again.

The Lakers — you remember the team so bad Kobe Bryant didn’t want to play for them anymore? — are right up there challenging for supremacy of the NBA’s power conference along with Phoenix, New Orleans (New Orleans? How’d that happen? I’ve really got to pay closer attention.)

I'll record this date. Monday, May 4, 2008. Mike Celizic finally admitted that he doesn't pay enough attention to the subjects he writes about. Also, I'd like to point out that this is all stuff that Celizic can find out by staring only at an NBA standings page.

Dallas, Utah, San Antonio, Golden State and Denver. There’s just five wins separating all of those teams, and if you don’t think that’s a horse race worth watching, you’re beyond salvation.

More things you found out just from looking at the standings. Why can't I be paid to do this? Also, I'm going to make a ridiculously bold prediction and say that you do not watch a single game played by Dallas, Utah, San Antonio, Golden State, or Denver for the next 3 months.

Can you imagine what it would be like if the Celtics and Lakers got together again in the Finals? Kobe and whoever those other four guys are against Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce and Ray Allen? Could it get any better than that? How about with Phil Jackson on the Laker bench?

"Kobe and whoever those other four guys are." Wow. Whoever Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom are, they better get better soon if they want the Los Angeles Bryants to have a chance at taking down the Celtics. Andrew Bynum? More like....Andrew Get-A-Fucking-Name-Dude! Ha ha! I'm right there with you, HatGuy!

What's funny is that HatGuy isn't recognizing that the Lakers are a top team again BECAUSE the supporting cast for Kobe is good again.

And if that doesn’t float your boat, how about Daytona? NASCAR’s most glamorous event and the kick-off of the season is just two weeks away, just like pitchers and catchers. It’s the perfect road trip, if you’re looking to escape winter’s icy grip — do the 500, then head off to spring training camps for another week. Take your golf clubs.

You're obsessed with pitchers and catchers. It's not that exciting, really, and I'm a baseball fan to an unhealthily large extent. There aren't even games to watch. I'm not gonna bash NASCAR, because so many people in America like it, but NASCAR is 100% completely and totally useless and boring to follow and watch. It's also stupid.

I mean come on. There's no VORP!

(note: above may actually be pnoles's personal opinion in disguise and not actually fact.)

I’d go into one of my regular rhapsodies about the joys of the NHL here, but that sports’ fans know all about how Detroit is putting together a phenomenal season, so incredible that they’ve removed all the drama from the regular season. No matter who else does what, the Red Wings are going into the playoffs with the top seed.


More things you can see from the standings page.....

NCAA hoops is more interesting, anyway. We’re into the final month of the season, and Memphis is still undefeated. Teams don’t run off perfect seasons anymore, and my bet is Memphis won’t, either. But they’re worth watching — just in case.

Agreed, you should try it sometime. Name me one player on Memphis. Go ahead. Try.

And if I haven't beaten this to death yet, I could have written that paragraph just by looking at the national rankings and Memphis's record.

Besides, it’s time to start thinking about who’s going to make it to March Madness, the single best tournament in America sports. That is literally just around the corner.

The schedule giveth and the schedule taketh away. We lose the passion of the NFL playoffs, and we’re given a smorgasbord of things to look ahead to.

The NBA is always going on at this time. Pitchers and catchers always report soon after the Super Bowl. NCAA March Madness is always in....wait for it....MARCH! People who care about these things know all of these things already. I want to know, please, who the hell is your "target audience" in this article?

The schedule giveth and the schedule taketh away. We lose the passion of the NFL playoffs, and we’re given a smorgasbord of things to look ahead to.

More old-Englishy Shakespeary-talk. Stop writing. Just stop. I already gave you your D-minus, you can go now.

Spring training starts, the NBA is heating up, college hoops craziness is starting to warm up for its annual crescendo, those guys who do left turns at 200 m.p.h. are putting the pedal to the metal

You already said these obvious things. Repeating obvious things is not a good writing tactic.

and before you know it, the magnolias are blooming in Augusta and it’s time to see whether there’s going to be a shot at the Grand Slam for Tiger Woods. Elsewhere, others are already starting to think about Kentucky and mint juleps and a run for the roses.

Yeah, February can be the pits, especially in the post-Super Bowl depression. But it’s hardly dead. It’s when we look forward to new thrills, to March and crocuses and rebirth.

Does it get any more puffy and bullshit-y than "crocuses and rebirth"? I don't know, but I've got myself a fun new label.

Hey you forgot someth-

And pitchers and catchers.

There it is.

Bring it on.

Oh, it's already been burrr-oughten.

Oh, The Irony

Thanks to the results of today's wholly satisfying game, you'll probably see a lot less Boston bashing from me during the next few weeks. I feel so incredibly relieved. It's like an enormous weight has been lifted from my frail, un-muscular shoulders. Don't get me wrong; I still hate those teams and their fans just as much as I did 24 hours ago. But the proverbial itch has been scratched. Knowing that pretty much everyone north or east of Hartford feels like a bag of shit right now really frees up my mind. That said, I will still continue to post about Bill Simmons with the same frequency I have been. Boston-centric articles by him are on an entirely different level of awful than those written by other journalists.

I was going to post about this before the game, but things are a little busy right now. (Incidentally, after this, you won't hear from me again until Wednesday at the earliest. So if someone else around here wants to step up for a couple days... yeah... otherwise, see you when I see you.) From Simmons' Super Bowl pick column:

Over the past few weeks, I have become mildly obsessed with how this moment came to be -- and by moment, I mean "the chance to go 19-0" -- partly because everyone is dissecting the Patriots these days, and it's frustrating to hear dumb points or half-assed thoughts about my favorite team,

What is it again that you do at ESPN, Bill? Oh that's right. About 50% of the time, you write about the Sawks/Patties/Celts in a fashion that's totally uninteresting to people that don't already like them. The other 50%, you offer practically nothing but "dumb points and half-assed thoughts" about other peoples' favorite teams. Did you really write that and think your non-Boston readers wouldn't mind?

Who else out there is brimming with excitement to see what Bill comes up with re: the Super Bowl? I'm terrified that he'll puss out and not even write anything. But assuming he does... don't bother emailing me and requesting that I make a post about it. I'll already be halfway finished.

Hooraaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyy

Nice job, douche. You've just made most of America happy. Maybe you should miss some more wide open receivers.

The 1972 Dolphins? Whatever. I can deal with their asshole-ery for another year. They're not long for this world anyways.

We Get It, Santana Makes the Mets Better

But that's no excuse for this rare puff piece by John Donovan.

Johan Santana's impending trade to the Mets will be, when and if it's consummated later this week with a contract extension, the rarest of baseball swaps, one that completely and immediately transforms a team and the balance of power in the league.

It's a huge upgrade, no question. Santana seems to hover around 10 wins above replacement per season. I tend to think you're exaggerating a little bit about the balance of power shifting, because the Mets were getting 4 wins out of Glavine and about 3.5 from Sosa/Pelfrey. Whichever slot in the rotation you're displacing with Santana, it's like a 6-7 win upgrade. Very significant, but not "team-transformingly" insane, especially considering we don't know how much Pedro Martinez will pitch. Anyway, nothing really offensive there. I just like hearing myself type.

Let's compare and contrast the Mets with and without Santana!

Let's face it: The Mets, without Santana, are just another NL East schlub.

Mets with Santana: Not a "schlub", for whatever that's worth.

They are a bunch of chuckers without an ace

Mets with Santana: A bunch of chuckers with an ace. Johan Santana does not make the other starters better. Chuckers before trade, chuckers after trade.

a collection of hitters who cease to hit at the most inopportune times

Mets with Santana: Supposedly a more clutch hitting team? Will Johan Santana's bat at the plate be fixing this problem, John? Because even the most moronic of Mariottis can understand that a new pitcher that throws once every five days has absofuckinglutely nothing to do with the timing of the hitters' base hits

all marched around by a sometimes stone-mugged manager who presided last year over one of the most embarrassing nosedives in baseball history.

Mets with Santana: Managed by a happy, animated, enthusiastic-mugged manager whose near-perfect in-game tactics are surpassed only by his ability to vomit sunshine. Make a note, Donovan, Santana does not make anyone else on the New York Mets better. Period.

Without Santana or someone a lot like him, the Mets are non-factors. And in New York, that's almost worse than being terrible.

That's a pretty bold claim, considering that it took one of the most monumental collapses in baseball history for them to lose the division last year. Now you're saying they weren't even a factor?

What general manager Omar Minaya has pulled off here, in this stunning series of fortunate events, is to make the Mets mean something again.

In that case, that's one thing that the Mets and that sentence do not have in common.

When Santana pressured the Twins to trade him before the start of spring training or not trade him at all -- Santana has full veto power over any trade -- new Minnesota GM Bill Smith was stuck. He went for the prospect-heavy package that the Mets offered; outfielder Carlos Gomez and pitchers Phil Humber, Deolis Guerra and Kevin Mulvey.

And the Mets, out of nowhere, are players again. Real players.

Give me a break, Donovan. Even you had to feel stupid tying that sentence. At least give me a story. Like, maybe that there was a sweet episode of The Wire on TV or something in the background, so your brain checked out and your fingers just kept going.

Reader Extra Participation Friday: Does It Get Any Better Than Something That Pretty Much Sucks?

First, a side note. You know how "The Daily Show" and "The Colbert Report," despite being obviously comedic in nature, are actually two of the best political/current events shows on TV? Well, I've accidentally (read: I am too lazy to find anything else) watched a fair amount of Winter X Games over the course of the past few days. And I'm seeing the exact same kind of "You wouldn't think they'd be this legitimately good!" phenomenon happening when it comes to broadcasting ability. Despite the fact that I really could give two shits about these events, I've noticed that the announcers have been superb throughout. They're informative, they're just funny enough, and they don't get in the way of each other or the visuals. Why can't we have that kind of announcing for, you know, the sports everyone actually cares about? I'm sitting here being entertained by Guy A and Guy B while watching dudes jump snowmobiles off enormous ramps. But when the World Series or the Super Bowl rolls around, you've got Tim McCarver and Phil Simms bending over backwards to find ways to ruin the broadcast. It ain't right, I tell ya.

SO ANYWAYS.

In this crazy mixed-up world there's one constant we can always rely on: if a movie was made between 1980 and 1994, Bill Simmons is going to love it.

Does it get any better than the first 30 minutes of "Sleeping With The Enemy?" You have Julia Roberts at her apex, living in one of the coolest summer houses in movie history, only she's married to a creepy rich guy with a mustache and severe OCD who puts on a sinister opera CD every time he's ready to have sex; says things like, "If I didn't know any better, I would think you're trying to provoke a quarrel with me"; gets upset if the bathroom towels aren't hanging at the same length; takes her sailing on stormy nights when she can't swim; and if that's not enough, regularly beats the crap out of her. What a great premise for a movie!

If you've seen this movie and actually agree with Bill, feel free to let me know with a comment. I won't be holding my breath. And if you're lucky enough to have not seen this movie, don't. I'm not going to say why or under what circumstances, but I've sat through it, and it's a piece of garbage. Especially the first 30 minutes. If Bill's gripping description right there doesn't convince you, watch the first two and a half minutes of this video. Really? Boy, I don't know- does it seem like anything could get any better than that? A tall order, but I've got some nominations. How about Vertical Limit? That movie eats balls, and I'd still rather watch it again over Sleeping With the Enemy. Take a look at Sleeping- you've got a 35 year old antagonist wearing an 80 year old's pants and a mustache that's probably attached with a piece of double sided tape. You've also got gripping dialog such as "We all forget things. That's what reminding is for." And you've got Julia Roberts stepping way outside her comfort zone to play a character who is simultaneously both tough and womanly. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. It's corny, it's poorly written, and it couldn't be much less interesting.

Anyways, I'm rambling, because I love rambling about things that suck. (Why else would this blog exist?) So here's the Reader Extra Participation Friday assignment. Take your pick- either

a) List any shitty movie you can think of that is better than the first 30 minutes of Sleeping With the Enemy. I'm going with

-Vertical Limit
-Mission Impossible 2
-Spiderman 3
-Troy
-Vertical Limit
-The Wicker Man
-Batman and Robin

And so on and so forth. Or,

b) Come up with something else that's completely unremarkable and rhetorically ask if it gets any better than that. Such as

-Raisins
-"The Family Circus"
-Paperclips
-Shovels
-Lenny Kravitz
-Water
-Knock-knock jokes

OK, you've got options. Everyone jump right in. Don't be shy. Blanco was last week's winner, and JD took home the trophy* two weeks ago. Who else wants their 15 minutes of fame?

*Note- trophy may not actually exist.