News - Thursday, September 17, 2009

[Left] This image will be more important later on in the post, so just keep it in mind for now.

Here is some random, trivial news that you nonetheless can't do without:

- This article is from June 2008, but I just recently became aware of its existence. It is written for The Atlantic by a professor at a small liberal arts college and a community college. It is a pretty damning account of how a lot of people are being shoved toward school, even if they're clearly unqualified for it or if it would have little practical value for their career.

For more own experience in college and substitute teaching, I do think this is still the case. People who have no interest in learning and school go to college and community college because it is another year that you don't have to get a real job. Then, as the article spotlights, there are people interested in learning that just don't have the capacity or the underlying ability to do college-level work. While it would be nice for there to be more services to "bridge" this sort of gap, I don't really have a solution at all.

- Slate has a good interview, the first of two parts, with Bill Cosby. He mostly talks about The Cosby Show, which is always a good thing. Also in Slate, a reviewer pans the accuracy of Dan Brown's latest book. And Bill Simmons being sponsored by Miller Lite isn't a gag.

- In neato dinosaur news, scientists have found a smaller version of the T-Rex in fossils. You know, if Jurassic Park was real, I would love to have a pet dinosaur. I promise that I would take care of it and everything! It would awesome, especially one of the ones with a long neck, that I could ride down like a slide. I would also like the plush dinosaur featured above. (See, told you it would be important later.)

- And finally, in strippers news, Las Vegas Weekly notes that the pole is on the rise (get it?) culturally. According to The Cleveland Plain Dealer, a former transportation director is in trouble for shaking down witnesses, and also allegedly traded contracts for sex parties on Lake Erie. Lucy Lawless' new show has strippers cast as extras. And this company is advertising a book from an Ivy League-educated stripper who just recovered from breast cancer.

At The Commercials: Totally meeting expectations

The past couple months there has been a weird radio commercial about Verizon FIOS Internet, and about how it can help the slow connection speed of your office network. Basically, you hear an angry boss-type screaming to a co-worker, "I need the blah blah file, stat!" And a guy screams back in reply, "Still making changes, circle back later!"

Then a voice of sanity interjects and asks why everyone is yelling - it sounds kind of like a delivery boy. A seemingly-cute sounding, but not hot, woman answers and says in a normal voice that because of their slow Internet and office e-mail, they need to scream to one another, because it's quicker than e-mail. Then, the formerly sweet-toned woman screams, "Ben thanks for the flowers I thought you hated me! L-O-L!" Then Ben, who is apparently the boss, screams back, "Semi-colon! Right parentheses! Winking emoticon!"

This commercial was annoying enough in just an audio format, but now, it has spread to television without changing a single line of dialogue! What gives, Verizon??? The odd thing is that the appearance of each - stodgy angry bald white boss, cool black co-worker and cute-but-not-hot female workers - correlates to their voice. So, yeah, the commercial has that going for it, which is nice, I guess. Apparently, I'm not the only one who hates the commercial, which is always good to know.

Thanks to this site for the graphic at the top.

Pickin' Pigskin: Week 1 Tally

So, uh, it was kind of a weekend to forget from a picking perspective for me. With an assist from Andy Hanson, who did all of the games up until Monday night:

Andy: 10-6
Bob: 10-6
Kristin: 9-7
Steve: 5-11

I have no real excuse for my performance. Listen, I'm a bit embarrassed for myself, and this shows why I stink at picking against a point spread. Luckily, this is the first time I've ever done it for everything, so I really have nowhere to go by up next week. This experience does confirm my suspicion that I should never, ever gamble on anything; I'm glad there is nothing at stake with these picks except for bragging rights.

Anyway, that's all. I will apologize for the lack of a "real" entry tonight, since this is kind of short, but I've been going almost non-stop since 7 a.m. today and didn't get much of a chance to write. I should have something a bit longer tomorrow.

iTunes Running Diary – Monday, September 14 – Guitar Hero 5

This week's artists.
I decided to do another theme entry, since I just got Guitar Hero 5, and I'm loving it so far. (By the way, McDonald's, I am not paying for that usage, never ever.) Because I realize that some people – myself included – like to discover the game's songs as they play, I will preface this entry with the information that these songs are uncovered within the first hour or so. I only play the guitar, because I don't have any of the other instruments, and really, who prefers to play bass? On to the songs!

- "Fame" by David Bowie. It is already well-cataloged on this here blog that I'm a huge Bowie fan, so I didn't mind playing along with this version at all. I did really well, too, getting five stars easily with 99 percent, and only misplaying a single note. It seems like a song that is tailored more for the vocals, with the ending especially hard.

The song itself is one of Bowie's better, although it doesn't really work up to much of a crescendo. A fun fact from Guitar Hero 5: Some of the backing vocals at the end are by John Lennon. Good for him! I'm glad he had such great taste. I like the first and last minutes the best, with the 1960s "face-off" music giving way to the pluck and glitz of Bowie, which reaches its peak at the end of the song, with the echoing vocals.

- "Only Happy When It Rains" by Garbage, a.k.a. the Shirley Manson band. Their biggest hit might be "Stupid Girl", but I much prefer this song, and I had forgotten about how awesome it is until it came up as a playable for me. Hmmm, do I want to play Shirley Manson or Bob Dylan? The answer is simple, although I'm probably the only one who would chose for the Garbage over the art. (Get the double meaning, get it???)

On a game-related note, the avatar for Shirley Manson is shockingly hot. The actual Shirley is pretty attractive, but the goth makeup and outfits don't really do much for me. Her outfit in the game is just a red dress, and as a result, she has earned the spot as the lead singer in my make-believe band. The other two spots are still fictional characters though; still holding tryouts and what not, you know.

- "Gratitude" by The Beastie Boys. I was actually surprised that this song made it into the game. As a big fan of The Beastie Boys, I don't really consider this one of their signature songs, or one that lends itself well to Guitar Hero. Obviously, "Sabotage" is the easiest one to port, and that's already been done, along with "So Watcha Want?", which wasn't done as well to me.

Off the top of my head, if they wanted to go kind-of-artsy like "Gratitude", then "Sabrosa" would have been better, except that it doesn't have lyrics. My favorite Beastie Boys' song of all-time, "Live at PJ's", would have been an awesome selection because of the great lyrics, bass and drums. There is also some ambient sound in the background - people cheering and clapping to start and end the song - that would have lent itself well to the Guitar Hero crowd. Also better than "Gratitude" would have been "Jimmy James" and "I Don't Know" and "Heart Attack Man".

- "Hurts So Good" by John Cougar Mellencamp. I'm torn on Mellencamp as an artist; he is so freakin' pandering. He's like the generic, mass-market version of Tom Petty, like The Eagles of his generation. "Small Town" and "Jack and Diane" are especially guilty of this sin. I could stand them if they were played sparingly, or if he wasn't shilling Chevy trucks in every other commercial, but it's just all so muchery.

That being said, I do think "Hurts So Good" is the best song of his catalog. It is just a bit catchier and rockier than his other songs, and thus, it gets a reluctant nod of approval from me.

- "Sympathy For The Devil" by The Rolling Stones. Yes, I'm not much of a Stones' fan outside of "Get Out Of My Cloud", but I must admit that I did enjoy playing along to this song, as opposed to some of the alternatives at this point. Also, some of the other songs available - "Steady As She Goes" by The Raconteurs and "Gamma Ray" by Beck - I've already written about, so this song gets the last spot according to the two sweetest words in the human language, according to Homer Simpson - Dee Fault.

Scheduling and News - Sunday, September 13, 2009

An example of the Adult Swim schedule. Click here for full-size.

Here is a tentative schedule for the blog in the coming weeks, since I've always liked when Adult Swim posts their schedules on a bump:

- Sunday: Miscellaneous fun
- Monday: iTunes running diary
- Tuesday: A wrap column about how the weekend football picks went
- Wednesday: Miscellaneous fun
- Thursday: NFL picks on early weeks / miscellaneous fun
- Friday: NFL picks on normal weeks
- Saturday morning: Kristin's football picks on normal NFL weeks
- Saturday night: Storytime with Amanda Meyer

With this current schedule, there are three regular features (iTunes running diary, NFL picks and Storytime) and a smattering of other content every week. I will continue to sprinkle in my other semi-regular features, such as Inexplicable Movie Reviews and At The Commercials, instead of giving them their own specific day.

And speaking of a regular feature, let's do one I haven't done in a while - The news!

- Click here for a really good article from The National Post about how the Mexican government is having a big problem cracking down on the drug trade. It reminds me of some of the better work that you'd see in The Wall Street Journal; I think journalism needs more international reporting like this.

Along similar lines, in terms of the war on drugs, The Guardian also had a nice piece in an August issue about cocaine bars in South America, and Bolivia in particular. While I think the article is a bit soft on the abuse aspect and danger of the drug until the end, the enterprise nature of the report is still surprising and interesting throughout. And although the content is a lot different, the enterprise reporting going on in Afghanistan is just as impressive, according to American Journalism Review.

- In stripper news that is actually realistic and not super-sleazy or funny, a Vancouver paper did a really good piece on how strippers and prostitutes are still using Craigslist to setup jobs. The reporter sets up meetings with several of the escorts, and although he compensates some for their time, which is normally a journalistic no-no, the results seem to be worth the overlay. Informative and interesting read.

- In stripper news that is bizarre and surreal, although not what you'd think, a Connecticut man was arrested for dumping paint stripper all over his wife's car, which he then draped with her wedding dress and bouquet. The only thing surprising about this story is that it happened in New England, and not Germany or Florida.

- And in stripper news that is completely what you think, a guy is trying to use pictures of a stripper on a police car near a police deputy to blackmail the deputy from testifying against him in court. Whew; that's a mouthful.

Storytime with Amanda Meyer: Seasonal shifts in the great coffee battle

So this fine Saturday, I want to talk about coffee. Specifically, I want to talk about my inability to start brewing my own and further inability to stop spending far too much money daily on my caffeine fix.

I’m a sucker for advertising. I define Corporate America’s targeted demographic. And yet, if Dunkin’ beat Starbucks, why does The Bux continue to beat my wallet on a daily basis? I’ll tell you why in four short words: pumpkin spice soy lattes. Okay Dunks, you win my vote on iced coffee, but fall is in the air. I know, I know, summer just ended, but if you don’t believe me, look at the foliage freaks screwing up traffic on 95N starting at the 128 Split all the way up to New Hampshire.

So other than the foliage and back to school, fall in Boston means that it’s a lot windier than I’d ever like it to be, and thus, my lattes double as a way to keep warm. Starbucks re-introduced the pumpkin spice flavor this week and I am already hooked. In my humble opinion, it’s absolutely perfect. The soy milk makes it extra thick and the nutmeg on top is like the icing on a cake.

“But Amanda! You live in Boston? Wouldn’t it be much more fun to hang out at some tiny hole in the wall cafe drinking fresh brewed coffee that isn’t mass produced?” Well, in a word, yes. But to elaborate, that takes time, time I don’t have as one of this city’s many impatient “Massholes,” and I like I said, their advertising is good. Basically what I am telling you is that getting out of bed early to brew coffee is less appealing to me than standing in a line, having an anxiety attack about being late to work, and spending no less than $5.21 (venti soy flavored latte with MA 6.25 percent sales tax) on enough espresso to get me through the day.

Call me crazy, but that’s just how I roll. And for the record, when I do have a lazy Saturday morning with nothing to do but homework or reading, I absolutely love scouting out “real” coffee shops and spending some nice time there with my iPod and my books. But in the great rush to work Monday through Friday, that is the last thing on my mind.

Pickin' pigskin with Bob and Steve (and Kristin!): Week 1, Part 2

[Left] This doesn't really have anything to do with anything, except that I really like Luke Skywalker, and I think Mark Hamill's performance is sometimes lost in the praise people give Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher. I mean, Ford got the Han Solo role, which almost anyone could have made cool!

In an effort to get some more sports content up, I'll be doing a weekly football picks column with my buddy Bob during the football season. And, similar to the Sports Gal, his wife will be picking games as well. For our take on the Thursday night game, click here. The rest of this week's games, with Kristin's take at the end:

BALTIMORE (-13) over Kansas City

Steve: Kansas City +13

While I'm not in love with Kansas City as a team, I simply thing this line is too high for Baltimore. The Chiefs have some talent on the offensive side of the ball - Matt Cassel, Dwayne Bowe, Larry Johnson - and the Ravens are still underwhelming to me, even if Ray Rice is seemingly everyone's fantasy sleeper. Even if Cassel can't play, I think Tyler Thigpen is a better QB than people realize.

Bob: Kansas City +13

I agree that this line is way too high. However, I'm tempted because I don't think that KC has the running game to keep the Ravens honest. In the end, I think the Chiefs will surprise some teams because Cassel may be a better QB than some people realize and I think the Chiefs did a lot to work on their defense in the offseason. Also, firing Herm Edwards was the greatest decision this franchise has made since... actually, I can't think of a better decision than firing Herm Edwards. That guy was an AWFUL football coach. Now, KC is actually playing to win the game.

CINCINNATI (-4) over Denver

Steve: Cincy -4

Denver just looks god-awful this year. Kyle Orton could barely win, even though he was supported by a world-beating defense in Chicago, so I have no idea what gave Josh McDaniel the idea that he was the answer at QB.

I do have a bit of a soft spot for Cincy, since they are my favorite team, because of my experience growing up with Tecmo Super Bowl. (And thanks to this guy for putting the screen shot to the left on his blog; see, the Bengals can win in at least one medium!) I don't think they're going to be mind-numbingly bad this year, more mediocre, and I wish they would just fire Marvin Lewis already. Their re-signing of Chris Henry is just embarrassing, even for the Bengals. That being said, I still think that Carson Palmer is a franchise / Pro Bowl QB, and that Chad Johnson (I'm not calling him the other name) has something to prove.

Bob: Denver +4

I don't understand why people are so down on the Broncos this year. I think Jay Cutler was a way overrated player who had two great wide receivers to throw to. I imagine he is going to come down to earth this year when his No. 1 wide receiver is... Devin Hester. Orton, on the other hand, never seemed to be as bad as people thought. Remember, he had the receivers that Cutler just inherited but managed to have servicable numbers. I don't think Orton is going to set the world on fire, but I think the Broncos will be better than people think. Also, Orton has the cooler beard. I'm not sure Cutler even has facial hair.

The flipside is that the Bengals seemed to get much worse this year. They lost T.J. Houshmanasdfsdal;jfsda;jl;dafjha and got a whole bunch of bad karma when they resigned Chris Henry. It will be much easier to guard Ochocinco now that there isn't a prolific No. 2 wide receiver to guard as well. Combined with the bad juju between Ochocinco and Carson Palmer during the offseason, I see bad things in the Bengals future.

HOUSTON (-4.5) over Jets

Steve: Houston -4.5

Every year, it seems like some people pick the Houston non-Oilers to breakout, and while I wouldn't go that far, I do think they'll be on the cusp of playoff contention this year. Everyone, myself included, laughed when they chose Mario Williams over Reggie Bush, but time has proven that their talent evaluation was correct, and Steve Slaton is a nice player as well.

Meanwhile, I think the Jets are going to struggle with Sanchez at QB. I'm seemingly the only Kellen Clemens fan left in the world; I don't think he ever really got a fair shot to win the job, and it wouldn't surprise me to see him do some good work once he gets out of New York. I feel like the Jets weren't a playoff team last year, and didn't really do anything to improve themselves for this year, and they aren't a particularly young team either.

Bob: Houston -4.5

I get sucked onto the Texans bandwagon each year. They're a likable team that is in the Colts division, so I always hope they can do well. Usually, they prove me wrong. However, I think facing Sanchez in his first pro game will be great for a defense with a good pass rush, and I can see Slaton and Shaub ruining the Jets defense.

Speaking of the 2006 NFL draft, isn't it funny how that draft class turned out to be a surprisingly weak one, at least in the first round? The first round of that draft had seven Pro Bowlers, which is the same as the 2007 and 2008 first round draft classes despite the fact that they have had less time to accumulate Pro Bowls. In addition, one of those Pro Bowlers was named Vince Young; I don't see him making a quick return. Wasn't the impression at the time that 2006 was a strong draft class? Yet, many teams had huge misses in the First Round (although the book isn't closed on them, Leinart and Maroney haven't exactly set the world on fire).

NEW ORLEANS (-13) over Detroit

Steve: Detroit +13

This game makes me nervous. I think Detroit getting a real coach and a real QB, even if he is a rookie, substantially improves them this year, along with the continued improvement (presumably) of Calvin Johnson. I think they've improved enough that they can hang a bit with the Saints, who are entirely offense. This game has potential to be similar to those 1980s NBA games that would have 136-117 finals.

Bob: New Orleans -13

I think the Saints defense is better than it played last year and Detroit made a bad decision by throwing Stafford into the flames so soon. I think Stafford would have been better served by letting Culpepper (who vastly outplayed him in the preseason) take the reins at the beginning. The Lions likely aren't going to the playoffs this year, so giving their franchise quarterback some time to develop and perhaps be the hero as Culpepper inevitably fades could only help. Also, Stafford's preseason play was a big red flag. He doesn't seem ready to be an NFL quarterback. I agree this game will be high scoring. But I think that Stafford will turn the ball over enough that the Saints put up a lot of points.

[Left] Dear San Francisco, remember when you were relevant? Joe Montana does. He has four reminders of it.

ARIZONA (-6.5) over San Francisco

Steve: Arizona -6.5

While I think everyone else will overrate Arizona, based on their somewhat-miraculous run to the Super Bowl last year, this isn't the week I'm betting against them. San Francisco is just a mess. I can't wait for two years from now, when the Patriots sign Frank Gore after another miserable season, and he scores 20 touchdowns for them.

I also don't know why the line is only a touchdown for this game. San Francisco, I think there is a chance they win like two games this year.

Bob: Arizona -6.5

I think Arizona has the chance to be pretty bad this year, but San Fran will be worse. Kurt Warner seems to have the same disease that Jake Delhomme and Chad Pennington caught – that is, they can't put together two good seasons. Unfortunately for the Cards, Matt Leinart is not going to be the answer. I can't imagine a way to get worse karma than to dump your college girlfriend, the mother of your kid, and then dating Paris Hilton. This guy not only has a hex, he probably has eight different forms of HPV.

[Left] Rick Pitino called me this weekend Seattle fans, and he told me that Steve Largent isn't walking through that door.

SEATTLE (-8.5) over St. Louis

Steve: St. Louis +8.5

This line stuns me. What's going on? Did Matt Hasselbeck suddenly find a fresh body to harvest new organs from? Did they use a time machine to import Ricky Watters, Chris Warren and Shaun Alexander? Did Deion Branch find the fountain from Tuck Everlasting and use it to regain the form that made the Seahawks trade for him in the first place?

It's not that I love the Rams, but Bulger and Stephen Jackson are a decent one-two punch to me, and I can't see the Seahawks running away with this game by 9 points. I don't think the Seahawks have the firepower or health to severely outclass the Rams, who finally have a real coach.

Bob: Seahawks -8.5

Stephen Jackson is good, Marc Bulger is not. This is definitely a guy who benefited from having good receivers earlier in his career and a coach who cranked offenses up to 120 decibels. I don't trust St. Louis to do a whole lot this season, even though they hired a better coach. They were one of the worst teams in the league last year, and I don't see how they got much better.

The Seahawks, on the other hand, were pretty racked with injuries last year. Even though they aren't getting younger, I think this team might be decent. Also, don't forget about T.J. Houshmanasdfsdal;jfsda;jl;dafjha. I also think they have good depth at running back. Finally, the Seahawks have a great homefield advantage, which puts them over the top for me. I also think the line is high, but I think this game could be a laugher.

NEW ENGLAND (-11) over Buffalo

Steve: New England -11

See, the Patriots are a team that I can see completely overrunning teams. They have a bunch of weapons, plus something to prove this year with Brady being healthy, plus I think they'll be super focused on the game as an escape from all of the Richard Seymour talk this week.

It doesn't help the Bills that 1) they fired their offensive coordinator right before the season started 2) their best running back is suspended for this game 3) their QB is still Trent Edwards and 4) Mr. Edwards now has to deal with TO. Maybe TO will be a bit more humble, seeing that only the Bills were interested in his services this offseason, but trying to guess the actions of TO is like trying to count all the grains of sand on a beach.

Bob: Buffalo +11

I like the Patriots chances of having a record-setting offense this year, but I don't see how their defense can hold up. Their defense hasn't been up to snuff during the last few years, and I think they only got worse in the off-season. Particularly, I see the secondary being something where people say "they couldn't possibly be worse than last year," but somehow proving people wrong. If they move to a 4-3 I think their pass rush has a chance at being better, but that secondary still worries me. I think we might see a lot of 41-38 games this season.

I don't think Buffalo is going to do anything great this year, particularly while Lynch is suspended. If it wasn't the Pats, I would say this one is a laugher. However, that might jinx the game (and this is coming from a guy who has eaten the same food during Patriots games for the past six years) so I won't say that. Buffalo covers, or perhaps wins outright.

[Left] I remember a kinder, gentler time in Atlanta football history, when a certain quarterback was just getting in trouble in civil matters.

Miami (-4) over ATLANTA

Bob: Atlanta +4

I'm not a believer in Miami at all. They had a gift schedule last year, had a fairly weak division, and weren't able to do much against quality teams. In addition, I see defenses figuring out the Wildcat and Chad Pennington having a down year (he can't seem to put two good seasons together). I wouldn't be surprised if there was a quarterback controversy later this year.

That isn't to say I'm wild about Atlanta either. Atlanta's defense didn't set the world on fire and didn't do much to improve. I also think Matt Ryan will have a hard time following up last year. In the end, I think Miami did more to improve their defense, which will help them pull through. I'll take the points.

Steve: Miami -4

I'm not a huge believer in Miami or Atlanta either, but I think the Falcons have the greater chance of collapsing this year. Matt Ryan got picked in the third round of the fantasy draft for the league I'm in, which seems insanely high to me. While I think there is a chance that he gets better, I think it's negated by the huge amount of carries Michael Turner had last year. I am a big believer in the curse of 370 – and the curse of 363, so I'm worried about Adrian Peterson too – so it wouldn't surprise me to see Atlanta struggle to post between a 5-11 and 7-9 record this year.

That being said, the Dolphins don't impress me that much either. Chad Pennington can't stay healthy, and I think Ronnie Brown has just as much injury concern as Turner. (Brown is on my fantasy team though, so I'm wishing for the best.) I think they manage to stay healthy through the first game though, and that means a Dolphins win by a touchdown or more.

Philadelphia (-2.5) over CAROLINA

Bob: Philly -2.5

This game is a crap shoot. On one hand, you have the wildly inconsistent Jake Delhomme. On the other, you have the somewhat less inconsistent (but not to say consistent) Donovan McNabb. Despite the fact that there hardly seems to be a home field advantage in the NFL anymore (thanks for all the luxury boxes, though, NFL owners), it looks like McNabb is much worse on the road (8 TDs and 8 picks on the road last year versus 15 and 3 at home) while we all know that Delhomme is better at home. So my gut instinct is to take Carolina.

Then again, Philly's defense was much better last year than Carolina's. That, in addition to the turmoil Carolina faced in the off-season (being simply trounced in the playoffs and Julius Peppers' holdout), makes me feel as though this is the beginning of a bad season for Carolina. So I'm going to take the Eagles here.

Steve: Philly -2.5

The contract extension that the Panthers signed with Delhomme is just absolutely insane. I have no idea what they were thinking. Yes, he's been the best quarterback in franchise history, but that history is about a decade long, and he's been a great player only a few years in that span. He's also injury-prone, and throws a lot of interceptions. I'm not sure if there has been an odder, “Why the hell did they do that?” personnel move that has been made in the past couple years.

For that reason alone, I think Philly wins this game easily. The Eagles are still the Eagles, and while they seemingly have a couple brain farts each year under Andy Reid, I think there is a great chance that the Panthers just completely quit on the Delhomme. I think that process starts this week.

[Left] He's coming for you, Childress... You creepy looking sonofabitch...

Minnesota (-4) over CLEVELAND

Bob: Minnesota -4

Sometimes, there is a clear villain in games like these (at least in my head). Typically, I would root against Mangina (note: not a misspelling) for unleashing the whole Spygate thing two years ago. The double whammy of going to the hated Jets and then immediately stabbing Belichick in the back cemented his place in my heart. On the other hand, Brett Favre has made NFL off-seasons completely unenjoyable by playing the whole “will I / won't I retire?” game. So I don't know who to root against in this game.

Even when you consider the suffering of the fan bases, it's hard to choose between the two. Cleveland has been consistently awful (and had their franchise stolen from them), but Minnesota has not been setting the world on fire either. In the end, it amounts to Favre and AP versus... Brady Quinn and Jamal Lewis? On the other hand, Brad Childress versus Eric Mangina... Ugh. I'd like to take the points, but I'll take Adrian Peterson running all over Cleveland's not amazing run defense. I do like Cleveland's chances of having a rebound year, though.

Steve: Minnesota -4

I totally concur with you on all of the wishy-washy drama between both of these teams, coaches and individual players with the rest of the league. Both have been pretty miserable for the past fill-in-the-blank years, but Minnesota has at least had some promise and some exciting teams (remember when Daunte Culpepper didn't suck?), whereas Cleveland has just had year after year of muddy, grinding, unexciting teams. While it was shitty of Art Modell to move the team to Baltimore, who the heck wants to stay in Cleveland?

For the aforementioned non-football reasons, I'm going with Minnesota. While the Brett Favre factor means that every game, he has a chance of throwing five interceptions and ruining their chances, I don't think it'll happen this week, on his first game back, and with Adrian Peterson ready, willing and able to run roughshod over the rest of the league. However, it does worry me that Childress is the coach, and he needs to realize that Peterson should not be a case study for whether a Jim Brown-like workload would work in today's NFL.

INDIANAPOLIS (-7) over Jacksonville

Bob: Indy -7

Some day, Indianapolis will be bad. I would take more solace in this if I thought that time would be soon. I am sick of Peyton Manning commercials, even if they are kind of funny. I am sick of hearing about how Peyton Manning is great, while he has essentially had two No. 1 receivers almost his entire career. It will be interesting to see how he performs without Harrison. It is also interesting that Bob Sanders has again managed to injure himself. Perhaps this is the year the Colts come down to earth (but I wouldn't bet on it).

Jacksonville always plays Indianapolis hard, but this is a team that hasn't gotten much better. They had a middling defense last year and did nothing to improve it, while they got worse on offense by losing Fred Taylor. MJD managed to hurt himself last week. Gerrard actually has players to throw to this year, though. I say Indianapolis wins this by not much more than a TD, but starts falling down to earth as the season goes along.

Steve: Jags +7

While I am worried about MJD health, enough so that my buddy convinced me to draft Brady over him in our fantasy draft, I think that the Jaguars will be amped and looking for blood in this game. Remember that cinematic classic Little Giants? In the final game, a plucky squad without much talent managed to stage a miraculous comeback against the big, bad local team. I don't think this has anything to do with the Jags vs. the Colts, but I did want to work them into this picks column somehow. My gut just says that the Jags keep this close and interesting, as the Colts don't manage to put a finishing blow on the Jags when they get a chance.

[Left] Dear Tampa Bay, please break Tony Romo's legs, so he can understand the pain Jessica felt when he BROKE HER HEART.

Dallas (-6) over TAMPA BAY

Bob: Dallas -6

I'm starting to get concerned because I'm choosing a lot of favorites. However, I don't see how Tampa Bay does anything this year. I wrote that before I saw that Byron Leftwich is their starting quarterback. Leftwich??? I guess this team could surprise me, but I would have a hard time turning the keys of my team over to anybody name Byron, and particularly Byron Leftwich.

Dallas may sneak up on people this year. Romo broke up with his bad luck charm (hopefully his career won't go the same way as Nick Lachey's, though), they seem to have gotten better on defense, and they've gotten rid of a consistent locker room cancer. Ewing Theory, anyone?

Steve: Dallas -6

Byron Leftwich deserves enshrinement in the Reggie Cleveland All-Stars Hall of Fame, since he's a black dude, and also in the Matt Jones Misapplied Stereotype Hall of Fame, because a few analysts laughingly referred to him as a “scrambler” when he was being drafted out of Marshall. (This is named after former Jags receiver and college QB Matt Jones, who was called a possession receiver in the NFL because he was a white dude, which essentially means that nobody noticed that the guy ran fast as eff.)

I'm also picking more favorites than not, and I can't blame you for picking Dallas in this game. Even overlooking Tampa Bay's issues at QB, what the heck is going on with their coaching staff? They hire a first-year coach to replace Gruden, and while I think he was overrated, Morris' performance this season would have normally been banner news in a non-McDaniels year. Meanwhile, the Cowboys' off-season has been quiet for the first time in ages, with the only drama concerning punters and the scoreboard, and not the on-field product. I don't think this will last the entire season, but Week One seems safe for now.

NY GIANTS (-6.5) over Washington

Bob: Washington +6.5

This game has me torn. I just expect the Redskins to be bad. Not only does the team make awful decisions, but they have an evil, evil owner. On the other hand, Haynesworth has a way of making a team inexplicably better. This team's defense could be stifling. I can already see the Redskins flags popping up on cars all over town (when they started off well last season, you could go five minutes without seeing a car with them on the road).

Helmet catch. Helmet catch. Helmet catch. Helmet catch. Ugh. If you can't tell, I severely dislike the Giants. Somehow, though, this team has managed to remain good. Hopefully karma will catch up with them for winning a Super Bowl on the luckiest play ever. Also, it's about time Eli Manning play to his level—which is far below the level he has been playing at. Maybe the lucrative extension he signed during the offseason will convince him to play awfully for a few weeks.

Steve: Giants -6.5

First, I agree with Bill Simmons and (seemingly) you about the David Tyree catch. Since he got released by the Giants in the preseason, there is a good chance the helmet catch will be the LAST catch of his career. That fact guarantees that he'll be in the news every five years, as newspapers and sports media sites will feel the need to run retrospective after retrospective on the New York Giants' upset, just like they way overdo every other storyline that has a remote New York connection. ESPN ran an entire mini-series on The Bronx is Burning, but I doubt they'll be extending the same courtesy to anything coming out of Baltimore, even if Brian Billick morphs into Godzilla and starts playing offensive line for the team he used to coach.

However, as much as I dislike the Giants, they are at least run, or rather left alone, by a semi-competent owner. Dan Snyder is like Jerry Jones or Al Davis with absolutely no track record of success. TMQ calls him Voldemort, so named after the Harry Potter villain, and I see no reason to dispel that nickname. I think Campbell is better than people give him credit for, and that Eli Manning is much worse, but there is also a big talent disparity in the talent surrounding each of them. Clinton Portis is the only guy I like on Washington from a stats perspective, and even his numbers are the result of the Redskins force-feeding him carries a lot. Chris Cooley is a cool mofo though, with a very nifty name.

GREEN DAY (-3.5) over Chicago

Bob: Chicago +3.5

Battle of the blahs. Although people seem to be somewhat excited about these two teams this year, they just manage to play such... boring games. Don't get me wrong - this will probably end up being a good, hard-fought game with several lead changes. But what player is going to be the star of this game? Aaron Rodgers? Jay “Diabetes” Cutler? Matt Forte? There is no player in this game who excites me much. I see this as ending up as a close game - read one field goal - so I'm comfortable taking the points.

Steve: Green Bay -3.5

As a former fantasy owner of Aaron Rodgers, I think he takes a big step forward this year and becomes a Pro Bowl quarterback. Last year was essentially his rookie season, yet people are more psyched about Matt Ryan this year. What gives??? If the defense improves even a little, than the Packers are a playoff team, and really only have the Bears to worry about in their division. (I'm assuming Childress or Favre will eventually do something stupid to ruin Minnesota's chances.)

The Bears, meh. I don't think Cutler is the franchise QB that everyone else does – he comes off as an insufferable jerk in interviews, and in the Stephan Pastis book where he tries to make the Broncos as a placekicker. However, Cutler is clearly better than Kyle Orton, Rex Grossman and the other scrubs Chicago has run out at QB in recent years, so it wouldn't surprise me to see him annointed in the same lofty airs as Brady and Big Ben after he leads his team to a good record. But, I'm going with my heart this week, and picking the Packers.

San Diego (-9.5) over OAKLAND

Bob: San Diego -9.5

How will this game even be close? Even if Seymour does report before this game starts, I don't think he's going to be a game-changer. San Diego isn't a terribly likable team, but I just don't see how the Raiders can possibly be good in the next few years. On the other hand, I can see San Diego going into a frenzy and beating the pants off a few teams, a la the Patriots in 2007. I hope somebody knocks the grin off Philip Rivers' face by the end of the season, though.

Steve: San Diego -9.5

This line could be 20.5, and I'd still pick the Chargers at that point. The Raiders... are just a miserable team. Even if Rivers and LDT get hurt, I think whoever is Rivers back-up and Sproles would still handily beat the Raiders. Tom Cable punched out an assistant coach, and the bad news is that with the Seymour trade, that wasn't even the bad news of the off-season!

-----

Similar to the Sports Gal, Bob's wife Kristin will also be picking games against the spread with us. I have no idea how much she knows about football, but I have great confidence that she'll beat either one or both of us this season. These picks were submitted before the start of Thursday night's game, but Kristin's regular spot will be Saturday morning, as a sort of Girl Power Tag Team with Amanda Meyer's entries later in the day. (This makes the picture above of the WWE's Bella Twins totally justified, of course.)

Tennessee over PITTSBURGH +6

Mainly because I hate the Steelers. I think they're cocky and rude, and frankly, Tennessee is an unassuming team that did rather well last year while nobody was paying attention (at least I wasn't paying attention), so maybe they'll do well again this year.

Miami over ATLANTA +4

I'm pretty much going to pick Miami unless they're playing the Pats. Maybe it's a Dan Marino thing, or maybe I'm just not over the dogfighting thing.

BALTIMORE over Kansas City -13

I think it's always safe to pick a team where you would never want to run out of gas in their city.

CAROLINA over Philadelphia +2.5

Philly is a city of choking assholes.

Denver over CINCINNATI +4

My mom went to school in Denver, so my family kind of always roots for them.

CLEVELAND over Minnesota +4

As much as I dislike the Jets (Mangini), I need to pick them over the Vikings because I'm more mad at Brett Favre. I believe there is honestly something wrong with you if you're over 40 with a wife that hot and you choose to leave her and return to football. Repeatedly. Even after everyone knows you're too old and you kind of suck now. And, frankly, didn't he even break a rib? Isn't that a sign from God? A too-old sign?

HOUSTON over Jets -4.5

I don't think that Houston can win, but I just can't pick the Jets.

Jacksonville over INDIANAPOLIS +7

Ditto for Indianapolis. Maybe somehow the spread will help me out on that one.

NEW ORLEANS over Detroit -13

I almost want to pick the Lions, because no one else ever will all season, but as long as they're still rebuilding New Orleans, you have to root for the Saints.

TAMPA BAY over Dallas +6

I'm not allowed to ever pick Dallas since I was raised a Redskins fan. However they'll probably win because I think Romo is still broken up with Jessica Simpson.

ARIZONA over San Francisco -6.5

I guess I have to pick Arizona. The last cool thing the 49ers ever did was that Super Bowl where they scored 49 points, except I think I was in elementary school then.

Washington over NY GIANTS +6.5

Go 'Skins! There is a chance they might win this game in order to more fully break my father's heart later in the season after getting his hopes up.

SEATTLE over St. Louis -8.5

I think I'm going to have to say Seattle. The Rams are just so boring.

GREEN BAY over Chicago -3.5

I hope that Green Bay completely trashes the Bears because I hope they're as pissed off at Brett Favre as I am. It would be like going to the Yankees. And really, the Midwest has nothing much better going on, so it's almost worse.

NEW ENGLAND over Buffalo -11

Obviously go Pats. But if they don't beat the spread, because they like ridiculously close games that don't seem close after the fact but really were while you were watching them, it's because they traded away my husband. You don't let go of a man who looks that good in a suit, or who can completely squish whoever he wants.

OAKLAND over San Diego +9.5

As much as Oakland is old and mean, and I really shouldn't pick them, I'm not over the LT comments when he was a total prick after we beat them in the playoffs a few years ago. I think they're a team of poor sports.

Tag Team Sequel: Steve and Danielle on nannying, Basterds and The Informant

Although Danielle is a dear, dear friend,
she ain't got nothing on this dame.

To rip-off the disclaimer for Bill Simmons' BS Report, Tag Team is a free flowing discussion between two adults that sometimes touches on mature subjects. This is the sequel to an earlier Tag Team I did with Danielle, which was mostly about South Park and how awesome it is. This time, we speak a bit about our respective jobs, and some of the summer movies that I haven't seen.

Want to do your own Tag Team with me? Send me an e-mail at sgre6768@gmail.com or leave a comment.

-----
Steve said at 1:47 p.m. on August 23:

I'm trying to queue up a couple of these, punk. And since Bob got a sequel, I suppose it is your turn, since your Tag Team with me is the second most popular thing on the blog, in terms of hits. Hurrah for you!

Anyway, how did you like Inglorious Basterds? I told you it was supposed to be awesome! I mean, it had Brad Pitt and was directed by Quentin Tarantino, so I don't know how it possibly could have failed. The other key thing it has going for it - Killing Nazis. Nobody likes the Nazis, not even their moms, so seeing lotsa Nazi deaths would be awesome. It somehow feels like an OK thing to watch, as opposed to Transformers 2, in which random people would just get wiped out constantly.

How is life (just outside) Boston? By the way, I saw this little girl yesterday that I was a substitute teacher for this past year, and she was so cute! She was helping out at a free dental service day that I had to cover for the newspaper I work for, and she was dressed up in the same polo and outfit as her mom. It kind of reminded me of you and Isabel. Have you two visited any fun puppet shows lately? And also, do people ever think you're her mom? You two don't really look alike at all, but kids are kids, and don't always look like their parents.

-----
Danielle Membrino said at 4:03 p.m. on August 25:

I promise I'm going to write you soon. Probably like Wednesday or Thursday. I just have some friends visiting right now, so I'm kinda busy. [what i'm saying is they're more important than you]. But I do have lots to say on these two subjects. I have this big patch of peeling skin on my wrist from a sunburn. It kind of itches. Maybe I'm just shedding.

-----
Steve said at 12:51 a.m. on August 26:

That part is definitely going in the entry, so that everyone knows to avoid you and your zombie-like peeling skin sunburn. Ugh, gawd.

-----
Danielle said at 11:05 p.m. on August 26:

I am so tired. But I'm going to answer this now because tomorrow night I need to work on editing photographs I took of one of my mom's friends kid. Ugh, I have lots of boogers in my nose.

Inglorious Basterds was pretty good. It was bizarre and entertaining. I felt Tarantino held back on the gore though this time! I've seen Reservoir Dogs and Kill Bill (unfortunately) and comparatively, it's not as bloody. I mean, don't get me wrong, the scalping is pretty graphic (all the Jewish-Americans working under Brad Pitt owe him 100 Nazi scalps) and there's definitely lots of shooting and killing. But nothing made me go, “Holy shit!” or feel grossed out.

It was pretty long though - almost exactly three hours. I mean, the newest Harry Potter movie is almost 3 hours long, but a) It's Harry Potter and b) It didn't feel like 3 hours. Basterds felt long and kind of drawn out at times. There was a lot of dialog at times. It was funny and I liked it, but it still felt like it was dragging at these times. If anything, like you've said, it's definitely worth it just to see some Nazis get killed and Brad Pitt talk with that Southern accent trying to speak Italian in one scene.

Ok, so that wasn't a lot, but whatever. I'm not very good at reviewing movies. Either I like it or I don't. And if I do like it, then how much I like it is really based on... Would I buy it? I like buying movies. I don't really know why. I have more than 100 DVDs. But I don't think I will buy this. It was good and I enjoyed it, and I'm not saying I'll never watch it again, but I didn't love it enough to own it. That's just me though. Definitely worth seeing in theaters.

As for nannying and what not, it's going well. We, fortunately, do not wear matching outfits. Growing up (and even now) my mom was always very anti-matching clothes with children or husband. If she comes downstairs in the morning and my stepdad is wearing a shirt that's the same color as hers, she'll go back upstairs and change. Or if he would come downstairs after she was already dressed and ready, she'd make him go and change. She refused to match me or my sister either. Thankfully this means she never tried to make us wear matching outfits (and considering we're 7 years apart, that probably would've been weird).

Point is, I'm very anti-matching. It's vomit-inducing or hilarious. And yes, occasionally people have referred to me as "mom" and I'm like, “Uh... Definitely not. Just the nanny. I get to give her back!” (I'm so witty, I know!)

But Isabel's generally a well-behaved kid, so I'm not like ashamed to be around her. Yesterday we went to story time at the Harvard Coop bookstore, and I told her I was glad she was one of the good kids. She certainly can throw fits, but in public she's well-behaved. I cannot stand parents that won't take care or control their kids in situations like storytimes and puppet shows.

An example from yesterday: Isabel and I were sitting on the floor listening to the books and we were next to the snack table. This little boy who had to be around 2 1/2 walked over to the table and promptly knocked over a cup of water on the table. Now accidents happened, but no parent came over to take him away or to clean it up. The water started running off the table onto the carpet next to me and on/in my purse! And on top of that, he started splashing the water spilled on the table with his hands, therefore also splashing me!

Finally, I just got up and grabbed some paper towels and pushed his hands away and cleaned it all up. I kind of looked around; no one still seemed to be claiming him or noticing ME cleaning after HIM. I go to throw away the paper towels and when I turn around, the little boy is sitting in the lap of some woman was A FOOT AWAY FROM ME. She was sitting there the ENTIRE TIME and did NOTHING.

I am only a nanny. I don't have a child. I should not be a better parent than you! Don't think you can just ignore your kids now that you're in a group setting. RUDE!

Sorry, that was more of a rant than I intended. And this is getting long, so I'll stop for now! (Plus, your and Amanda's Tag Team was wayyy long so I didn't finish it. I read like half of it and then just skimmed the rest.)

-----
Steve said at 1:45 p.m. on August 31:

It figures that you were worried about replying late, since it took me even longer to reply than you did. Go figure, even! But alas, here I am, four days later, to your three days. You are still beating my friend Chloe in terms of response time, though.

Anyway. Okay, I still haven't found someone to go see Inglorious Basterds with, which is mildly upsetting to me. What gives??? At this point, I might just download a screener or cam copy, because I'm not sure if I can wait until it comes out on DVD. Pretty much everyone thinks it is awesome, and it even hit #1 at the box office for a couple weekends, which is rare for a Tarantino film. For all of the acclaim that Pulp Fiction got, I think it only made around $50 million in theaters. By the way, have you seen that? It is a little gross in parts, but so stylish and neat in others, that I think you might like it.

See, I definitely think you should wear matching outfits now, because almost nobody else matches. You're conforming to your mom's expectations by not conforming, Danielle! God, you conformist. And you're making your young daughter conform too! Sickening, really. Next thing you know, you'll give her YOUR cooties as well!

For some reason, this reminds me - Remember when we saw Transformers 2 with your sister, and we went to the Dollar Tree or whatever it's called before? And when we were in line, I was wondering who would get a pregnancy test from that store, and then you and your sister started talking about it... And the lady in front of you both reached back and bought one, right in front of you. Since I was only tangentially involved, the whole thing was really, really funny to me.

And finally, one, how DARE you criticize the length of Tag Team I did with Amanda Meyer! I thought it was the perfect length, although, I do love the sound of my own voice. And second, wow, that sounds like an annoying situation with that kid. I had to deal with a little bit of that when I would substitute for elementary school teachers, but luckily, I never had to do lunch duty, just a bit of recess. The harder part for me would be seeing kids struggle who obviously came from bad home lives. Not surprisingly, there was an overlap between inattention to detail on the kid (i.e. his shoes were untied, messy clothing, absolutely no school supplies) and his ability to do any sort of school work.

-----
Danielle said at 10:36 p.m. on September 2:

Noooooo, you should go see Basterds in theaters. Go by yourself. Or are you one of those people who won't do that? I actually don't really mind going on my own sometimes. I saw Up by myself and I was kind of glad because it definitely made me cry a bit. and crying is for weenies.

As for matching outfits - I hate it too, not just my mom. It looks SILLY. Especially when parents make siblings who are a few years apart wear the same clothes. I'm sure they REALLY appreciate that. Because they're exactly the same. Obviously.

I will definitely buy the awesomest clothes for my child, but then I'll let them dress themselves. It sometimes produces very interesting results. I let Isabel do it most of the time. I really only give my input to let her know how warm or cold it is outside so she knows what clothes to pick from or if it's something that just looks... Not good. Although a few times I've tried that and she wears it anyway. But I'm just like, fine, wear what you want. I'm not the one who has to walk around in it. (I don't actually say that to her. Just in my head.)

You asked me to answer in the e-mail how one becomes a nanny. So for me, it started with babysitting. When I was 11, I took the Red Cross babysitting course and after I completed that, I started babysitting occasionally for my next door neighbor. I babysat for her until I graduated high school and then a few times after that during my freshmen year of college.

Then I did odd jobs around Newport babysitting, took a break from it during my sophomore year of college. Then when I got back from studying abroad my junior year, I REALLY didn't want to work at Ritz Camera again so I started looking for babysiting jobs and ended up as a part-time babysitter in Maryland. And I continued doing that throughout my senior year too.

I was a little apprehensive because I found them on CraigsList and not long ago there had been a couple incidents down in Maryland where babysitters who got jobs off of CraigsList went to the house and got murdered. So yeah.

But the family was super nice. For my birthday, they bought me the entire Harry Potter bookset in hardback! So it all worked out for the best! And then last summer I worked as a camp counselor at a sleep away camp in Connecticut.

Once I moved to Boston in the fall I needed to find a job; great timing with the recession and all. No jobs in the art field were really coming out, so I started looking at babysitting jobs again. The family I nannyed for down in Maryland told me about this website, sittercity.com. It's a legitimate website and more secure because you have to register to use it and the website can perform background checks on people.

So anyway, toward Christmas time I responded to this one family's posting and they responded and we met up and it seemed to really click. They did the background check, called my references and voila, I became an official full-time nanny. Umbrella and carpet bag not included.

-----
Steve said at 10:35 pm. on September 8:

Wow, you went to a theatre by yourself AND you were crying? C'mon Membrino, get your life together! And yeah, I normally refuse to see a movie in a movie theater unless I have a friend to go with. It just feels weird going by yourself, or, I imagine it would. My friend Shaun would do it from time to time, and even he said it was weird, and he's normally a pretty mellow kid.

Kids mostly seem to wear what they want to anyway, judging from elementary school classes I subbed for. The difference is mostly in quality level - The girls from better families will have like leggings and Abercrombie clothes in angry, non-matching colors, whereas the poor kids have like ratty T-shirts and jogging pants in angry, non-matching colors. For that reason, I like matching clothes; it is a sort of conformity that suggests you are at least in your right mind a little bit. Speaking as a kid who never-ever really learned how to dress because of his family background, it's somewhat cringe-worthy when I see kids who remind me of me at that age.

I like your tale about becoming a nanny! While this is nowhere near the same level of complexity or coolness, I have been a house sitter twice for a pair of URI professors. However, all I had to do with them was to feed their fish and watch the dog, which required sleeping over at their huge house and feeding her twice a day. As you can imagine, this wasn't much of a chore, AND they paid me AND left me a bunch of food in the fridge! The whole experience was very, very sweet, and I secretly hope to get the chance to housesit again soon. After all, I don't really have a permanent residence, but I do have a college degree and a reputable job and references, so I'm still super qualified for it.

-----

Danielle said at 10:36 p.m. on September 10:

I really have no problems going to the movies by myself. The only time I felt like a creeper was when I went to go see Meet the Robinson's by myself. It was pretty full in the theater, so I had to sit next to this little kid who was there with his parents. I felt like a creeper for sitting right next to this little kid all by myself! But then they had some commercial about the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (not a preview, one of those commercial things for the people who get there before the previews even start) and he said something to me about the Ninja Turtles. So of course I had to talk to him about them! But I also made sure to talk to his mom so I didn't seem so weird. And actually had a pretty interesting conversation with them, haha!

Anyway, I an early screening of The Informant tonight. And I'm going to tell you about it, cause I don't know what else to write about!

I'm not going to give too much away though, because it was really the unexpected in this movie that made it great. Being able to react to this movie was the best part. Matt Damon was great! His character, Mark Whitacker, is very much a go-getter, happy, bizarre person, and he plays the part perfectly.

For anyone who doesn't know, the movie is about Mark Whitacker trying to help take down the company he works at for illegal, worldwide price-setting. He becomes an informant for the FBI and it goes from there.

His seemingly innocent naivety of how he sees things is partly what makes the movie so funny. He seems himself as the good guy and the rest of the head honchos in the company as the bad guys. And that's that.

The other part that really makes this movie is the overhead voice. Throughout the entire movie you get to hear Whitacker's thoughts as he's talking to people or something is going on. Most of the time it has absolutely nothing to do with what is going on. In one scene he's going into this big meeting wearing a wire for the FBI and he starts thinking about polar bears and how their fur makes them blend them, except for their noses. Because they're black. But they know to hide their noses. But how do they know their noses are black? Do they look at other polar bears and say, "Am I not invisible?" That seems like a lot of thinking for bears.

Overall, I really enjoyed the movie. You really get attached to the character Mark Whitacker because he just seems so endearingly naive and Matt Damon plays him so convincingly. I mean, I felt REALLY embarrassed for him at times. The only downside to this movie is there is a lot of bureaucracy behind it and it is sometimes rather hard to follow with all the terminology about what's going on. They don't really give explanations of some of the things going on and it can get confusing and you just have to guess at some things if you don't understand it. It was still very amusing and I would recommend going to see it.

(I hope that was a good review. I don't think I'm very good at them!)

Want to do your own Tag Team? Feel free to e-mail me at sgre6768@gmail.com.

Beeeeppppp.... Boop boop beeepppp....

Sorry for yet another delay, but because of how long it took me at the DMV today, tonight's regular entry will be posted a bit after 7 p.m. I'm guessing it'll be up more near 9 p.m., and it is a Tag Team with Danielle Membrino, who got to see the new Matt Damon movie, The Informant, at a sneak preview the other night.

Also on the schedule will be Storytime with Amanda Meyer on Saturday night, and a big NFL picks column with me, Bob and Bob's wife on Saturday morning. I was hoping to run that earlier this afternoon, but, well, screw the DMV. It will regularly run on Fridays during the season, though, followed by Bob's wife's picks on Saturday morning.

Pickin' pigskin with Bob and Steve: Week 1, Part 1

In an effort to get some more sports content up, I'll be doing a weekly football picks column with my buddy Bob during the football season. And, similar to the Sports Gal, his wife will be picking games as well. I'll fix the formatting of this entry in a little bit, but because I'm right up against my 7 p.m. update deadline, here is the take on the first game from Bob and I:

PITTSBURGH (-6) over Tennessee

Bob: Tennessee +6

I need to say one thing up front: I hate the Steelers. Well, hate might be a strong word; but at the very least, I severely dislike the Steelers. I was never wild about the team in the first place, but their fans drive me nuts. During Week 1 last year, I was in a bar that had every game on. When Brady went down, almost every fan in the place went silent. Except for, of course, the Steelers fans, who promptly went nuts. They earned some bad mojo that day, which of course they did not suffer during last season. Perhaps finding out their starting quarterback is a rapist will be their comeuppance (or is it too soon for Roethlisberger rape jokes)?

Anyway, my dislike of the Steelers leads me to believe anything negative I hear about them (against, too soon?). And one thing that has stuck with me is that their defense does not perform well against quick, shifty runners. The Titans, with Chris Johnson, have a quick, shifty runner. As a matter of fact, last year Johnson averaged 4.3 yards per carry against the Steelers defense toward the end of the season; even if you take away his longest run, he averaged a respectable 3.2 yards per carry (the same as his teammate, Lendale "Tequilla-free Diet" White). So long as the Titans have the confidence to give the ball to Johnson, leaving White to stomp on terrible towels on the sidelines (this story gave me a slight man crush on him), I feel as though they can at least cover the spread. In the end, unfortunately, I still see the Steelers winning by a field goal.

Steve: PITTSBURGH -6

See, I think you're looking at the micro-issue of the Steelers being unable to stop the Titans' running game and extrapolating it too much. I don't think this will matter as much, because the Steelers will probably get up by two scores, and the Titans will be forced to pass.

And, I think this is the Titans real Achilles' heel. The best thing that could have happened for them this preseason would have been for Vince Young to play so well that they were forced to start him. Instead, he didn't, so the Titans will have another year of Kerry Collins to look forward to. By the way, the term "game manager" is slang for "this quarterback isn't actually that good, but we don't want to give credit for the win to the defense and running back."

I think the Steelers win by at least a touchdown, and that the game is possibly a romp.

The rest of the games will be posted - hopefully - tomorrow morning or night, depending on when I get a free moment.

Recycling My Past: Kiss vs. Jewel

This is exactly what it looks like.

I originally wrote this in April 2007, in an attempt to set a record for the longest column ever printed in URI's campus newspaper, the Cigar. Although there was no real way for me to check, I'm pretty sure I did, since the piece was 3,001 words. If you want to punish yourself, you can read it here. This entry is a combination of that piece with some added detail.

I'm going to tell another story about things my friends and I did in the past. Back when I was a freshman in 2002, my friend Pat was invited to a party his cousin Jen was having at her house in Newport. She went to Salve Regina, and Pat brought me along, and our two other friends, Eric and Jeff.

For some reason, even though most of us had cars, we took our friend Chris' car. I don't know why we did this, since our friend Jeff couldn't really drive stick that well, and he was driving. We also got kind of lost on the way there. Three of us were from South County, and one was from Vermont, so really, you can't fault us for not knowing Newport, it being a whole 30 minutes away from where we grew up.

I'm regrouping though: This was the first "college party" that most of us had been to, so we played it cool for the most part. You know, we had a few beers, played some Taboo, didn't get too Wild and Crazy Kids. (Yeah, that's right, I just used that TV show name as an adjective, want to fight about it?)

As the party started to break up, Pat and Eric got into an argument with Jen's boyfriend, Ian, with Jen's friends Betsy, Kate and Erica egging them on. The argument was about who was better, Kiss or Jewel.

Reflecting back upon the argument, it is now obvious to me that it is something we have all pondered in our short time on this Earth. Keep in mind, this was before Jewel went bat-S crazy and tried to become a pop diva, and also before Gene Simmons started hosting a reality TV show that revealed he was a kind-of normal dad.

As Pat and Eric came up with reasons why Jewel was better, Ian came up with what he considered the ultimate counter to their arguments. "You can be buried in a Kiss coffin, does Jewel have coffins?"

Side note: Kiss no longer sells coffins, unfortunately. The band sold the Kiss Kasket from 2001 to 2006 for low, low price of $4,700. On the plus side, the band did autograph it before shipping out a unit.

Once Ian brought up the coffin issue, the argument slowly petered out, although it is still hotly debated to this day. For what it's worth, while I was intentionally on the side of Jewel, I have become a bigger Kiss fan as time goes on. Jewel really only had that one stellar album, which had come out around the time of this argument, whereas Kiss has an entire catalog of different music that is still worth listening to. Their greatest hits and singles collection CDs has a whole bunch of music you don't even realize is theirs.

After that, we left the party, and an unnamed member of our crew demanded that we stop at Newport Jai Alai (back when it still had jai alai) to pee in some shrubs. We concluded the night with some grub from IHOP, which was utterly fantastic at 2 a.m.

Making the pilgrimage to Sonic

[Left] The spoils of my trip.

Labor Day was especially, uh, special to me this year, because I finally completed one of my life's goals. No, I didn't make it with a lady, and how DARE you for thinking that. I got to visit my first Sonic, since one opened up in Peabody, Massachusetts about two weeks ago.

Firstly, the reports of the traffic jams around the restaurant are no exaggeration. My friend Amanda went with me - you might know her from a few past entries - and we sat in traffic from 4:15 p.m. until about 5:45 p.m., when we finally made it to the drivethru order box. The traffic literally stretched about a third of a mile back down Route 1 North, and that isn't counting the line for the pull-up service, which stretched down an adjacent street and behind a nearby hotel.

Anyway, before I get the comment that the food isn't that great - Yes, I knew that going in. But after getting besieged by clever, quirky advertising for Sonic for years, I really felt the need to go now that one was (relatively) close to me. Some of the food also seemed interesting enough to intrigue me, as did the wide drink selection.

So on the advice of my friend and blog commenter Kristi Coleman, I did try the cherry limeade, even though I don't normally do fancy drinks. This was the highlight of the visit, even though it was just a sharp cherry cola, with a lime, and plenty of crushed ice. It was strangely delicious - Maybe they added another ingredient that I didn't realize it?

The rest of my meal was somewhat ho-hum, though. I got Sonic's version of a big double cheeseburger, except it was $4 for something about the size of a McDonald's double cheese, except with pickles, lettuce and tomato on it as well. (It was about the size of two Wendy's Jr. Cheeseburgers.) Amanda and I both got tater tots, but they barely filled our cartons. I also got a steak, egg and cheese burrito - I decided to go big, because how often was I going to be visiting Peabody? - which was passably delicious.

However, as some old white guy probably once said, the journey matters more than the goal sometimes. Yes, the actual food was only average, but I was finally able to visit a medium-quality fast food restaurant that had been blitzing me with effective advertising since I was 17. What could be better than that?

iTunes Running Diary – Monday, September 7 - The Best of Steve's Worst

This week's artists.

In case the theme of this week's diary isn't obvious, I'll just come out and say it: Songs I listen to even though they are not critically acclaimed in the slightest. In fact, most of them downright suck, and if you want to judge me, well, I can't really blame you. Admitting you have a problem with pornography is more acceptable than being a Limp Bizkit fan at this point. (And yes, I do enjoy them, but they didn't come up in the playlist Genius spit out.) Anyway, let's get this over with...

- "Mudshovel" by Staind. Prepare to see a lot of nu-metal / grunge / heavy rock / loud music on this list. I think just about every guy gets the impulse to listen to grinding guitars and hard rock at some point. Others who are luckier than me will find their heavy metal muse in something critically-liked, such as Metallica or Pantera, or at least in cheesy fun, like Kiss or Poison.

However, because I grew up in the late 1990s and early 2000s, it means certain tracks are burned into my psyche, like "Mudshovel." First, from a literary standpoint, I feel like that should be two words. Second, this is the only Staind song I can remotely tolerate.

If I am following my stated goals with this entry though, it definitely fits the criteria. The guitar breakdown leading up to and into the chorus is excellent. And, although the song is loud and nu-metal, there is some harmony and melody, as the lyrics are synced up to the pulsating guitar at points.

- "Bullet With A Name" by Nonpoint. There are several bad things about this band. For starters, they're from Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Since they're not old or supermodels, that means there is a strong chance a member of the band is on meth.

Second, the chance of this is increased because this song is on the soundtrack to, not just a video game, but a wrestling video game, Smackdown vs. Raw 2007. It's kind of like if I told you my friend had a drug problem, AND he was moving to Harlem or Compton.

Final bad sign: Wikipedia keeps track of the chart positions for pretty much any single released in the past two decades. Even though "Bullet With A Name" was featured in a popular video game, it still only hit #22 on the U.S. Mainstream Rock charts. Even worse is that it's still there most popular song. They've managed to have 10 singles that placed between #22 and #40 on the charts, but no higher. That's the sort of middling mediocrity that is equivalent to Troy O'Leary or Tim Thomas or Ron Coomer or Xavier Nady.

- "They Say" by Scars on Broadway. Similar to the first two, this is a heavier song that features a good melody despite its heavy sound. It was pretty popular last summer, I believe, but seeing as I don't listen to a ton of new music, there is a good chance it actually came out five years ago.

The weird, synth guitar that comes in especially hard toward the end of the song really helps "They Say" out in my estimation. Also, its short length (that's what she said) helps it from becoming super repetitive and effed out. By the time it's over, I've moved on to another couple of songs, and I wouldn't mind hearing it again because the chorus isn't really dragged out.

- "Peace of Mind" by Boston. I believe there is a rule out there that bands based on cities suck, and Boston does not dispel the trend to me. (Confession: I don't mind Chicago.)

They have, to me, one unquestionably awesome song, which is "More Than A Feeling." In every other aspect, they are beaten by arena rock brethren Journey. "Peace of Mind" is a decent little 1980s rock song, but it's not nearly as good at rocking as "Anyway You Want It." The best of Boston can't touch Journey's more somber offerings, like "Open Arms", or the cheese value of "Wheel In The Sky" or "Don't Stop Believing."

- "Lick It Up" by Kiss. I believe this is Chuck Klosterman's favorite song, but it kind of sucks. There, I said it. Then again, it's not like Kiss shows a lot of musical diversity, and I do always rag on other bands for straying too far out of their comfort zone.

To make another baseball comparison, "Lick It Up" is a .275 rock song. Is it an incredible, life-changing experience? Not really. Is it so bad that you change it every time it comes on? Not really. It fits the bill if you're trying to round out a Top Five for your favorite Kiss songs, or if it was one of the first hard rock songs you ever heard, which I believe is why it ranks high on Klosterman's list. Hey, I can be the same way - You shant talk me out of my love of Green Day, Everclear, Billy Joel, Counting Crows, Soundgarden and Sublime, despite their radically different sounds.

- "Only Women Bleed" by Alice Cooper. I'm apparently closing this entry out with some of the worst / most dubious songs by rock legends. While Alice Cooper has some great songs, this is not one of them. Adam Carolla cited it as one of the worst songs to play at a wedding, and I happen to agree with him.

To be honest, I giggle like a 12-year-old at the chorus, so I don't even know that much about the content of the song. The chorus is so blatant and overbearing that the rest of the song's lyrics kind of get swept under the rug, similar to how "Rape Me" by Nirvana isn't endorsing rape in the slightest. Wikipedia says it is a song about a wife in a relationship with an abusive husband, and on second listen, it is a song with a message, and I'm probably going to Hell.