Again with the anecdotes!

I saw this picture making the rounds on Facebook today, and I have to say that I'm not impressed.  Not that I'm going to tell anyone that Occupy Wallstreet is 100% right and you should have to believe in it in order to be American- that'd be UnAmer'cun.  And I certainly don't want to come across as being disrespectful to a soldier- I can only imagine how much hard work and sacrifice that dude had to make to even be a soldier, let alone the job related hazards he has to put up with.

But this picture is just a snapshot of everything that's wrong with the United States of America today.  Let me 'splain.

To me, this picture symbolizes how divided we are as a society.  Blame it on politics, religion, talk radio, or whatever, but it's painfully apparent that we are no longer 'one nation', under God or otherwise.  It's no wonder that with such an atmosphere of mistrust and division, we can't even decide on something simple like an economic protest.

Playing a significant role is the underlying values that our country was founded on.  Values are not just good deals at Wal-Mart- they define the very rules and laws (written and unspoken) our society functions by.  In America, two of the most important values are sticking our noses in other peoples business helping those who are less fortunate and working hard.  Sometimes they work together to make us better people and sometimes they are in conflict.  Unfortunately, the Occupy Wall Street movement has brought their clash to the forefront- and we are all witnesses of one great-big-giant value-cat fight. 

Right now, it looks like Hard Work has Helping the Less Fortunate in a very painful noogie-deathlock.

Never mind that there is room for both philosophies- Occupy Wall Street (OWS) has made the two seem as different as Democrat and Republican.  Which, oddly enough, seems to be the dividing line for this whole mess.  I realize that's a generalization- but think about the last time you heard one of your conservative friends talking about what a good thing OWS is- or the last time a liberal chum decried the lazy poor looking to get an unearned distribution of hard-earned tax payer dollar bills.  It doesn't happen- because we're just stupid sheep, droning along to whatever Pied-Piper tune our news source of choice tells us to drone to.

When I see the picture above (no, not the wrestling chicks- keep going up), it reminds me that the ties that bind are not nearly as strong as the ties that divide.  That picture says to me that anyone who is complaining is a lazy, good-for-nothing because there are jobs all around us- even if all you have to do is become a soldier.  It says that the 99% movement is just made up of lazy, freeloading, couch-surfing, feeding-hand-biters.  Well maybe not all of the 99%....but at least, 98% ...of the, um...99%...or is it 99% of the ...99%???  Gah I'm so confused!

Of course, ideological stances aside (because there are legitimate reasons for not wanting to join the military), it's asinine to say that 'Well, because my job is that I'm a soldier that means that no one else has a right to complain/accept government handouts because they should just all be soldiers if they can't find a job'.  That's not an option for everybody.  Some people literally cannot enlist in the Armed Forces for various reasons- and some of them aren't even moral failings! 

This picture is just another reminder that many Americans still operate under the auspices of the 'Pull yourself up by your bootstraps' philosophy that blatantly ignores a couple centuries of every 'ism' you can imagine.  Problem- not everyone has bootstraps.  And even those of us with bootstraps might not be able to pull ourselves up by our bootstraps.  But still, many operate under the idea that 'if I can do it, so can everybody else'.  That attitude is to empathy like Kim Kardashian is to 'Death do us part'.

The fact is that just because the Declaration of Independence says that all men are created equal doesn't mean that it is so.  And not all poor people are lazy bums sitting around trying to milk the system.  There are plenty of hard working people making sacrifices that do receive some form of government assistance (terrible, I know) because of the economic reality we live in.  And they still don't have enough to make ends meet.

That's why this picture pisses me off.  It's just another example of someone with a subjective opinion and a successful anecdote getting on the Internet and turning what could be a thoughtful discussion about how to better improve the lives of our poor people into a big-hornets-nest-poking-stick monologue about the evils of socialism.  Too bad that you don't have to walk a mile in someone elses shoes before you can criticize them for shopping at Goodwill.

PICS- Soldier- Find it on Facebook
Catfight- http://dallaspenn.com/pics/albums/backup3/catfight.jpg

The Least Likely to Succeed: The actual

A couple of weeks ago (closer to a month, but still countable in weeks), I promised to deliver you a rendering of that one time when someone actually set my words to type and sent them around the globe.  Today, I come to honor that promise.  The long awaited world-wide Internet presentation of: The Least Likely to Succeed!

Despite the constant cringing and incessant temptations to change things (minimally at times, often drastically), I have decided to present the essay in its pure, undistilled form.  And....here it is.

Non can foretell what will come to pass, if we take this road or that.  But it seems to me not clear which road that we must take.  The westward road seems easiest.  Therefore it must be shunned....Now at this last we must take a hard road, a road unforseen.  There lies our hope, if hope it be.  To walk into peril- to Mordor.  We must send the ring to the fire- Elrond

In the midst of the excitement of seeing The Lord of the Rings masterfully translated onto the big screen (although in truth I was more versed in The Hobbit as a child), it is important to remember that Tolkien's work is not just entertainment but an extension of who he was.  Try as we might, we cannot fully separate entertainment from reality because entertainment is really just an outlet of creative expression of who we are.  Whether it is music, or acting, or writing, as an artist it is impossible to completely sunder who we are from what we want to portray. 

The Lord of the Rings is no exception.  I don't claim to know what J.R.R. Tolkien intended in his writing, nor do I know what he was thinking.  What I do know is that Tolkien was a Christian man who could not separate his Christianity from his writings.  The Lord of the Rings is an unbelievably well designed tale, with depth that very few stories have ever attempted and stirring of the imagination that few stories ever achieve.  Reading The Lord of the Rings is like taking a trip to another world, a world with it's own extensive history and stories of it's own.  When reading, the reader feels not only that Middle-earth actually exists, but that they are actually there.

However, the Lord of the Rings text contains more than a story; it is filled with Christian parallels.  Indeed, reading the Trilogy has helped me in my Christian walk, in that I've been able to see some things in a different light.  Things such as understanding God as the King, creation (from The Silmarillion), and the corruption of sin.  These are things I knew about, but by applying Christian principles to Tolkien's work, I have gained an even greater understanding and appreciation for them.

The One Ring serves to show us the power and enticement of sin.  Sauron is very much a form of Satan, pure evil and hatred personified, as opposed to the typical watered down Dr. Evil type of villain ("I'm holding the world ransom for one million dollars!").  Sauron, like Satan, does not merely desire to rule the world; he desires to completely annihilate all that is good.

But ultimately, every element of the story serves to compliment one central theme: final victory over evil.  In The Lord of the Rings, this theme is embodied in Frodo's quest to destroy the One Ring.  In Christianity, it is the death and resurrection of Christ to defeat Sin and Satan. 

There are three Christ-types in the story (according to my count; there may be more): Aragorn, the victorious King, the healer, the social outcast whose return marks the end of the age and ushers in a period of peace; Gandalf, the wise wizard, the Istari sent by the Ainur to guide the protect men, who gave his live to save his companions from the evil demon Balrog; and Frodo.

Aragorn is the image of Christ's return.  We first meet up with Aragorn in the Bree, under the guise of a Ranger named Strider.  Strider is suspicious at best and has the appearance of someone who is up to no good.  As the saga unfolds, however, more of Aragorn's kingly nature shines through, climaxing at his daring adventure through the Paths of the Dead.  Much of Aragorn's life is fulfillment of prophecy.  In addition to his jaunt through the Paths of the Dead, Aragorn turns out to have 'healing hands', which only the King returning is said to have.  His reign on the throne ushers in the beginning of the fourth age, a peaceful age.

Gandalf could be said to be the one who illustrates Christ's death.  Just as Jesus was sent to help people find God (both through His life and His death), Gandalf was sent by the Ainur (who were sent by Ilu'vatar to be gods of Middle Earth) to help all beings of a good heart.  More than a man, but less than the Ainur, Gandalf has some power allotted to him, but only within the confines of Middle-Earth.  When the fellowship is trapped in the Mines of Moria by a Balrog, Gandalf lays his life aside to battle it, and falls "into shadow".  Gandalf defeats the demon and emerges from the confrontation, changed, more powerful and wise.  Gandalf the Grey has become Gandalf the White, much like the Lamb who was slain is now the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

There are two follies to avoid.  To use this [Ring] is perilous.  At this hour, to send it into the hands of a witless halfling into the land of the enemy himself, as you have done...that's madness- Denethor

Frodo is the most unlikely Christ-type of all.  Aragorn had the credentials of being a descendant of the Dunedain, the greatest of all the race of men.  Gandalf was a wizard, given great power with which to battle against the forces of Sauron.  But Frodo?  He was a hobbit, which was mockingly called halfling by other people.  Most of the tales of of lore in Middle-earth don't even allow for the existence of the little people, especially the tales involving heroic deeds and valor.

As the story begins, Frodo seems to be caught in the wrong place at the wrong time.  His adopted father (and cousin also) Bilbo, who found the Ring while on an adventure with dwarves, had reached the ripe old age of eleventy-one, or one hundred and eleven years old if you prefer.  Reaching a point in life where he was starting to "feel like butter spread across too much bread," Bilbo set out to Rivendell and left the Ring in the keeping of Frodo.  This occurrence just happened to coincide with the reemergence of Sauron in Mordor.  Sauron had discovered that the One Ring was in circulation and began to draw evil to Mordor in anticipation of his retainment of the Ring and subsequent destruction of Middle-earth.

One of my favorite scenes from the movie occurs shortly after Frodo discovers the nature of the Ring.  Gandalf is leaving to counsel with Saruman while Frodo and Sam are setting out to Bree.  Gandalf tells Frodo that the Ring "wants to be found" by the Dark Lord.  It became clear at that moment that Frodo wanted no part of this quest.

Thus we return once more to the destroying of the Ring, and yet we come no nearer.  What strength have we for the finding of the Fire in which it was made?  This is the path of despair.  Of folly, I would say...-Erestor
I said victory could not be achieved by arms.  I still hope for victory, but not by arms- Gandalf

After a close call with the Ringwraiths (former kings of men who succumbed to the power of the Ring to become Sauron's slaves), Frodo arrived at Rivendell, the house of Elrond.  There several leaders met, representing the Dwarves, Elves, and Men, to figure out exactly what course of action to take in regards to the Ring.  At the council, every conceivable plan seemed doomed to failure against the powers of darkness.  A battle of arms would be futile, for Sauron's forces far outnumbered those of Gondor and its allies.

The Ring could not be hidden, as Rivendell had insufficient power to resist Mordor, and the other strongholds were even less resistant.  Even throwing the Ring into the Sea, which would at least buy valuable time, would only delay the inevitable.  The Ring could only be destroyed in the fires of Orodruin, Mount Doom.  Even that course of action seemed folly, because Mount Doom was located in the very heart of Mordor, the stronghold of Sauron.  In truth, no course of action seemed any better than the other because all seemed destined to fail, to the complete ruin of Middle-earth.  With that in mind, the wise were forced to make a decision to choose the best path in the interests of all the free peoples.  They chose to destroy the Ring in Mordor.

Why do you speak ever of hiding and destroying?  Why should we not think that the great Ring has come into our hands to serve us in the very hour of need- Boromir

What was he thinking?  The council had to be filled with doubts and 'what-ifs' when the decision was made.  Even those who had the most faith in the mission couldn't feel too secure in the thought of taking Sauron's Ring, which wanted to join with him, into his acropolis unprotected.  It would have been impossible to take a sizable force into Mordor undetected.  Neither Gandalf nor Elrond, the wisest and most powerful of the council, could bear the Ring for fear of the potential danger they would wield.  After listening to Boromir, nobody was ready to completely trust Gondor with it.  After a period of thoughtful consideration, Frodo felt the call to bear the Ring into Mordor.

Despair or folly?  It is not despair, for despair is only for those who see the end beyond all doubt.  We do not.  It is wisdom to recognize necessity, when all other courses have not been weight, though as folly it may appear to those who cling to false hope.  Well, let folly be our cloak, a veil before the eyes of the enemy!  For he is very wise, and weights all things to a nicety in the scales of his malice.  But the only measure he knows is desire, desire for power, and so he judges all hearts.  Into his thought will not enter that any will refuse it, that having the Ring we may seek to destroy it.  If we seek this, we shall put him out of reckoning- Gandalf

To make the long trilogy of books short, the Ring is destroyed in the end, in spite of what seemed to be overwhelming odds.  The plan which seemed to defy all wisdom, in the end, provided a victory that was not only final but satisfying in the sense that the victory was accomplished beyond all reasoning, via means that Sauron didn't even account for.

Jesus also went on a Ring-quest.  In fact, Frodo's quest is remarkably similar to Christ's life.

The fact that Jesus chose to lay aside His Godhood to become a man like us is against logic, kind of like trusting the fate of Middle-earth in the hands of a halfling.  Jesus, as Creator of the world, probably could have chosen from any of a million different ways to reconcile men to Himself, and could have saved Himself a lot of pain and sorrow.  Instead, He chose to show us how much He loved us.  With that in mind, there was only one course of action to take, no matter how foolish it seems to us.  The God of love had to bring about reconciliation through the greatest act of love He could have shown: to lay down His life.

In our wisdom, God's decision to take the form of man and live among us is hard to comprehend.  But it's what Jesus chose to do with His life that really confounds most people (Isaiah 55:8- For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord).

Instead of flaunting His Godhood and setting up the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth, Jesus became the servant extraordinaire.  He showed remarkable self-sacrifice, frequently laying down His rights and desires for the good of others.  Jesus even humbled Himself to the point of washing His disciples feet!

Jesus also said things that clashed with traditional thinking.  Jesus said that the poor in spirit were blessed, as were those who were persecuted.  He said that in order to gain life it had to be lost.  In the mind of Christ, it was better to lose everything to gain eternal life than to gain the whole world and lose our soul.  In the Kingdom of God, the last shall be first.  These are some examples of radical words from Jesus, who spent His life on Earth going against everything that man said was wisdom and truth.

1 Corinthians 3:19- For the wisdom of the world is foolishness in God's sight.  As it is written: 'He catches the wise in their craftiness' and again, 'The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile'.

 However, none of the things He did while He lived on Earth flew in the face of human reason the way His death did.  Indeed, His very mission in life was to die.  His disciples were confused because they thought Jesus wasn't advancing His "political agenda" enough.  The people were confused because they saw the Man who saved others and chose not to save Himself.  The Pharisees were confused because the man who openly challenged their self-righteous, dead religion go quietly to death without so much as a word of defense.  Even to the end, Jesus chose to go against the norm, choosing humility, self-sacrifice, and obedience over power, self-preservation, and rebellion.

And that is why the quest to destroy the Ring is the central theme, not only in The Lord of the Rings, but in our lives.  It is as if the King, the Istari, became the halfling and chose to bear each of our rings into Mordor, so that we don't have to.  The life of Christ may not make sense to us.  But one thing is for sure: with the victory He as purchased, it doesn't have to.

1 Corinthians 1: 18-23, 25- For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.  For it is written: 'I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate'.  Where is the wise man?  Where is the scholar?  Where is the philosopher of this age?  Has God not made foolish the wisdom of the world?  For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased that through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.  For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.



Well, there you have it.  If you made it all the way through until the end, congratulations.  You have must have Wolverine-like healing and regeneration skills- at least in the eye and brain area.  Even though I was able to resist the urge to basically revamp it completely, that doesn't mean that I'm not going to be discussing my thoughts on it.  But that will come another day.  Hopefully another day next week.

Herman's Bane

If you've been paying attention to my blog the past couple months, you're no stranger to my feelings about GOP Presidential candidate Herman Cain.  (Inaudible whispering).  Wait, what's that?  I haven't said anything at all about Cain?  Hmmm....(goes back and extensively checks).  Oh.  I guess I haven't.  There was just this one time I posted a link to a USA today article on Facebook and made some passing comment about not liking Cain.  Well then- it's too late turn back now.

Herman Cain has captured my attention, and not in the good way.  Even though I haven't been paying too much attention to what's going on in the GOP (there's no point in really- as a social worker I am bound by the Code of Ethics to vote Democrat), I've gleaned all sorts of information about Herman Cain from CNN articles, random sound bites,and commentary provided by Stephen Colbert.


Yes this is the sort of thing I've railed against in the past. Too bad for you I already knew I was a hypocrite, Mr. Jump-to-Conclusions Mat!

Incomplete research/incorrect facts+opinion-stated-as-fact=hypocrite.  Well played, Mr. Jump-to-Conclusions Mat

Still you have to admit that the soundbites haven't been friendly to Mr. Cain. He comes across as full of himself, with an unhealthy childish arrogance laced with an overbearing disdain for convention in a non-charming-but-trying-to-be-charming sort of way.

 
From what I know of Cain (and again I'm no Herman Cain wikipedia entry), he has already written a book about his journey to the White House, sold out his race, promised an electric border fence, claimed he was joking about the electric border fence, then said he was kidding about joking about the electric border fence,and insulted an entire nation of Uzbeks.  That was all in like two months.

Note: I'm sorry about all of the links that took you away from my blog.  I realize that you probably came here to read my blog and not read stuff that other people wrote.  But since I'm only marginally interested in blatant plagiarizing, I figured it'd be best if I let you know that not all of my great ideas are, in fact, original.

But earlier this week, Cain's past rose up from the grave like a waylaid kitty cat from hell and bit him square on his I-am-America ass. 

For the uninundated, some skeletons came out of Herman Cain's 1990s closet singing a couple of tunes about sexual harassment.  With a backstory practically choking on a mix of political intrigue and Clue, this turn of events could very well turn the GOP tide.  I'm sure Cain knows this- he has already begun engaging in his verbal denial gymnastics.  Therefore I won't bother to keep feeding him rope with which to hang himself.  No, I want to talk about something a little different:

I want to talk about me.  Well, and you.  You too.

See after reading about Cain's apparent indiscretions, I went through my checklist of predetermined cognitive biases.  I compared it to my theory of Herman Cain that I had already postulated in my mind, found that it reinforced my notions, and filed it away as another case of Herman's Bane.  And by 'filed it away', I mean 'attached a millstone to the neck of Herman Cain's chances for election and dropped it into Lake Superior'.

But then I started thinking about the whole idea of an event from 15+ years ago resurfacing in the present day.  I started to think about mistakes committed in youth (or youngerness in Cain's case), and how much a person changes over the course of their lives.  Biologically, Herman Cain isn't even made up of the same cells he was in the mid 90s.  Who is to say those allegations (even if they are true) are necessarily relevant to Cain right now?  Maybe he did act poorly towards women in those circumstances but then changed when he realized the error of his ways (note: I'm intentionally not going to talk about any financial hardships due to the 'error of his ways'.  Oh crap.  I just did.).

Then I thought about 'what if I was a candidate- what sort of dirt would they unearth about me?'.  I decided that I didn't really like that line of thinking.  I've spent the better part of a lifetime meticulously crafting my wholesome image, and some of the stuff I've done/thought/said could erase all of that hard work in the amount of time it takes you to say "Youshouldknowjasonparks.blogspot.com".  Screw that, I say.


I reckon most of us like to think and hope that the dark deeds of evil will be brought to the light in this lifetime- as long as its the other guy.  Thankfully, most of us don't go into careers where people are paid to delve into the sordid details of our pasts (no matter how 'past' they really are).  Unfortunately, society makes it easy for us to be failure voyeurs, getting our self righteousness jollies by others shortcomings while we plant our own holy flags in the backs of those who lives the lives we wish we lived.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I really don't care at this point whether Herman Cain did or did not sexually harass anyone in the Pizza biz.  Because I'm not convinced it has anything to do with how well he would run our government.
 
I'm not trying to say that sexual harassment is a minor issue, and I'm not trying to minimize Herman Cain's 2 (known) transgressions in this area.  After all, I'm a white Anglo-Saxon Protestant male.  I know all about discrimination (just from the other side).
 
The past counts, yes- but shouldn't our political discourse stick more to policy issues?  It seems that nowadays, the only way to get people interested in politics is to sensationalize the candidates until our elected government officials are really just our latest reality TV contestants.  I think back to 2008, and the whole 'Barack Obama is a secret Muslim/wasn't born in the USA/has ties to anti-patriot preacher'- and how none of those things really contributed anything to understanding Barack Obama's views on healthcare, the economy, or foreign policy.  Which is, you know, what politics is kind of about.
 
As Americans, I think we owe it to ourselves, our neighbors, and the nation at large to seriously look into the political stances of our candidates and not their steamy off-camera failings.  We're not voting someone off the island or trying to pick the next American Idol- we're trying to find the next Commander-in-Chief.  And chances are that person will be a human being who has done some (relatively) horrible things- just like me.  And you, I'd imagine.  But then again, if we aren't willing to be governed by a morally-flawed human being with skeleton-laced closets- then maybe we should just give this whole 'anarchy' thing a go, eh? 
 
PIC- http://www.thinkgeek.com/images/products/additional/large/office_space_kit_mat.jpg

Freecell football. Yeah, it's pretty much what you think it is.

Here at youshouldknowjasonparks.blogspot.com*, we strive to bring you a smorgasbord of interesting content to make you think, (hopefully) laugh, and shake your head in amazement/disgust.  My expressed goal is to bring it with each and every post.  Sometimes that means I write about my thoughts about God.  Sometimes that means I keep you up to date on my Fantasy Football team.  Sometimes that means I deliver some ideas about humanity in the world we live in.  But today, for the first time ever, I'm going to talk to you about my absolute favoritest card game that I play on the computer- Free Cell.

If you haven't played Free Cell then please stop reading this blog right now, go over to the program menu, click on the game menu, highlight Free Cell, and get ready to have your mind blown.  Free Cell is like solitaire if solitaire was King Leonidas played by Patrick Dempsey if Patrick Dempsey was Patrick Swayze.  Yeah, it's like that.

The thing I love most about it is that it requires a good amount of strategy and planning.  In solitaire, you're at the complete mercy of the deck.  All you know is the cards on the top- most of the deck is a complete mystery.  And the stock too is completely blind- so to me it's much more of a game of chance than it is strategy (although there are elements of both, to be sure).  So when I win a game of solitaire I feel good- but I also feel like I was more like a mouse in a box, led by a series of pre-designed pellet droppings to an already determined outcome.

With Free Cell, it's all on me.  Everything is laid out there.  Win or lose, it's most likely due to some sort of human error I made instead of some random placement of cards.  In fact (and when I say 'fact', you should know I'm taking my facts from Wikipedia), there is only one unwinnable Free Cell game out of 32,000 (from the original Windows), while the estimated number of unwinnable games in solitaire is between 8.5-18%.  Basically if I lose in solitaire then it's 20% likely that I had no chance before the game even started.  Meanwhile a Free Cell game will pretty much always rise and fall based on my abilities (which I should tell you are substantial).

And I like that.  I like the feeling of being in complete control of my game destiny.  That means that when I win, I win because I was smarter than a stack of computer generated playing cards.  I was able to use my mental faculties and precognition to triumph over my inanimate enemy.  If I lose, it's because I made a wrong choice or got ahead of myself- no mystical force leading me astray.  No computer defense to accuse of cheating.  The only person to throw the controller at is myself.

But hey, the point of this blog post wasn't really to trumpet the superiority of Free Cell over solitaire (ATTENTION- FREE CELL IS SUPERIOR TO SOLITAIRE).  My point is to let you know that I am challenging myself to my own Free Cell football league.  Yes, my efforts to incorporate football into every facet of my life knows no bounds.

Let me explain what I'm doing.  I'm going through a series of 16 game 'seasons', if you will.  At the end of each 'season', I advance to the playoffs depending on how many victories I achieve.  9-11 wins gets me in the Wildcard round, and 12-16 gives me a first round bye.  If I make it to the playoffs, then I follow the NFL playoff format until I win the 'Super Bowl' or lose (whichever comes first).  My first 'season' I went 12-4  but lost in the equivalent of the conference championship game (note: the only way that I could make this possibly cooler is if I somehow managed to clone myself into any multiple of four and set up equal divisions that I could compare records against and actually set up a literal playoff tree against myself.  Science, get on this please).  I was devastated to be sure- so I went out and made some impressive moves in free agency and drafted shrewdly to fill some needs.  I'll let you figure out what that means.

Last 'season', which I finished tonight, I went 11-5.  Not my most impressive finish, but considering I started 1-4, it was quite a feat- especially since I won the Super Bowl!  That's right, I managed to overcome a 1-4 start to finish with a playoff berth and like the Green Bay Packers of last year, I won four straight games to reach the pinnacle of my trade.  Move over, Freddie Mercury- I am the champion, my friend.

Rest assured faithful reader, I'm not going to be bringing you frequent updates of my Free Cell successes and failings.  This will probably be the only time you have to read about these shenanigans.  But I did think that the world needed to know that I take my Free Cell as seriously as I do my Fantasy Football.  Which is to say that I take it way too seriously.

*I suppose that hyperlinking to a website that you're already at is a little superfluous.  It's like giving you a map to a door, and the door is in the middle of the room that you're already in.  But that's okay because it's just nice to know that there's no place like home.

Friendship like flower petals fall

Forget everything I've ever said might be the toughest thing about parenting.  There's a new sheriff in town- and it is Kindergarten friendships.

As I write this, I'm struck by several conflicting emotions, all working together to paint this tapestry that we call parenthood.  I feel alone- like all of my struggles are occurring uniquely in my own private corner of the world.  I feel relief (mixed with horror) that my struggles are probably universal.  I feel hope that regardless of the struggles, there will come a day when I look back on these years and wonder- how the hell did we survive?  And I feel worry that my biggest flaws will swallow up my children's biggest strengths, turning them into little imperfect clones who can laugh and giggle with the best of them but struggle to have authentic human relationships.

Let me explain.

A few months ago, Delaney met her first Kindergarten friend, a little girl named (for the purposes of confidentiality) Anna.  I remember the time we bumped into her family at Wal-Mart, shortly after school had started.  It was quite wonderful- standing there chit-chatting with her mother (who is very nice and fortunately seems normal), watching our daughters smile shyly and giggle nervously.  How precious to see those genesis moments of friendship- two precious little girls, not really knowing what to do or what to say, just knowing that there was something inside that lit up a little bit when the other was around.

It's not that Delaney was friendless before (please- she has tons of friends.  Just like her dad)- but Anna is the first girl that Delaney has befriended outside of our circle of influence.  We've known all of her other friends, either through relatives or living arrangements.  Anna is the first fruits of us letting our daughter swim out into the ocean on her own.  She is the symbol of our faith in society.

Over the first couple of months, it was a darling little friendship to see in action.  When we dropped Delaney off at school, she'd often stand next to Anna and her family while we waited for the doors to open.  Delaney doesn't talk about school often (which could probably be another blog post altogether), but she does like to talk about Anna and the fun they have out at the tires at recess.  So why the blog post?

Unfortunately, not all is okay at the O.K. Corral. I can't say definitively what the deal is and I'm no Batman- but something is up.  When I dropped Delaney off at school on Friday, Anna was standing there with another girl, smiling and holding her hand.  Hey.  Hey you- what do you think you're doing?  Delaney stood over by them, but she might as well have been the chair the little brown haired chubby kid was sitting on.

Then, while the kids were putting the red folders into the box and their coats in their cubbies Anna and mystery girl (after sharing a joyful embrace) ran over to do puzzle together.  I gave Delaney a hug and kiss goodbye and watched her go over and sit behind the girls as they worked on a puzzle.  I had to leave before seeing how things progressed from there (I don't really relish the idea of getting dragged out of the school with a police escort), but in that moment I forgot all about school as a learning institution and saw it instead as a social one.  Did I just witness the beginning of the end of her first friendship?

Long term, I am not worried.  I know that many people come and go, and that people change and grow and it's not a guarantee that your best friend in Kindergarten will be your best friend later in life (or even in elementary school).  I've managed to keep a solid friendship with my Kindergarten BFF (I even stood up in his wedding last year), but middle school claimed an elementary friendship of my youngest sister.  And we're both fine....I think.  

Besides, it's not like the friendship is necessarily over (and believe me, that's all that was on my mind Friday and was the first thing I asked her when she got home).  I'm very aware of my propensity to overreact.  It's just that I know how innocent Delaney is- and how sensitive.  I'm worried that she'll misread something and push Anna away.  I wonder about Anna just wanting other friends but not knowing how to communicate it and pushing Delaney away. 

There's a whole lot of control struggle going on here, believe me.  It's so tough just letting her go to school and put herself and her feelings out there and knowing what will (someday, somehow) eventually happen.  It's the hope that I've prepared her enough and the worry that I haven't.

The trials of these early years feel so much like a referendum on my parenting.  Like every bad day and every tear is the product of my deficiency, or something.  Insecure much?  Well yes, to be frankly honest.   

It doesn't help that I feel like we're outsiders.  Because of our work schedules and school schedules and our own personalities, we're just not huge social butterflies.  It's tough to see so many of the other parents who all seem to know each other, with some sort of history.  And they all seem like they're in such stable places in their lives.  Meanwhile we're hopping around from transition to transition.  Factor in that I'm really not a person who does well with entering into meaningful relationships, and we could be talking about the Hindenberg of parenting, folks.   

The toughest part of parenting is the worry that my failings will become my daughters failings, and that all of her wonder, her joy, her imagination, her sense of humor will get lost in translation.  My biggest fear is that her immeasurable gifts and talents will be dimmed by the tarnish of my mistakes.  I worry that she will be like me, someone friendly- but not necessarily a good friend.  

I know tough times are ahead- I just hope that this storm will be a minor one to weather.  It will be- it will be.  I know the wonder that my daughter is.  Besides- how good is this other girl at playing on the tires, anyways? 

9 vs 0 yardage analysis for Fantasy Football update (hint: It's more of a not-update)

Hello cyberspace.  I just wanted to drop a quick line to those who actually look forward to the things I promise and fail to deliver- I have not forgotten about my analysis of yardage gained ending in '9' versus '0' (for the purposes of Fantasy Football scoring and relief of agony).  The last few weeks I've been working third shifts at work, which means I've been busier/more tired than I normally am.  I could attempt to undertake some data gathering during my downtime at work, but I don't necessarily trust myself with numbers at 3:00 in the morning.

I should be back to my regular schedule in the next few weeks, so hopefully I can resume my highly important, groundbreaking study then and present to you my purely scientific findings.  But for now, I'm going to go read some more articles on cracked.com.

I debate with myself- because I always lose

Recently I've begun to challenge myself to read things that are beyond my understanding from perspectives other than my own.  And I'm not just talking about 'The Cat in the Hat', either.

Today's reading: Anthropomorphism, Trisyllabic Meter, and Dr. Seuss- Why Mike Myers Isn't All That Funny

In the midst of one particular academic foray, I stumbled upon an article in which Richard Dawkins lays out a reason for refusing to engage in debate with William Lane Craig.  Heady stuff, to say the least.  After my brain temporarily shut down because of intelligence overload, I figured I could use this as a good segue into my struggle right now in regards to understanding the Bible and its role in my life.

I'll write more about this in much more depth later on (after lots of reading and research).  Suffice it to say that for a long time, I took the Bible as the true word of God because that's what I was told.  I was told that the Bible said it was the true word of God, and so therefore it was- perfect and infallible.

Lately I've been trying to think about it more objectively.  That is, if you look at it on an organic level, the Bible is a collection of history, legends, songs, and rules that were written by people thousands of years ago.  It has an elevated place because we are told it is God's direct word to His people- but is it possible that it is nothing more than the ongoing journal of one group of people from the Bronze Age?  Right now, I'm not sure either way.  But I intend to find out. 
That's all stuff for another day.  Let me get to the point of this blog- which is about the idea of genocide, and whether God is for or against it.  Actually, scratch that- I'll link you to William Lane Craig's response to a question about the genocide of the Canaanites, found in the Old Testament.  I'll let you read it.  Then I'll get to the point.

From the Christian perspective, I can see where you would say that God is the end-all-be-all, that He can do what He wants to whomever He wants.  Otherwise, He's probably not a God worth serving.  And I get it when Craig talks about us approaching this from a Western perspective. We tend to see the human race much differently (for the most part) than the Biblical writers did- and even though I think we are less xenophobic/ethnocentric than they were, I have to concede the fact that there is a bias in my viewpoint.
However, that still doesn't mean that there isn't some bias from the writers themselves.  Winston Churchill said it best- "History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it".  When you have power or obtain victory, you have the opportunity to spin the history however you want.  You get to decide who the players are and who gets ignored.  You can choose who plays the hero and who plays the villain.  It usually isn't until much later when people can look back more objectively (as much as is possible, anyways) to smell the BS.

And if you demonize certain populations, then certain actions can be justified.  Think about Hitler and his quest to exterminate the Jews.  Think about African-Americans and slavery.  Think about the Native Americans and Manifest Destiny.  Think about the Catholic Church and the Inquisition.  All of these events are simply appalling and horrific in our eyes today.  At the time, though, they were "justified" because of certain beliefs about the victims.  That's the power of labels. 

I feel like I'm having a hard time connecting the dots here, but the main point is that the slaughter of the Canaanites is the same thing in my opinion.  Historically, there is no reason to believe that this was a moral venture because it involves the demonization of a people (Canaanites) from the perspective of another group of people (Israelites) that were the more dominant military force.
So why would such an account have authority to make claims about the morality of genocide- it is already skewed to the perception of the author, right?  Maybe Israel just wanted to take the land of Canaan, so they did- forcibly, under the banner of Yahweh and the cause of righteous judgment.  We don't know, because we weren't there.  All we can do is apply our own interpretation (which is skewed no matter how we try to approach it because of our own worldviews).

There's a lot more we could talk about on this issue- the idea of grace in Old Testament/New Testament theology, the effects of domestication and civilization over the years, the Monkeysphere, etc.  And as I said before, the events could have happened as reported- God may have well wanted Israel to smote the Canaanites in retribution for their sins.  But that doesn't mean we should just assume so because we are told to assume so.  God gave us eyes to see.  He gave us ears to hear.  And He gave us brains to think about things critically.  Well, that and the many other things that the brain does, which is pretty much everything.

2011 NORTH Michigan Snow Flurries- Weeks 1-7 (The Snow Job)

A couple weeks ago, I was talking with my cousin Chris.  It was on a Monday night- the Monday night when the Lions whupped the Bears on Monday Night Football.  I suppose it was the first time the Lions had been on Monday Night football since the Mesozoic era.  Anyways, during our conversation Fantasy Football came up.  It's pretty rare for me to talk about football and somehow not relate it back to Fantasy Football.  Sort of like how I can't talk about anything without relating it back to Fantasy Football.

I told him about my dilemma about having Matt Forte of the Bears on my team.  I was losing my game, and I needed Forte to get a bunch of yards and/or touchdowns- just not at the expense of a Lions win.  Chris explained that these types of scenarios were the reason he quit Fantasy Football.  An intelligent viewpoint, by the way.  I told him that I wished I wasn't like this, but that I just can't help myself.  Rationally, I can't think of a reason to stay.  Emotionally, I can't leave.

The amalgamation, of course, is what keeps me coming back.  That unadulterated combination of emotion and logic sets all of the gears in my brain on fire at once, and it takes me to places in my creative soul that I could never find on my own.  If there was something else that could do for me what Fantasy Football does then surely I would switch.  But for right now, this is where it is at- a place I like to call 'Living'.

In case you're wondering what the hang is going on, I'm giving you a review of the first half of my Fantasy Football season.  Completely absurd, by the way.  But if you've been around these parts before, you know that ridiculousness is my modus operandi.   

I thought about waiting until the season was over, but I decided against it.  For one thing, it is therapeutic for me to write while in-season.  It releases all of the shennanigans and ridiculousness and overreactions into cyberspace, and gets me on a nice-even keel.  Just in time for the playoffs, when my idiocy amps it up to 11.  Additionally, my team is 6-1.  This is the best record I've ever had, and since I am completely an utterly hopelessly cynical about the nature of Fantasy Football, I believe this is probably the best it will ever be. 

So with that inspiring intro, I present to you the first half of the NORTH Michigan Snow Flurries 2011 season. 

Week 1- After what happened last year, my only hope was to make it through my matchup against expansion franchise Team Knights with zero injuries.  Well I did that-and a little more, as my team comes out with guns blazing in a 162-133 victory and the Snow Flurries first-ever 1-0 start.
What went right- Tom Brady, where have you been all my life?  After having a revolving door at quarterback the last couple years, I finally have a guy that I can just plug in weekly and assume that 20+ points are in the bag.  This week Brady went off for 44- a Snow Flurries record and my first 40+ point game ever.  (Holding back the tears) I feel so proud- it's as I had a son, and my son was an NFL QB and he threw for 517 yards and 4 TD on Monday Night Football.  I love you son!

But les Averses de Neige are not a one-man band.  My starting backfield (Darren McFadden, Matt Forte, Beanie Wells) combined for 53 points.  The Ravens 'D' (29 points) justified my blind faith in them.  Except for Mario Manningham, all my guys score doubled digits.  I also benefited from my opponents misplay, as the Knights left 2 guys on the bench with 25+ points each.
What went wrong- When you win by almost 30, you really didn't do anything wrong except think that you did.  It took approximately one half of football on a Thursday for me to start kicking myself over points (Jordy Nelson's 13) left on the bench.  Understand- there's no logical reason why I would have started Nelson over Manningham and Tampa Bay Mike Williams.  They're all good receivers.  But the fact that Nelson scored more points than either of them means that I spent most of Friday and a good part of Saturday kicking myself over a "misplay" that wasn't even a misplay.  How pathetic is that?  PLEASE DO NOT ANSWER
Bonehead move- Playing in a second league.  I now realize that my emotions (which are already tattered, frail messes on Sundays) will constantly be battered and torn apart even more, because it is now possible that I will be facing off against players that I own in an alternate universe.  Let me break it down.

After the 1:00 round of games, I was trailing 100-78, but I was feeling pretty good about my chances.  I still had four players to go (Brady, McFadden, Wells, and Manningham), and my opponent only had Steve Smith I.  Smith was playing in his first game since retiring in 2008, so I...oh.  He didn't retire.  What happened then?  Did he fall off the face of the world?  Because I don't remember him playing the last couple of seasons.  Are you sure he didn't die? 

Of course I will remember him now because of his career resurrection in which he torched me for 33 points that he also scored for me.  Head...spinning...grey...hair...starting...

Week 2- The Snow Flurries have their first chance ever to go 2-0, which is a lot like 1-0 except it's twice as good.  I spent all week getting ready for Team Fergy, a constant thorn in my side, only to find out there was a scheduling screw-up and my opponent was changed to the Castrated Bulls (formerly the Bullies).  If Fergy is the thorn in my side, then the Bulls are like a giant flaming ACME safe and I am Wile Coyote. Despite the short notice, my team adapts quickly and walks away with a 140-121 victory.
What went right- Brady fell back to Earth this week, scoring "only" 36 points.  My draft "strategy" (it should be noted that the use of "my" and "strategy" in the same sentence is something of a misnomer) of drafting versatile RBs pays off as neither Forte or McFadden rush for over 100 yards and yet both have over 15 poitns.  7 of my 9 players end up in double digits, including Nelson, who scored all 14 of his points on one play late in the 4th quarter of his real game. 
What went wrong- Rob Gronkowski's 20 points would have looked heckabetter in my lineup than on my bench.  And Mike Williams had 0 points.  A goose egg.  Mike, how are you going to come into my house, eat my food, sleep on my couch, and disrespect me like that.  You know what dawg- I ain't even mad at you.  We're 2-0, baby!  Last year....well, last year, I'd have been figuring out a way to arrange a short walk on a long cliff for Tampa Mike.

Wait- don't you mean a long walk on a short cliff?

Um, no- obviously he'd die!  Duh!
Bonehead move- Pfftt.  Please.  We're 2-0.  I have the top scoring team in the league at this point.  My roster practically sets itself.  There is no bonehead moving this squad- you'd have to have a football pedigree of like, Matt Millen or something.  STOP- don't you dare say anything.

Week 3- A killer early season matchup against the two time defending champs and my team is dinged up.  I'm a little worried about the toughness of my team.  This is our Super Bowl- and you guys want a week off?  I had a guy come back from the dead last year- I don't want to hear about your wussy injuries. Hamstring? Please. What are you, pig shoes? Concussion? You can't just make up fancy words and pass them off as legitimate injuries.  ARRGGH- youngsters these days.  Oh well- despite not being at full strength, my team is still strong enough to shock the champs 145-86.
What went right- Brady, McFadden, and Raven's D outscore Disco's entire team.  Even with his top scorers at each position, I would have still won the game.  Graham overcomes a 0-point first half to finish with 17, and Neil Rackers bangs home 15 big ones at the K spot.  Discos' big guns (Phillip Rivers and Chris Johnson) combine for 13 points. 
What went wrong- My WRs only have 8 points.  I leave points on the bench at RB because Beanie Wells is too wimpy hurt to play and literally everyone on my bench who played in a game outscored my Waiver-wire handcuff, Chester Taylor.  And while that move (and the 23 Gronkowski point game) obviously would not have come close to costing me the game, the fact is that we are trying to change a losing culture here.  2nd place isn't good enough.  Winning isn't good enough.  Winning by almost 60 isn't good enough.  NOTHING IS GOOD ENOUGH!!!!
Bonehead move- Picking up Taylor in the first place.  To think I wasted a transaction on a guy who scored 3 points for me in a 59 point win.  Unbelieveable.  And it's not like I didn't have other running backs- Michael Bush and Brandon Jacobs, each put up a double-digit on my bench.  Oh well.  No time to savor this win, only to beat ourselves up over the things we sucked at and try to get better just enough for next week so that we can still beat ourselves up afterwards about how we need to get keep getting better.

Week 4- After a huge win, the Snow Flurries had to travel to Team Moose (his team's real name is some sort of leet speak, which I refuse to acknowledge) to take on the leader of the other division.  I was worried going in- sure, my team was the highest scoring team 2 out of the 3 weeks, but Moose was high scorer the other week.  Nevertheless, I knew this was a chance to flex my muscles against a good squad, and flex my muscles I did with a resounding 144-88 win.

What went right- Wells was again questionable most of the week, but was able to get well enough to rack up 32 points.  Forte added 30 and McFadden 11.  It's hard to lose a game when your starting RBs contribute 73 points.  The Raven Defense also went ape, racking up 37 points. 
What went wrong-  Despite Graham being nothing but awesome for me all season and having a favorable matchup against the Jaguars, I subbed Gronkowski.  At the time, Gronkowski had been almost matching Calvin Johnson's prolific TD stretch, and with Brady on my team, I figured I could use the Teammate Connection extra points.  Of course Gronkowski scored 1 point while Graham scored 20.  I hope Jimmy didn't take the demotion personally.  Manningham also scored 1 point, while Nelson and his 15 languished on the bench.
Bonehead play- If I would have played Graham or Nelson, I could have had the high score in our league.  I won handily, so I can't complain too much.  It just would have netted me an extra $1.

Week 5- We must protect this house!!!  After spending much of my first two years of Fantasy Football with sub-.500 records, the weight of a possible 5-0 start has literally whipped me into a blood lust frenzy.  I'm doing 9-0 yard analysis, researching waiver-wire players, evaluating future matchups, and sacrificing squirrels to the football gods.  Actually, that last one isn't true.  It was chipmunks.  KIDDING.  So an intra-divisional matchup against Team Dennis awaits my team in Week 5.  This is a trap game if there ever was one.  Team Dennis is tied for second place, just sort of lurking back there, while my team is coming off of 3 high-profile matchups in a row (with a grudge match against Fergy lurking in Week 6).  Add in the fact that bye weeks are coming up and these slackers are eyeing their paid vacations...there's a big chance that my team could fall flat on its face.  And right on cue, the Snow Flurries fall way behind early, then again late, and need almost every second of football to pull out a 90-79 win over Dennis. 
What went right- It's easy to keep your chin up and play hard when you're winning easily.  Much less easy to keep plugging away when things aren't going your way.  My guys could have just thrown in the towel, accepted a divisional lead tie, and got ready for next week.  The fact that they battled back in an ugly, rock-em/sock-em type affair tells me a lot about the character of my team.  It doesn't hurt that I got 16 points from bye-week starter Giants D (who I picked up earlier in the week), 13 points from Graham (whew!  He doesn't hate me), and 15 clutch MNF points from Forte.
What went wrong- Williams volunatrily signs up for purgatory by scoring 0 points.  McFadden struggles to put up 6 points, and Brady's off game of 17 fails to keep pace with Brees' 25.  Kendall Hunter, a bye-week fill-in who literally signed with Team Dennis on Sunday morning, scores 6 points in the late games to give Dennis a 5 point lead with only two games to go.  Trying to keep myself from going crazy, I tell myself that this is a manhood test, and if I can't have two players score 6 points then I don't deserve to win.  Then Nelson racks up 1 whole point, with Forte still to play against an inspired and tenacious Lions defense.  Fortunately Forte scored enough for the victory, but I shouldn't have had to win like that.  Partly because it's just not fair, and mostly because I left 21 points from Victor Cruz on the bench.
Bonehead move- I don't qualify sitting Cruz over Nelson and Williamsas a bonehead move- I don't.  Even though I've butted heads with the Experts in the past, I agreed with the assessment that time was needed to properly evaluate the roles of Manningham and Cruz.  Now it is clear that Cruz is a player to watch, and Manningham can still be solid.  But I didn't want to chance it at the expense of Nelson (who has always been solid) and Williams (who I just wish didn't suck so bad). 

Week 6- Ah Fergy, my nemesis.  Other teams have beat me, but no one has beat me the way Fergy has.  Including the consolation game last year, I went 0-3 versus Fergy in 2010 (1-4 lifetime).  Two of my most devastating defeats have come at his hands.  Fergy entered this game as the second hottest team in the league (3 game win streak) and second high scorer.  So believe me, he had my full attention.  And after losing our first game of the season, a 108-96 decision, he has even more of my full attention.
What went right- Brady had 20 points (we won't talk about the 2 picks he threw).  Forte and McFadden each had double digits, and Nelson made his two real-game catches count for 17 fantasy points.  Graham had 13 as well.  Fergy left points on the bench at RB and Defense.
What went wrong- Of course, you can afford to leave points on the bench when you have two players (in his case, Aaron Rodgers and Michael Turner) combine for 56 points.  Seriously, the rest of his roster did just okay.  Those two guys killed me.  I think Turner was out for a little jilted lover revenge, and I'm okay with that.  I've moved on, right Victor?  Oh yeah, that's right- Cruz choked in his first game as in the starting line-up. 
Bonehead move- None, actually.  At this point in the season, I have to say that I really don't have any bonehead moves to date (other than my drafting, but we'll get to that analysis after the season).  It could be an artificial sense of my own accomplishment, but the fact is that my team has pretty much performed to its maximum capacity every week. Sure, we have some depth issues- especially at WR.  But overall, we're humming along pretty well.  We could very well be 6-0 if a couple of plays to Manningham hadn't been overturned.  So I'll just stay here...at the first place ball...waiting for the prince to notice me (or the clock to strike Midnight, whichever comes first).

Week 7- Ah, the week after the first loss of the season.  That's usually when the panic and paranoia sets in.  It's just that usually this happens to me after Week 1, so I have much more time to right the ship.  Now, despite sitting at a league-best 5-1 record, I've managed to thouroughly convince myself that I'm destined to watch the playoffs from the sideline.  Every future matchup for my guys is like a virtual Steel Curtain.  To make matters worse, this week I'm playing 1-5 El Diablo.  On paper, this should be a cake walk for me.  His team is missing most of his potent weapons due to bye weeks, and I'm projected to win 141-48.  But I think back to last year, and how he was 4-0 and I was 0-4, and I defeated him- so I'm not taking this matchup lightly at all.  You wouldn't know it though by my effort.  Sure, I bring home the 73-51 win.  But that's just about all I'll be bringing home from this turd sandwich.
What went right- Matt Forte scores 24 points on foreign soil, which unfortunately is not subject to the exchange rate but is still quite impressive.  Graham ends up with 17 (and the eventual game winning points).  The Ravens D scores 15.  And Joe Flacco sucks almost as much as Matt Cassel. 
What went wrong- Wells and McFadden both go down with first half injuries.  Cassel throws 2 picks, has a TD pass overturned, and finishes with 2 points.  Nick Novak racks up a grand total of 3 points at K (while Neil Rackers enjoys his 11 points on waivers).  Let's see, what did I miss?  Oh yeah- how about DeMarco Murrays 33 (on the bench), Mike Williams 7 (on the bench) and Doug Baldwin's 0- right out in front for everyone to see.
Bonehead move- Sigh...I almost wish that I could say I've had some bonehead moves.  But really, my logic was sound.  My methods, flawless.  I couldn't have known that two of my top-three RBs would get injured.  And sure, Wells was going against Pittsburgh, which is more like Sarlac Pit-tsburgh for RBs- but he's El Hombre for the Cardinals.  I knew Murray would get some totes for the Pokes- but who knew he'd have 253 yards? 

The problem with having a team perform at it's peak every week is that you feel so hopeless when things go wrong.  When your guys aren't performing, you're just watching the seconds tick away, and there isn't anything you can do about it.  At least if I make a misplay or a bonehead move, I can pass the blame.  I can blame the experts for poor predicting.  I can blame Eli Manning for not throwing the ball to Manningham more. I can even blame myself for making the bad play.

The funny thing is that I'm sitting at 6-1 and I feel worse about my team than I did a year ago at 3-4.  What kind of monster am I?  Who has made me this way?  I know that I am a messed up human being.  But this is 'Living' my friends- and I wouldn't have it any other way.  Unless I could.

Tim Tebow: Savior- or saviorest?

If you even thought about accessing any sort of media relating somehow to sports, then you surely know that yesterday was Tim Tebow's first start of the season.  And I'm gonna take him to task.

I actually have nothing against Tebow- from what I've read/heard, he's a fine and upstanding young man, a devout Christian, and an excellent teammate.  Tebow has done humanity a solid.  His parents should be proud.

He definitely doesn't deserve most of the venom being spewed towards him.  You can't blame Denver for reaching to draft Tebow in the first round.  He (probably) didn't ask the fans to start cheering for him when Kyle Orton's career started to tailspin.  It's definitely not his fault that everyone everywhere nitpicking his football career the past two weeks- talking about how inaccurate he is, why he is inaccurate, how his arm isn't strong enough, how his arm is strong enough, how he needs an offense specifically tailored to his skill set, how he needs to be a pocket passer, how he isn't ever going to be a pocket passer, his intangibles...and I didn't even actually read most of the articles- this is all information gleaned from headlines and the NFL pregame shows that I watched today. 

I understand why this is- we're like information sponges, and the Internet is Bikini Bottom.  Bill Simmons has talked before about the culture of the Internet, and the 24 hour news cycle, and because there's so much more air time to fill, things get analyzed and reanalyzed, and the analysis gets analyzed and so on and so on.  And of course I could rip on the process...but using my own blog to do so would be a little hypocritical.  I just don't believe that you should bite the hand that feeds you (especially since most of the time it's my own hand). 

I do think that this over-overanalyzation had a ridiculous impact on the development of young players.  Head coaches too, but I'm not talking about coaches here- I'm talking about the man Tim Tebow.  I remember as a kid reading this book of NFL player profiles from the early 1980's.  One of the player profiles was Bert Jones, a young QB for the Baltimore Colts, and his head coach made a comment akin to QBs taking about five years to really fully understand the NFL game. 

Every time I stumble across an article about Tebow or see him being virtually dissected, I think about that quote.  I think about Tim Tebow, starting for the 4th or 5th time in the 2nd year of his NFL career, and I think it's absolutely preposterous that people would be trying to make declarative statements about his football future at this stage in his career.  Especially since everybody knew that Tebow was going to be a project coming out of the funky spread offense that Florida ran.  But hey, we have to fill the air time, so let's keep talking and talking and let's run this kid's career into the ground before it even gets started.  Poor Timmy.

But enough about that.  On to the game!

Full disclosure- I didn't actually get to watch Tebow play very much yesterday.  Apparently 1-4 Denver at 0-5 Miami didn't really make for must-see TV, Tebow or no Tebow.  So I watched San Diego at New York (the Lions were on, but I couldn't stand to watch them suck).  Ergo, my discussion of Tebow will be mostly academic.

I know that his passing numbers were so-so.  I know that he led the Denver offense to within field goal range a couple times in the first half but the Denver kicker missed a couple of field goals.  I know that Tebow led the Broncos from 15 points down in the last 3 minutes of the game (thanks on-side kick team!) and then about half-way through the OT period the defense delivered a turnover that eventually led to a 52 yard game winning field goal.  I know that after the game they interviewed Tebow and he thanked Jesus and then his teammates.

People with way more time and money on their hands are going to sit around and dissect the film of this game and be able to determine whether Tebow played good, great, or more great.  So I can't really comment on that.  He led them to a win, which is always a big deal in the NFL.  He's definitely an exciting player, if not slightly unorthodox.
 
What I want to focus on is his post game comments- particularly how they rubbed me the wrong way.
 
Maybe it's just because I'm a little older, a little wiser, or maybe I'm about to get ungrafted from the Vine- but I really wasn't feeling the shout-out to JC.  Far be it for me to make any sort of judgments or assumptions or mind-readings, but it really felt forced.  It was like Tim spent all week with a series of post-it-notes around his house that said "If get interviewed, thank Jesus Christ Personal Savior". 
 
I don't have any problem with athletes being outspoken about their faith- as long as its in context.  If you're speaking to a bunch of church camp kids- yeah, tell them about your faith.  If you're telling a reporter why you set up this charity or that fundraiser- sure, that's appropriate.  If the NFL analysts are asking you about game situations- you should probably leave God out of it.  Especially since you just got sacked 7 times, went 13-27 passing, and spent most of the game struggling against the worst defense since Helms Deep.
 
I don't know- I just think that it's okay to talk about football when they ask you football questions.  If you repped Christ because you're wanting to stay humble, try looking at your statistics instead.  Plenty there to keep yourself in perspective.  If you name-dropped Jesus because you wanted Him to get proper praise and glory, try going 31-35 for 325 yards and 5 TDs.  But don't take my word for it:
 
-If anyone speaks, they should do so as one who speaks the very words of God. If anyone serves, they should do so with the strength God provides, so that in all things God may be praised through Jesus Christ. If anyone plays quarterback, he should complete at least 60% of his passes with an average yards/attempt of about 7-8, and a 3-1 TD-to-INT ration.  To him be the glory and the power for ever and ever. Amen- 1 Peter 4:11 (Bolded part was not part of the original manuscripts.  Or any of the manuscripts, for that matter)
 
That's all I got.  I don't know if it's good enough, but thanks to the Internet we have nothing but time to kill and space to fill.  I do hope that Tebow does well- I like to see the good guys succeed and the underdogs prove their doubters wrong.  I'm also partial to left-handed QBs  TTFN!

The problem with polls

You want to know how cool I am?  I'm about to singlehandedly lead the Air Force Falcons to an NCAA Football Bowl Subdivision championship.

On the PS3.  Boo-yah!

Before you drag the mouse up to that little X next to the tab you're reading this on, I ask you to just hang with me for a second.  There's actual substance to this post, and I will get to it fairly quickly.  But in order to get to the meat, you first have to chow down the airy, spun sugar/like substance that is the backdrop of my story.

I'm playing a dynasty on NCAA Football 11 as the Air Force Falcons.  I've always had this mythical interest in the football programs of the service academies.  I think this is because there is nothing quite as manly as the idea of playing football at a military institution combined with that fact that military institutions generally make use of the Option offense (my absolute favorite football offensive system).

Anyways, so I'm playing as Air Force.  Obviously I needed to be on the team- that's the whole reason why dorks like me play sports games.  Right?  So I created myself as a dynamic, dual-threat quarterback (a lot like real life, without the 'dynamic' or the 'dual-threat'.  Or even the 'quarterback') and started plowing through Conference USA (I know Air Force is currently in the Mountain West- but I just had to find a league that played a conference championship game so I could have that extra game's worth of stats) like I was a warm knife and the Tulsas and Houstons were melted butter.

My latest season started off with a 21 point win over a #6 Florida Gators squad- on the road.  I shouldn't brag, but I was impressed.  After all, Lee Corso and Kirk Herbstreit had both predicted Florida to win.  Boy I showed them.  I played on Varsity level and everything!

The very next week, I skyrocketed up to #19 in the polls.  Where was I the week before- I don't know.  Limbo, oblivion, Dante's inferno- it really doesn't matter.  The fact is that now I'm #19.  Scratch that- #15 after I creamed Army last week by 20 (who is the civy now, huh?).

I'm really close to actual real-life application, so if you've made it this far, you are about to be rewarded beyond your wildest dreams (which probably says more about the state of your dreams than it does about my writing).  I was looking at the rest of my schedule, and I realized that at the rate I'm going, I will probably be playing for a National Championship at season's end.  I'm in the top 15 in week 3- I'm basically already sitting at the cool table!  Most of my games will be conference games (in a weak conference), with a trip to Mississippi State (hardly a Florida-level challenge) and a conference championship game that will give me an extra week to move up in the polls.  BCS, here we come!

And so naturally I then started thinking about the problem with polls- because this is how my mind works.  I don't question it anymore, I just roll with it.  Mostly I was thinking about college football polls (which I've talked about in the past), but it's no stretch to apply that to other polls as well.  Particularly since we're currently in the middle of a GOP Presidential candidate orgy. 

The use of polls to determine the national championship is, I believe, an inherently flawed strategy. I feel like it gives artificial favor to the teams that are ranked in the preseason polls as well as teams from BCS conferences.  This is because, unless you have a colossal faceplant to start the season, or multiple losses throughout the season, the chances are pretty good that you are going to be in a strong position to remain ranked in the top 25 throughout the season.  And if you are in a BCS conference, you have a greater chance of being ranked in the first place (and less of a chance of falling out of the top 25 should you lose a game).

This is no mere academic issue, either.  Being ranked brings prestige with it.  You get nice little write-ups in the beginning of college football preview mags.  Your scores come first on ESPN's homepage.  The byproduct of the increased attention gets you more love and attention from the top recruits, which means you're more likely to continue to have good football teams in the future, which means you'll be ranked in the top 25, which means that....you see where this leads, don't you?  A self-sustaining cycle of artificially enhanced dominance.  And what does that dominance get you?

MONEY.  The better your team, the more money that gets brought into the school.  So obviously there is a great deal of interest in maintaining the status quo, which is that certain programs are granted the advantage of being ranked before actually playing a single game.  This serves usually to keep the money inside the big BCS conference super-circle while leaving the teams like TCU and Boise State on the outside looking in.

Let me show you a little bit how the BCS schools get favored in this system.  First of all, a majority of preseason ranked schools come from the six BCS conferences (Big 10+2, Pac-whateveritisnow, Big not-really-12, used-to-be-Big East, ACC, $EC).  A fairly large proportion of BCS conference teams schedule very winnable games in the early season.  Sure, there's always early-season high-profile showdowns, such as Oregon versus LSU, but most of the time they schedule cream-puffs.  The kind that E. Gordon Gee eats for breakfast. 

So by the time the average conference season starts, a team that started the season ranked highly is already going to have 3-4 wins under their belt, and if they're in a BCS conference, they're going to be playing against other ranked teams whose rankings are most likely reinforced by a series of wins against inferior competition (not always, but more often than not).  So then a ranked team beats another ranked team which enhances its artificially bestowed status (or a non-ranked conference team boosts their status because they beat a ranked team)- even though we don't actually know whether or not the ranked team is actually any good yet.  Does this make sense?  Am I taking crazy pills?

Sure, there are guidelines to help make sure that the voters are remaining as objective as possible.  But come on.  There is a subjective human element here that makes this whole thing stink.  Ask 1994 Penn State about their level of confidence in voter judgment. 
I read an article done by a guy that seems to know more about statistics than I do, and he came to the conclusion that preseason polls do matter (although not as much as we might think).  Using a complex formula, he deteremined the difference typically comes down to around 1 poll spot.  Even though most of the time 1 poll spot is inconsequential, it can also be absolutely devestating.  1 poll spot seperates #3 from #2, and only #2 gets to play against #1 for crystal football. 

Note- this is not the BCS trophy.  It's a warning to those that think SafeSearch is truly safe.  Or search.



T IS FOR TROPHY, THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME.  NOM NOM NOM NOM

Ask 2004 Auburn about how they feel about 1 poll spot. 
Sometimes teams win and lose ground in the polls, for sure- sometimes you just don't win that impressively or someone else leapfrogs you because they ran up the score notched a huge win.  But these are the exception and not the rule.  Most of the time you move up (or at least hold steady) if you win. 

So how does tie into politics?  Simple- polls influence the headlines, which in turn influences how most people perceive or feel about candidates (or at least the perception of how people perceive or feel about candidates.  Man my head is spinning!).  And the candidates respond accordingly.  Don't believe me?  Look at the action, and how much of it is dictated by polls.  It's like candidates are not even addressing ideas anymore- they're defending their rank.  They're on constant campaign mode, always trying to make their case to be #1.

The obvious problem with this is that our focus as voters can become about things like debate performance instead of policy content.  We start to pay less attention to what Herman Cain's "9-9-9" plan consists of and more time about how he sells/defends his image.  And then we have the audacity to get upset when we find out that the people in office are not as compentant as we thought they were based on the performances that we asked for.

So what's the moral of this story?  Obviously I'm telling you to do everything you can to artificially enhance yourself.  Whether that means that you schedule easy wins for your football team, become a charismatic public speaker, or make your speed rating a '95' (even though in reality it's more like '65')- just do what you have to do.  Because in today's society, it's where you start that determines where you finish.

PICS- Golf trophy- http://www.blackshoediaries.com/2010/4/11/1415660/jumble-in-the-rumble
Chris Leak- http://s3.amazonaws.com/collegeotr/images/blogs/9aa2c206e2ff225abedfaf9f6f414b2f.jpg