Hard to Believe, but 10-6 Might Be Good Enough

In no way am I suggesting the Titans will run the table the rest of the season and go 10-6, but remember when we thought even 10-6 wouldn't be good enough? Now it seems likely it will be.

After the division leaders, the current Wild Card contenders are:

Pittsburgh, Jacksonville, and the now-lowly Denver, at 6-4.

Miami, Baltimore, and Houston, at 5-5.

Tennessee and the suddenly-can't win Jets are next at 4-6.

So there isn't a team exactly running away with it in the second tier right now, and looking at the remaining schedules for these teams, it's likely 10-6 will get in, and possibly even 9-7.

Things can change, but in this group of teams we have Denver and the Jets just fading completely right now.

Baltimore and Pittsburgh have to play each other twice still. Pittsburgh still has the Packers and Miami on the schedule, too. Baltimore might have the easiest road left of all these teams, but they still have the Packers and they're such a who-knows? team they could easily lose at Oakland at the end of the year.

Houston has Indy, Jacksonville, Miami, and New England left as the tough games.

Anyone trust Jacksonville in this mix? They just barely beat Buffalo last week and now they play San Fran on the road, which will be a tough game, Houston, Miami, and New England for the next 4 games.

Miami has to play New England, Jacksonville, Tennessee, Houston, and Pittsburgh to end the year. Anyone seeing them go 5-1?

Denver: Giants, Colts, Eagles. They have several other interesting games, 2 with KC and 1 with Oakland. Anyone seeing them going even 4-2 on this stretch?

The Jets, who I think are completely insignificant at this point (and yes, they beat the Titans and have the same record...which satisfies me no end after hearing the 3-and-0 chants after that game), still have to play Carolina, Atlanta, Cincy, and Indy.

Again, I'm not even saying the Titans will go 10-6, but that 10-6 will get the playoff berth. The Titans have a pretty rough road ahead as well, with Arizona, Indy, Miami, and San Diego left as the tough games. I mean, being 4-6 is not a good prospect going into that kind of remaining schedule. However, they have 4 out of 6 games remaining at home. The way they are playing, the Seattle and St. Louis games should be locks for at least a 6-win season. Come away with winnable games like Arizona and Miami, maybe get a break against Indy or San Diego, you might have a 9-7 team looking at a decent chance.

Kansas City and Oakland, both 3-7 teams, will have lots to say about the Titans' minuscule chances. They've come up with some impressive wins. If they sneak by some of these teams mentioned above, then this could get really interesting. We could be looking at the rare 8-8 team getting in.

Seriously, after the 0-6 start, who thought the Titans would be 2 games away from the leading Wild Card contenders?

Belichick's Call

I'm going to put my opinion in the comments, but here's a great analysis by the cold numbers. Run your own numbers here.

The Belichick Gamble

As is expected, Bill Belichick is being widely criticized for his decision to go for it on 4th and 2 on his own 28 with a 34-28 lead and roughly 2 minutes left against the Colts Sunday night.

I actually didn't think this was that bad of a decision, had the Patriots played differently after the play came up short.

If you get it, you win. If you don't get it, then you basically allow the Colts to score a touchdown too quickly, get the ball back, and try a field goal to win it.

They had a chance for this to happen with about a minute left, when they decided to tackle Joseph Addai one yard short of the end zone just before the winning TD to Reggie Wayne. Had they allowed Addai to score there, then the Colts would not have run off more time before finally making the winning play.

We've always heard of the idea of allowing the opposition to score to get the ball back with time on the clock (I've never seen it), and this was the perfect time to do it. And I thought they were going to allow Addai to score on that play. It looked like half the defenders were thinking that, but the other half didn't get the message.

Whenever a decision such as Belichick's last night occurs, and it doesn't work, then the idea must be, "What is our best chance to win now?" rather than "We should have punted." Once it didn't work, Belichick should have said, "OK, make it look as good as you can, but let them score, unless Manning throws a gift-wrapped ball your way."

Then you put the ball in the hands of Brady, and I'm sure he could get the yards required to put them in position for a field goal.

I think people might be too hard on Belichick considering he just saw Manning carve up his defense in 2 minutes on the previous drive. A punt would have put the Colts around the 25-30 yard line depending on the kind of return, and with 2 minutes and a timeout he could have easily gotten them back to that same spot in no time.

So, the bad decision to me was not going for it on 4th down, but not allowing the TD earlier. Because you knew that was going to happen anyway, so give yourself a chance to win.

I Am Still In Disbelief

Around the start of the 4th quarter, I gave up. I began preparing myself for the worst. The Pats had seriously had their way with the young and inexperienced Colts secondary all game long. Peyton and company had struggled to get anything going on offense. In my mind... there's no way the game is still in reach at this point. Even for the Colts.

Obviously, I was wrong. Here are some things I still can't believe:

1. That Belichick would go for it on 4th and 2 from his own 28. Despite how little I think of this man, even I was surprised he did that. And it sure looked to me like it might have been Brady's idea--he was at least involved in the discussion.

Don't tell me for a second that they were really just that sure Peyton would score from 70 yards away. It's easy to say Belichick felt the defense would give up a score no matter what, and so he went for it. But not when Belichick has a history of being a cocky jerk who likes to make statements and run up the score. He was arrogant, plain and simple. He wanted to step on the Colts' throats. And in my opinion, got what he deserved. It was an attempt to pull a Bud Adams and give the Colts the finger, and it backfired. I'm looking forward to a week's worth of articles about Bill's screw up.

Yet even now I almost can't believe he did it.

(wow, I wrote a whole couple paragraphs about Belichick without mentioning cheating... amazing).

2. That final touchdown pass to Reggie Wayne. Lost in the hub-bub surrounding the comeback and the Pats' bad decision to go for it on 4th and 2 was the fact that Wayne's catch at the end was freaking ridiculous.

3. I can't believe the Colts are so good at scoring in the 4th quarter and so bad at it in the first three.

4. Still marveling at the perfect storm that led to the Pats not being able to challenge that spot. Out of timeouts (because of calling one just a few seconds earlier) kept them from challenging... and the timing of the play coming right before the 2-minute warning meant the replay booth couldn't look at it on their own either.

Not that it would have been overturned... looked very, very close.

5. I can't believe how many people I have talked to already today that stopped watching the game with about 5 minutes left--Manning's final interception of the evening seems to be the point when people starting tuning out.

6. That Belichick's bodyguard threw a photographer to the ground. Dang.

I am completely and wholeheartedly biased... but that was one of the best games I've seen in a long, long time.

Haterade

I absolutely, positively, cannot stand the expression, "Hater."

If you use this term, you are uneducated and idiotic.

Has someone called me a hater recently? No. In fact, probably never.

I think I first started disliking it when I was reading a Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen comment thread on IMDB. Why was I reading a comment thread on a movie that does not even deserve to be watched, much less commented upon? I don't know, I think I'm fascinated when people defend something that I can in no way see the value. Usually, the impassioned defense of a movie like that is, "Hey, man, it's freakin' robots and fighting and Megan Fox and stuff...it's rad!"

Any case, there were a bunch of people writing their disparaging comments of TROFL and someone writes something to the tune of, "All you haters out there just don't get it...look how much money this movie is making..." and so on.

It has gotten to the point where you can no longer dislike anything without being labeled a "hater," and God forbid you hate something popular.

I know what the spirit of "hater" is, and it's very rarely used the correct way, although even then, it sounds like someone who can't stand that someone has a different opinion from them. The spirit of "hater," in its correct use, is a person who just can't accept the success of another person, is unwilling to dole out respect. In other words, arbitrary hate. There are obvious examples of this, when people can't come up with a coherent reason to hate something, they just do.

Whenever I see the usual use of "hater," though, it's like the world is like this:

This is popular, you must love it.

I actually don't like it.

Hater. There could be no other opinion other than sheer like for this popular product, so you're trying to be different or difficult.

No, I think there are some serious flaws.

Look how much money this popular product is making. You are wrong.

So, you either like something, or you like it and can't admit it. There is no such thing as not liking something for any valid reason anymore.

I often wonder when the people who use "hater" actually don't like something, whether they realize they are being "haters" according to their own definition or not.

Sounds Observations - Absurd Pregame Interviews

Hi everybody! I watch a bunch of crap on Sundays to give you myopic insights into relatively mundane topics. Shall we begin? Abridged version today:

NFL Week 9

1. I talk a lot about the different pregame shows on here, and I typically neglect the NFL Network's show, which begins at 8 am here in the central timezone. There's a reason for this: I avoid Deion Sanders and Michael Irvin like the plague, and they both are employed by the Shield's Propaganda Machine. But, I decided to take a look on Sunday morning, and found it to be... not so bad.

The highlights are Warren Sapp and Marshall Faulk, who have astute, cogent and relatable insights into the NFL's inner workings, from off-the-field issues (holla at Fantasy Unsports) to play-calling and player personnel. However, I could not look away from this interview by Faulk with Ray Lewis. Go ahead and watch it; I'll wait.

Ok?

Alright, the main thing that got me is that the man (Lewis) makes absolutely no sense when he talks. It's as if he thinks if he makes a point passionately, he doesn't need to worry about what that point is. My favorite part is when he's asked about the Bengals (who ended up trouncing the Ravens later in the day) regarding respect for them. Lewis says "I don't need to respect nobody. I just don't disrespect anyone."

This is akin to the classic Vanilla Ice interview regarding the "Under Pressure" riff. "Our joint goes da da da daga da da... DA da da da daga da da. It's different!"

2. Ok, I went 6-6 so far this weekend. 6-6! This was an absolutely absurd week for picking games. Houston tried to scare Indy but lost the closest thing to an upset lock as there's been all season, Green Bay losing to TAMPA BAY? Carolina easily covering against the Saints and almost winning? I don't understand.

3. Against my better judgement, I was listening to Colin Cowherd this morning, and I heard two interesting things:

A. He made a point that was mentioned on the pregame shows (must've missed it myself) on why Miami is the only team that can properly execute the Wildcat formation: You must commit to it. It's why it doesn't work in Philly with Michael Vick, because they throw it in there as a gimmick, rather than a useful part of your offensive scheme. Good stuff.

B. Trent Dilfer was on, and I'm amazed that he's become a very talented and informative analyst. He made a defense of the Notre Dame coaches that actually almost convinced me that it's not their fault for the way things have been going for the Irish. Unbelievable. Watch, cause he's going to be either the next Tom Jackson or the next Sean Salisbury. Either way, it'll be entertaining.

MLB

4. Yankees won. A-Rod redeemed. Rivera and Jeter enter the Pantheon of greatest ever discussions. I remain unmoved.

College Basketball

5. It starts tonight with the defending champs (North Carolina) playing Florida International University. If that sounds like a game you're very likely to miss, keep in mind Isaiah Thomas is the fresh-faced coach at FIU, and it'll be worth tuning in solely for the facial expressions when the score's 157-9.

That's it for this week. I'm tired and there'll be plenty more next time. Cheers!

Championship City

So, the New York Yankees once again win the World Series, ending the decade as they began it. I don't care much for it, but that's another subject.

Instead, I'd like to focus on the decade's champions and the cities that got to celebrate them, because so much of the meaning of winning a championship has something to do with where the fans come from. New York has won the last championship of this decade.

Disclaimer: There are a great many people out there who love to point out that the decade has not officially ended, that because there was no year 0 that a decade starts with 1 and ends with 10. We had this argument in 1999 when everyone wanted to celebrate the new millennium the next year. Sorry, folks, the decade is determined by the first three numbers of the four-digit year, and why can't we just call the year before Year 1, Year 0 anyway? I'm not going to go through the motions of what Jayson Stark did in this article, where he felt the need to put quotation marks around every mention of the word "decade."

Besides, decade means ten years, and 2000-2009 is ten years.

Which city won the most championships in this decade?

Why, this one is easy if you think about it. Boston. Although the Patriots play in Foxboro, we know that the Patriots are the representatives of the closest metropolitan city. The Patriots (3), Red Sox (2), and Celtics (1) combined to score 6 championships for the city.

Los Angeles won 4, all by the Lakers. But if you want to encompass the entire L.A. area, you could include Anaheim's 2 combined championships from the Ducks and the Angels, and L.A. would also have 6.

New York City just won its 3rd championship of the decade, with 2 World Series wins and the Super Bowl-winning Giants. Of course, the Giants play in New Jersey as a New York team. If you would like to include all of New Jersey's teams as part of the NYC metropolitan area, New York came away with 5 championships if you also include the New Jersey Devils, who brought home two Stanley Cups.

Of the 39 championships (there was no Stanley Cup in 2005), these areas took 17.

So who else won multiple championships? Pittsburgh won 3 with the help of two Steelers wins and one Penguins win. Detroit won 3 with the help of the Pistons and twice with the Red Wings.

Tying St. Louis and Pittsburgh? Try San Antonio and those pesky Spurs, with 3 championships in a city that they own by themselves.

That leaves St. Louis (Rams and Cardinals), Tampa (Bucs and Lightning), and Miami (Heat and Marlins) with 2.

After all that, 15 more championships were taken by these 6 cities and that leaves 7 with individual championships:

Indianapolis (Colts), Chicago (White Sox), Phoenix (Diamondbacks), Denver (Avalanche), Philadelphia (Phillies), Baltimore (Ravens), and Raleigh (Hurricanes) round out the rest.

So now we know who won. How many championships did these cities have a chance to win?

Boston had 7 and came away with 6, the lone loss being that Patriots defeat at the hands of the Giants.

Including Anaheim with L.A., that metro area contended for an astounding 9 total, coming away with 6, the Lakers losing 2 NBA titles and the Ducks losing a Cup.

New York's metro area tops all of them, with 11 total attempts. The Yankees lost 2, the Nets lost 2, and the Devils lost 1. The Mets lost 1, but it was to the Yankees, so New York was both a winner and a loser there.

It gets a little more interesting and varied with cities like St. Louis (4 total attempts), which lost a Super Bowl and a World Series (and also won both those things), and Detroit (6), which lost a World Series, a Stanley Cup, and an NBA championship. Pittsburgh went to 4 and came away with 3, with the Penguins losing the 2008 Cup.

The city that had their hearts broken the most was Philadelphia, of course, with 4 total trips and coming away with only 1, losing a Super Bowl, a World Series, and an NBA Championship. Dallas would come away totally empty-handed with 2 failed attempts, the Mavericks and Stars.

The number of once runner-ups from individual cities is massive, starting with Nashville's Titans in 2000, Tampa (Rays), Charlotte (Panthers), Raleigh (Hurricanes), Chicago (Bears), Denver (Rockies), Houston (Astros), Oakland (Raiders), Indianapolis (Pacers), Cleveland (Cavaliers), Orlando (Magic), Phoenix (Cardinals), Seattle (Seahawks), and three Canadian teams who just couldn't bring the Cup back to the promised land: Edmonton, Calgary, and Ottawa.

So, then, I thought, what about the states? I would have to include college sports, too--strictly basketball and football.

It should come as no surprise that the state of Florida won the most. With 6 college wins, 4 of them from the Gators (2 per sport), 1 for Florida State (football), and 1 for Miami (football), combined with the 4 professional wins, Florida took home 10 total. They lost 5 more (yeah, the Gators actually lost in the NCAAs in 2000. It was a happier time). The state of Florida was involved with 15 title attempts.

Then it's California, with 7 wins. USC football won 1, combined with the 6 others previously mentioned. So they lost out on 5: USC (football) and UCLA (basketball), and the 3 other professional attempts, for a total of 12.

Texas went for 7 and got 4, when you include the Longhorns' win over USC to add to the Spurs. Houston and Dallas, what a bunch of losers.

Michigan: 8 tries. Michigan State won an NCAA, so 4 total wins for that state, and an extra loss when they lost to North Carolina this year.

Pennsylvania was all professional attempts: 8, coming away with 4.

North Carolina went for 6 and won 4, with Duke (basketball) and 2 UNC (basketball), along with the Hurricanes win. Losses came from the Hurricanes and Panthers.

And who knew the Sooners went for 4 BCS wins in this decade? Oklahoma came away with 1, over Florida State. They lost to LSU, USC, and Florida.

Ohio's only championships were with the Cavaliers and, perhaps, most memorably, with Ohio State. With the ignominy of losing to Florida in both football and basketball in the same year (2007), they also lost to LSU. They took their lone championship for Ohio when a referee decided some 3 seconds after a play was over to call pass interference in the end zone against Miami in 2003. I know what you're thinking. Screw Miami. That's 1 win with 4 crushing losses.

Maryland took 2 with an NCAA and the Ravens. They lost nothing. To hell with them.

Indiana had 3 tries, when you include the Hoosiers loss in the 2002 NCAAs. Indiana says Thank God for the Colts.

Louisiana won 2 with LSU (football) and that's it.

Kansas: 1 and 1 with a win and loss in the NCAAs.

Arizona: 3, with an NCAA, but still only D'Backs to celebrate.

Missouri: All St. Louis and their 2 wins, 2 losses. Sorry, Kansas City.

Massachusetts: all Boston of course. No need to delve further.

Washington: the lone Super Bowl loss from Seattle.

Illinois, 3, with the NCAAs. They still only had the White Sox actually win.

Connecticut, Georgia Tech (basketball), and Virginia Tech (football) were the lone representatives from those states in any kind of championship. UConn won, the Techs didn't. Sorry, Georgia, Virginia.

New York State, strictly to the letter, took 3 championships: 2 Yankees and 1 for Syracuse. New Jersey won the same amount, if you go strictly to the letter and give the Giants to Jersey. Overall the two states won 6 and had 12 tries between them. In other words, you just add Syracuse's win/attempt to all the New York metro area wins/attempts.

Tennessee went for 2, when you include Memphis, and came away empty-handed.

Yet Another NFL Promotion/Relegation Idea

Well Doc, it doesn't take much to get me going on this topic. I've debated how this whole NFL relegation thing could work, and I think something might be needed in time, if only to counteract how many horrible teams there are these days. For years the Bengals stank while raking in millions of dollars, and other teams are starting to follow the same course. The NFL is a river of money, and all you have to do is be in the club.

And so we get wonderful gems like Lions-Rams, and weekends where half the games are one star games. If we're to keep the salary cap, which does at least give every team a chance, we have to find a way to punish the awful teams where the front office has stopped trying. So lets kick some teams out.

For the life of me I can't figure out why there can't be a reasonable second tier league played in the fall, or even in the spring, as a minor league. It works so well in baseball, and even the miserably boring Arena League survived for years.

So, two tiers should work, and we need more teams. Let's give 13 cities a team, or even a second team, to create a second league with 15 teams. LA could have two. Here are the next 13 major metropolitan areas without an NFL team:

LA
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA
Portland
Sacramento
Orlando
San Antonio
Las Vegas
San Jose
Columbus
Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News
Austin
Providence-New Bedford-Fall River
Memphis

Okay, and some of those wouldn't work because they are too close to very popular existing teams. But every single one of them is larger than New Orleans or Buffalo. And further down the list we see:

Louisville
Salt Lake City
Raleigh-Durham
Winston-Salem
Grand Rapids
Hartford
Oklahoma City
Greenville
Birmingham
Richmond

And there are a handful more that have populations of over 1m. Of these lists, are there 13 cities that could field their own team? No doubt about it. And I'd bet at least one of these markets would be a major success. You might even have room for an NFL III.

So here's my proposal, which I'm trying to keep as realistic as possible. We have a new second tier with fifteen teams. The worst team in the NFC and AFC are relegated, leaving just 30 teams in the NFL (like the old format, which I prefer). So, in two years, surely predicated by which big money owners showed up, your NFL II league consists of:

NFC Worst team (Lions/Rams)
AFC Worst team (Raiders)
LA #1
LA #2
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA
Portland
Sacramento
Orlando
San Antonio
Las Vegas
San Jose
Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News
Austin
Memphis
Louisville

This league is more stripped down, with the format being seven home games and seven road games, playing every team once. The top team is promoted, and the second and third team playoff for promotion, that game possibly being the most lucrative game of the year. Relegation would be determined by a short playoff between all teams that couldn't win five games. Imagine the drama as the Titans try to win five games this year! The whole Vince Young thing would have even more impact.

Now, how would you work out the details? Like salary cap and the draft? I say everybody gets to play at the same salary cap, and NFL II teams are mixed in starting at the third round of the draft, with a few more rounds added at the end. Plenty more debate to be had here.

Of course, the owners may never go for all this because you'd be harming their cash cows. Maybe if they got some cash up front for franchise fess that would help. Are there other problems?

Sound Observations - NFL Relegation

Well, as a Packers fan, I want to stick a piping hot iron stake in both eyes after seeing what occured last night, but there's plenty more to get this week...

NFL

1.) I've talked about this before, and I think Mike has originated the idea on this site, but why don't we relegate teams to the minor leagues like the English Premier League in soccer? I think this is the best way to work the UFL into a marketable system in American football. Think about it:

The 2008 Lions get sent down to the UFL after finishing 0-16 in the NFL. Rather than reward their incompetence with a high draft pick and fresh new logo, they must win a certain amount of games in the UFL the following season to become eligible for reinstatement in the primary league. Wouldn't attendance actually increase to the UFL games, in the hope that, if they're playing inferior competition, they have a chance to be promoted at the end of the year? This would provide huge incentives for the UFL teams to recruit quality talent, with the hopes that those players would be able to compete at the highest level.

The converse is true as well. If you have a team at 3-11 in week 15, and there's only a few teams with that record or worse, won't you be playing as hard as possible in the final weeks of the season to avoid relegation? This brings a new dynamic into the league that has plenty of ramifications all season long. It'll provide excitment in both leagues and keep an amorphous affiliation between them. Someone get this idea to Mr. Goodell.

2.) Shannon Sharpe wore a purple velvet suit yesterday for the CBS pregame. A velvet suit. Let that one simmer in your brain for a while. Mmm...

3.) I was at a bar yesterday to watch the Packers/Vikes (because Tennessee played a 3 pm game for some fucking reason and I couldn't weep in the privacy of my own home), and saw some very energetic and vocal Cleveland fans. Even when they were losing 159-3, they kept complaining about calls and cheering their team when they got their only first down. That's committment. Good for them.

4.) This is ridiculous to say, but... I... I think Terry Bradshaw had a pretty amazing interview with Brett Favre on Fox's pregame show yesterday. It was conversational, realistic, biting, and revealing in a way that most people can't get from the super-intelligent Favre. Surprised the hell out of me, but I've got to give him credit. Now, why they conducted the interview in a hall closet of someone's apartment I don't know.

5.) As K-Dub mentioned in the previous post, the Titans looked like they cruised to an easy win with Vince Young, circa October 2007. The reason why is simple: Jeff Fisher is a very, very good coach. I originally bet on Jacksonville to win, but then I thought, "Is there a better coach for a mid-level talent team coming off a bye week, playing a moderately talented visiting team?". I changed the pick and had no doubts the Titans would pull it out. No one does more with less over the course of a season than Fisher.

All the pundits are talking about how Fisher has had only 6 winning seasons in 16 as a head coach. Well, he's only had 5 losing seasons as well, and while 8-8 doesn't really blow the hair back, many of those seasons were during the whole "We're moving to Tennessee! Oh, well, first we have to stay in Memphis for a while, then we'll have to play at Vanderbilt's stadium." days. He's a good coach, and it would be moronic to fire him. Which means he'll be coaching Dallas next year.

MLB

6.) Rodriguez indeed is getting the proverbial gorilla off his back these days, but let's not forget he started this series 0 for 8, and is still not what I would call a clutch hitter. You don't learn stuff like that, or get used to the pressure. You just kind of close your eyes and hope for something to happen. If you're as talented as Alex Rodriguez, sometimes it does. Doesn't mean he won't choke next time.

7.) Strangely enough, given the fact that I really like the city of Philadelphia, I agree with Mike. I don't want to live in a world in which the Phillies have won back to back championships. Of course, I live in a world where Florida won back to back NCAA championships in basketball, while holding the National Championship in college football at the same time. Those were dark days.

8.) What're the odds at this point that the Cubs will EVER win a World Series? Is this even calculatable? Is that even a word? My head hurts.

TV

9.) I'm starting to notice that HBO has gotten away from nudity in their programming. I have to voice my opposition to this. Not only do they show a grand total of 3 distinct movies in a day, but their "original programming" is all mindful, thought-provoking Emmy-bait. This is not right.

Even the previously-fun-to-watch-but-now-looks-like-it's-written-by-a-retarded-monkey show Entourage has focused more on career goals for the group and less on the gratuitous, happy-to-throw-myself-at-and-willing-to-fuck-a-guy-I-just-met SoCal girls from the first couple of seasons. I want answers! If we can't get quality nudity from network shows that can somehow show dismembered and disemboweled corpses, but need to blur out a nipple, we need to depend on our premium channels to give us a little skin. That is all.

Holla back!

The Upsidedown Sports World Of KW

The sports world seems upside down to me the last few days:

• The Titans just blew out the Jags and looked great doing it. Vince Young played with confidence and seemed like a leader. The defense was pretty darn awesome (save for those two Jones-Drew scampers). When did this happen? I’m almost more pissed at the first 6 games seeing them play like this… where was this the last six weeks?


• The Colts nearly lost a game to the 49ers. Peyton was sacked three times, had a fistful of “three-and-outs”, and was missing throws long and short all day. The Colts offense was so frustrated that they had to turn to a trick play to score the go-ahead touchdown (an awesome trick play, by the way).


• A-Rod is awesome-ish… hitting home runs and doubles and getting RBIs in the—gasp—World Series. Yankee fans will probably still not let him out of jail.


• The Predators aren’t flat-lined after all. Now 6-6-1 after winning 4 out of their last 5, the team looks like a contender for one of those lesser playoff spots. For now. The defense looks great, and the offense is starting to gel.


• The entire city of Green Bay booed Brett Favre.


• Eli Manning looks like me playing QB. Tony Romo suddenly looks like Peyton Manning, with zero interceptions the last three weeks.


• USC lost bigger than they have in over a decade.


• Andre Agassi says he used to wear a hairpiece when he was playing tennis in his prime. W. T. F.?

Crazy past couple days... many things happening the opposite of how I expected them too. Especially with Agassi's hair.

The Decline of Sports

Sports aren't going anywhere, it's just that they're not immune to the pressures that every business faces, although generally facing them well off the front pages. Money drives everything, and the game is often played on the outskirts of legality to make more of it. The NBA tries to exploit their refs in quasi-legal ways to maximise profits, and it surprises no one.

The NBA has approached this in the dumbest way possible, the one that everybody can see. And MLB isn't much better by allowing steroids for so long. Issues that all can see will eventually be found out. Best to let players take uppers or something to increase their energy (no, I'm not endorsing that). The NFL is okay for now because steroid bodies can be hidden by the uniforms, but if it weren't for that we'd have the same issues we have elsewhere.

As an aside, I continue to believe that the much maligned Tour de France is the cleanest pro sport in the world because they take drug use seriously and don't just sweep away their issues. Good for them.

But no, the end of sports will never come, as there will always be people like me suiting up to play in adult leagues every weekend. Professional sports are in trouble, real trouble, and they need to face up to this, but something will be around. In what form?

Even if one of the major sports leagues fail, another league will take its place because there is too much money to be made. But, is there a chance that some element of professional "wrestling" will come into sports? Has that already happened in the NBA? I believe it has. I hate to say it, but everything in the book I linked to rang true. We've entered an age of sports as entertainment, and not fully sports.

Phillies Hope to End 364-Day World Series Drought

From The Onion

Cheating And Scandal Will Never Be the End of Sports

Last night I got home and read Mike's previous post, which led to the Deadspin article containing excerpts from a book written by disgraced NBA ref Tim Donaghy. It is indeed a fascinating read, and if it's true, then the NBA certainly has a scandal that I think is even worse than the steroid problem in the MLB.

This past year, I've heard a lot of sports radio talk centered around the steroids in baseball, and at around the time Manny Ramirez made it back to the Dodgers after his 50-game suspension, talk show hosts made note of the warm reception Dodgers fans gave him in that first game and said, "Fans are showing that they just don't care about this steroid mess."

Well, in some ways, this is true. I think the more accurate way to describe it is "people don't care enough about it to say goodbye to baseball."

I've been a baseball fan going on 25 years now. The very best baseball is played in the Major Leagues. College baseball is nearly unwatchable for me. When the steroid scandal hit, MLB dragged its feet for a very long time, finally getting around to suspending players. But the players are allowed back in, the records they may set are not officially tarnished (although baseball writers exact revenge on these numbers by not allowing these guys into the Hall of Fame), and there's no way of knowing whether they are all clean because drugs can be a step ahead of the testing. But for all that, I really have no choice on what MLB does. It's baseball. I love baseball. I will still watch.

It's the same for the lockout that happened 15 years ago. I thought, when a new labor agreement had to be reached a few years later, and there was talk of another lockout, that I might stop watching it if it were to happen. But then I realized, no, I wouldn't. The game I grew up watching and becoming my favorite sport for so many reasons had not changed.

There are a lot of things, I suppose, I wish I could stop enjoying so I could pursue more fruitful endeavors. I guess if I really tried, I could find a way to stop watching (or listening) and I wouldn't notice the void. But every time it's on, and it's either my team or a battle between two good teams, I can't help it. And if someone says they have tickets to the game and I'm not doing anything, I'll go. I think this is the case for many baseball fans, and why stadiums still fill up. It's the game they love...what other avenue is there to watch professionals play?

Sure, there are a few who can stop and do, but clearly it's not going to stop the majority, because they have no alternative. Saying baseball fans, or in the case of the revelations of Tim Donaghy, NBA fans, "don't care" is wrong. We care, we want it completely clean if possible, but in the meantime, the games are still the games we enjoy even if there's something cracked in them.

On the other hand, should officiating in sports become so awful that every game is being altered by horrible calls, you might see an exodus if nothing happens there. Officials can change the game in a meaningful way by interpreting the rules incorrectly or allowing things that are clearly wrong to stand. This is why the NBA scandal could be worse than the MLB steroid problem (although this postseason in the MLB is making me wonder if some umps are on the take). If people start going to games and think that their team is getting hosed because of officiating, and fans take a step further and think the refs are on the take, and there's a lot of evidence supporting this claim, then fans will turn on the sport.

Of course, when fans start turning on the sport, the league will probably make the necessary changes to try to win those fans back...until the next scandal hits.

Another Item in Deadspin's Favor: Blowing the Doors off the NBA?

Well, I'm not sure how much you can trust Tim Donaghy, but I have the feeling you can believe at least SOME of this article in Deadspin. With nothing to lose, he tells all, throwing several refs and the NBA's top brass under the bus. This supposedly was to be published next month, but now will not as the league has threatened a lawsuit. It's a must read.

Sound Observations - Dream NFL Pregame Lineup

Back again this week, since there's a lot happening in the sports world and beyond:

NFL Week 7

1.) I'm addicted to watching the pregame shows this season for strange reasons. One is because I've always generally stuck to Fox because they used to talk about Packers games nonstop in the mid to late 90's, and two because CBS is leading the league in "most mustaches in a pregame crew" stats.

Simply put, there are waaaay too many people in the studio at 11 am. Everyone knows this. Nobody likes it. But the networks just keep throwing us bullshit analysts because a.) they're former players and can string two sentences together, or b.) they're former head coaches that were respected and just want to make an easy paycheck before going back to the grind.

Because of that, we've been treated to the likes of Shannon Sharpe, Michael Irvin, Emmitt Smith (by far the worst idea, ever), Keyshawn Johnson, Terry Bradshaw and Michael Strahan. There's no analysis, cogent commentaries, or useful thoughts. It's all explosive, inappropriate laughter and lighthearted ribbing. Awesome.

There are some decent analysts out there that do their jobs, however, and I'd love to see more of them. So here's my dream team of a pregame panel:

Tom Jackson

Howie Long

Bill Cowher

Charlie Casserly (league info; love that segment on CBS)

For host, I'm waffling between Curt Menefee, James Brown (mustache included), and Chris Berman. All do a servicable job, but Menefee seems like he can barely get a word in edgewise, and Berman relies too much on schtick. Berman's definitely got the longevity, but I'll have to give it to Brown for the moderator position. Even though CBS's pregame is about as exciting as a senior citizen's strip club, I think he gets the job done.

Oh, and I'm sending all the "insiders" packing. Schefter, Mortenson, Glazer, et al. can hit the road. They seem a little too involved with themselves and their "breaking news", when the fantasy guys already have all that information. I wish I were a network producer.

Also, I'll throw an honorable mention to Mike Ditka, who is actually an outstanding analyst, but he can't get his words out properly. He reminds me of Frank Costanza trying to say "Del Boca Vista".

2.) While we're here, some of the box announcers need to go too. I'd give a pink slip to Chris Collinsworth (too smug and not good enough to succeed Madden), Rich Gannon, Ian Eagle, Joe Buck and his mancrush on Aikman, Jon Gruden, Ron Jaworski (put him back in the studio) and Dan Dierdorff.

I'd promote the hell out of Jim Nance, Brian Billick (I'm surprised too), Gus Johnson, Daryl Johnston, and Kenny Albert.

3.) Yes, the Packers will play the Vikings next week at Lambeau, and there will be a smidgeon more press coverage than usual. I hope the old man can make it out there so Green Bay can welcome him with open arms.

I fucking hate Brett Favre.

4.) I'm in a pick 'em league with some family from Wisconsin, and one of the team's names is Biff Stoner. I don't know if it's a pot reference or a clever switch of first syllables, but I think it's hilarious for some reason. Anyway, I went 6-0 with my morning picks for the 3rd week in a row. 6-0! Then New Orleans decided to show up in the 4th quarter, the Falcons played like they had Biff Stoner at tailback and it was all downhill. I hate gambling.

MLB

5.) Yankees/Phillies. Who's excited? Anyone west of the Mississippi? I'm sure this will be a decent series, and not a coronation, which will be pretty nice for a change. But we're playing into November now. November baseball? I'm past caring.

College Football

6.) Speaking of coronations, I spent Saturday night listening to the announcers spooge all over Tebow again in the Mississippi State/Florida game. Did you guys know that Tebow's competitive? And that he HATES to lose? And that he writes little Bible verses on his antiglare thingies on his cheeks? I imagine he's wearing those when he's banging some groupie or cheerleader in Starkville. Good times.

TV

7.) How did anyone watch anything before DVR/Tivo? Were people more active? Did they converse more? All I know is that I haven't seen my family since the fall season started.

Cheers!

Sound Observations - 2009 Style

Hi everybody! It's been a while, and I know people are clamoring for more myopic insights into relatively meaningless activities, including professional sports. Well, look no further! I've been watching this strange, sad and surreal version of the NFL season for the past 6 weeks, and there's certainly a lot to discuss. Sit down for a while, sip some cocoa, and join me, won't you?

NFL Weeks 1-6

1. Well, the first thing I want to get out of the way is my outright and unstoppable hatred of the quarterback of the Minnesota Vikings. This is one of the most mindblowing events in sports history, and I don't know quite how to react. Has there ever been anything like this in professional sports? Ever? Didn't think so. So now, to Packers fans (like me; full disclosure) have this mentality:

We had the greatest dad in the world. He did cool things like hunt and fish and cuss and fart and he used to get reeeeeally messed up on booze and drugs, but even that's ok, since he's clean now. Last year, he wanted to separate from Mom. We love Mom more than anything and will support her over anyone else, but we kind of understood. Dad needed something more. He doesn't like to sit at home and watch TV every night. He'd rather be out playing poker with the guys or hanging out at his steakhouse. He really should be looking for a hotter piece of ass. Even though we love Mom.

Well, after the hot-ass New Yorker was done, we figured Dad would move back into the neighborhood. Maybe even patch things up with Mom. If not, at least he'd be around, not chasing poontang all over the Big Apple. But... what? He's getting re-married? To Mom's worst enemy? The slut in school that always tried to steal Mom's boyfriends, but could never land a serious relationship (i.e. go all the way)? How could he? And now they're opening a business together, and it's super successful, and... oh god, now they're kissing and fondling in public, right in front of Mom... oh god...

Yeah, so now you know how depressed the entire state of Wisconsin and various other patches of America are. Good times.

2. Moving on to happier items, let's look at the Tennessee Titans, who most recently got whacked in the balls 59 times in one single game. This is a complete systematic anomaly. The team is essentially the same one that won a whole shitcan full of games last season, and now they look like the Washington Generals. I've gone from feeling despondent to actively rooting for them to be as crappy as possible... to make the '08 Lions look like they were competent. If they really try, they can suck on a monumental level. There's no saving this season; you might as well try to be great at something. In this case, getting repeatedly whacked in the balls.

3. As of Week 6, the division leaders are Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Denver, New England, San Fransico, Minnesota, New Jersey Giants and New Orleans. So... whatever that means. I have this feeling that, by Week 8-9, the sports pundits will be acting like they were picking the Saints and the Broncos all along, and this is not anything to be surprised about. It's the old Detroit Tigers of '06 syndome again!

4. Peyton Manning can kiss my ass. Is there any use for him in those Sony commercials? Anything? Is his mere presence supposed to make Justin Timberlake funnier? Well, I tell you this, Mr. Manning. Justin Timberlake is PLENTY funny enough on his own. I said good day, sir!

5. Hmmm, 6 weeks in and I still miss Madden. I miss the eyebrows, and the witticisms, and the vodka smell you could almost get through the TV. Maybe he could get back together with Pat Summerall next season, and we could have them do a good ole fashioned drink off to see whose liver explodes first. I've got Summerall after 10 shots.

6. Speaking of drinking, if you took the collective blood alcohol level of the cities of Cleveland, Buffalo, and Kansas City on a random Sunday this season, which would be the drunkest? Is Dallas in the mix? Oakland? Discuss.

NBA

7. LeBron James and Shaquille O'Neal might give people a reason to watch the NBA this season. With the new-look Cavs going against the returning champion Lakers, and the Celtics trying to bounce back from a rough post-season last year, and the Bulls trying to establish themselves as a force in the Eastern Conference, and... hey! Is anyone listening? Hey! Ok, nobody cares. Moving on...

MLB

8. So, is it gonna be Yankees/Phillies or Yankees/Dodgers? It seems like this is going to be one of those years that the Yankees win the Series. These years used to happen frequently, and people just became immune to it. Now A-Rod can try to redeem himself for post-season failures and steroid-humping, and Jeter can jump into "Greatest of all time" discussions that will splatter all over ESPN like A-Rod on his first date with Kate Hudson. Meanwhile, the Dodgers can win and Manny will continue to look like he has no idea where he is. Either way, it'll be interesting.

TV

9. Well, I think it's high time I got into Gossip Girl. Don't know why, and don't know why it's taken me this long, but I figure it's worth a shot. Rich, bitchy white kids living in uptown Manhattan that consistently engage in high-risk behavior, whilst spouting lingo that's so cool you've never even heard words like it: Count me in! Also, this helped.

Miscellaneous

10. I asked some friends about this, but I wanted to open it up to anyone who reads this blog. Is there anything worse than sitting on a warm toilet seat in a public bathroom? Yes, if it's wet it makes it worse, but if you look at the seat, it looks clean, no liquids scattered about, you go to sit down, and it feels like someone JUST got up about 3 seconds before... ugh.

Honduras is in!

The Honduran announcers from last night when we tied the score, sending Honduras to the World Cup. Cheers to them, maybe the classiest group of fans on the continent. They gave us a standing ovation when we qualified on their home soil, and we returned the favor. Gol Estados Unidos!



UPDATE: One more, from the streets. Gringo! Gringo! Gringo!

Here's What I Feel Like Right Now

In this YouTube video where someone has taken a video camera and shot a section of The Simpsons, I feel like this, at the 1:12 mark, after watching the Titans' fifth straight loss. Enjoy.

Microcosm

Tonight's 5-4 loss to the Marlins is business as usual for the Braves. Let me tell you how this one ended:

Bases loaded, 2 out, one of the Braves' better hitters at the plate. They knocked out Marlins closer Leo Nunez after 2 unearned runs got them to 5-4. The excitement was palpable. There seemed to be nothing that was going to stop the Braves from at least tying this game. In comes Brendan Donnelly to relieve Nunez. He throws a pitch...a ball...it gets behind the catcher and he can't find it.

But Matt Diaz at 3rd can't see it either and is halfway down the line...Marlins catcher Ronny Paulino finds it and fires to third...Matt Diaz out...ballgame over.

In games like these, you're hoping for some sort of escape from this situation. The escape never comes. Your team lost on one of the rarest of plays, not to mention rare for a game-ender.

The Braves found themselves in this situation after falling behind the Marlins 5-0, a deficit brought on in big part by an error by Chipper Jones, who allowed a double-play grounder to go into left field earlier in the game and it led to 3 runs. A pitcher the Braves had batted over .370 against decided this was the night he would strike out 16 batters.

The deficit the Braves find themselves in with the standings has been brought on by losing not only these types of games, but the games where they had huge leads that were erased, notably in the 3rd game of the year against the Phillies in which they had a 10-3 lead heading into the 7th inning and somehow lost 12-11. The bullpen, in general, has been a strength of the Braves but they've blown it in the most crucial situations. In 48 save situations between closer Rafael Soriano and part-time closer Mike Gonzalez, they blew 13. In other save situations, the other relievers combined for a 1-for-12 clip, bringing their success rate to 24 blown saves out of 60.

Now, I'm not the type to say my team should have won each and every one of those, because the percentages will be against you on that. But what about half of them? 12 more wins. Hell, they'd be NL East leaders with just that, forget about the Wild Card.

With the way the Braves lost the past two games and the Titans lost this past Sunday, I have seen all of the things that are supposed to be positives for a team fail miserably.

If anyone wants to know why I don't believe in the things that I have railed against in the past, this is why. I've seen my team have what is known as momentum and watched them fail constantly. I've seen the crowd get behind my team, cheering lustily, to be let down. I've seen my team play with emotion and lose. In the end, your team of guys must make the plays that move them forward, and nothing else matters, regardless of how the energy changes in the building or the two teams.

0-3

They just don't have any edge to them. They do not make their own luck. They don't press the issue and put their opponents on the back foot. They make dumb mistakes and are punished for it. They don't take advantage of other's mistakes. In a league filled with parity, that makes it very tough to win.

It's not Kerry Collins fault, limited as he is. His strengths are enough for a team to win, and his accuracy today was on a high level. Chris Johnson is turning into a fantastic running back. I guess that leaves it on the defense, and of course special teams.

A few years ago, a 1-4 start became a loss in the AFC Championship, but it seems unlikely to happen again. You'll likely hear Fisher saying that we just need to be patient and play our game, but it's not good enough in a game this emotional. I don't see the possibility that the needed change in attitude will come.

P.S.: One final note. The Comcast sports package is a must have now that the NFL RedZone channel is included. It is fantastic, and ESPN U is included as well.

Are You Serious? Titans 0-3

So, here at the aftermath of YET ANOTHER giveaway game, listening to chants of "3 and 0" mixed with "Titans suck" and "0 and 3!". If the Titans haven't found every way to lose a game this year in 3 games, I dunno what else there is. Two fumbled punts deep inside Titan territory? Seriously? Just give it away. Holy shit.

Update1: J E T S Jets Jets Jets never gets old. Never.

Update2: Lots of Titans fans here. Lots of Titans fans getting unmercifully booed.

Update3: I think our punt returner just fumbled his deodorant in the locker room. And the Jets STILL recovered it.

Update4: The Lions have more wins than the Titans.

Update5: Yes it's confirmed. Jets recovered the deodorant. And a bar of soap. Looks like no one on the Titans is getting clean today.

How I Learned to Start Worrying Again

And fear the freaking Soviets, still. The Perimeter doomsday device is STILL ACTIVE.

Perimeter ensures the ability to strike back, but it's no hair-trigger device. It was designed to lie semi-dormant until switched on by a high official in a crisis. Then it would begin monitoring a network of seismic, radiation, and air pressure sensors for signs of nuclear explosions. Before launching any retaliatory strike, the system had to check off four if/then propositions: If it was turned on, then it would try to determine that a nuclear weapon had hit Soviet soil. If it seemed that one had, the system would check to see if any communication links to the war room of the Soviet General Staff remained. If they did, and if some amount of time—likely ranging from 15 minutes to an hour—passed without further indications of attack, the machine would assume officials were still living who could order the counterattack and shut down. But if the line to the General Staff went dead, then Perimeter would infer that apocalypse had arrived. It would immediately transfer launch authority to whoever was manning the system at that moment deep inside a protected bunker—bypassing layers and layers of normal command authority. At that point, the ability to destroy the world would fall to whoever was on duty: maybe a high minister sent in during the crisis, maybe a 25-year-old junior officer fresh out of military academy. And if that person decided to press the button ... If/then. If/then. If/then. If/then.

Once initiated, the counterattack would be controlled by so-called command missiles. Hidden in hardened silos designed to withstand the massive blast and electromagnetic pulses of a nuclear explosion, these missiles would launch first and then radio down coded orders to whatever Soviet weapons had survived the first strike. At that point, the machines will have taken over the war. Soaring over the smoldering, radioactive ruins of the motherland, and with all ground communications destroyed, the command missiles would lead the destruction of the US.

Pass Defense Continues to Suck; Titans 0-2

The Titans have now lost 2 games by a combined total of 6 points.

They have allowed 678 passing yards in two games. And yet again, the other team makes the play that saves their bacon: Andre Johnson's one-handed circus catch TD. I guess the bright side is that the Titans have allowed 104 rushing yards total in two games, but I'd be willing to cash some of that in for a few more plays in the secondary.

The Titans cannot win close games. And what the hell is Kerry Collins doing holding the ball with one hand near the end of regulation? Veteran? Hell I'll take Vince Young if the Titans are going to lose this way.

Also, logic fails the NFL rules as the Titans suffer a ridiculous, nonsense returner interference penalty in the game, where Texans returner Jacoby Jones calls a fair catch, is unable to actually catch the ball, hitting off his hands, and the Titans are penalized for recovering it in the air. The rule is like this, and tell me if this sounds like a matter of semantics (important part in bold):

1. The member of the receiving team must raise one arm a full length above his head and wave it from side to side while kick is in flight. (Failure to give proper sign: receivers’ ball five yards behind spot of signal.) Note: It is legal for the receiver to shield his eyes from the sun by raising one hand no higher than the helmet.
2. No opponent may interfere with the fair catcher, the ball, or his path to the ball. Penalty: 15 yards from spot of foul and fair catch is awarded.
3. A player who signals for a fair catch is not required to catch the ball. However, if a player signals for a fair catch, he may not block or initiate contact with any player on the kicking team until the ball touches a player. Penalty: snap 15 yards.
4. If ball hits ground or is touched by member of kicking team in flight, fair catch signal is off and all rules for a kicked ball apply.
5. Any undue advance by a fair catch receiver is delay of game. No specific distance is specified for undue advance as ball is dead at spot of catch. If player comes to a reasonable stop, no penalty. For penalty, five yards.
6. If time expires while ball is in play and a fair catch is awarded, receiving team may choose to extend the period with one fair catch kick down. However, placekicker may not use tee.

Nowhere in the rule does it state: coverage team must wait for the ball to hit the ground, or can't catch it in midair after the ball has hit off the returner. In fact, by strict measures, the fair catch signal should have been "off" when the ball glanced off Jones' hands. Rule 2 is a bit interesting in this case, but the Titans sat there and waited for Jones to catch the ball and did not interfere with him until the bumble.

Also, the TD Jones caught should not have been a TD just by virtue of his knee hitting at the 1 yard line. We might have been delaying the inevitable here, but you still have a chance.

The turning point of this game was where the Titans had a 21-7 lead, then a defensive meltdown allowed Andre Johnson to go untouched through the defense and get an easy wide open pass. This would have been forgivable had Kerry Collins not thrown an interception right after that and allowed the Texans great field position to get the tying score.

What is it with backups that they can't enter a game in a crucial situation? So Craig Hentrich gets hurt and can't hold the ball on a Bironas field goal? So the Titans go for it on 4th and 6, because no one on the team can hold the ball for our kicker should he need to try a 50-yarder? Seriously. Do any other teams ever get into these situations? I'm going out on a limb and say, "No." Not even the Bengals probably have to think about stuff like this.

Jason Jones got high fives after getting kicked out of the game for throwing punches at the Texans after a run play. Way to go, Jason! Way to get kicked out! Way not to be professional! I would think maybe Jeff Fisher will handle this behind closed doors, but I would have liked to have seen him grab Jones' face mask and admonished his sideline for cheerleading this crap.

Titans are 0-2 guys. You ready for some football? Next up, 2-0 Jets.

What Is The Deal With The Titans?

It's the first game. It's just one game. Ultimately, it may not mean much for the season.

However, is there a team that loses more games like last night's 13-10 final against the Steelers than the Titans?

This post is very much woe-is-me and I'm sorry in advance for the complaints. But something is up.

It's all about plays, but it always seems like teams make absolute miracle plays against this team. Troy Polamalu's interception...I mean come on. Sort of reminds me of that Marvin Harrison stretched-out one-handed catch a few years ago. Somehow these teams, like the Ravens, find a way to block a field goal in these close contests. These are all rare plays, but happen to the Titans with alarming frequency. Didn't you just get a feeling on the blocked field goal attempt something bad was going to happen?

My point is, you don't see the Titans make these plays, ever. Yeah, they got that Hines Ward fumble late in regulation...near their own goal line. Couldn't force one anywhere meaningful, where you might position yourself to win the game. That's not a criticism...it's a comment on the serendipity of this team.

We had the fortunate experience of seeing the Music City Miracle ten years ago. I am not referring to plays like these. That truly was a miracle play. But remember the circumstances by which that play was necessary--the Titans had the lead the whole game and then found themselves behind...somehow. They dominated that game against the Bills and found themselves inexplicably in the position to lose it.

That New England playoff game a few years ago...Drew Bennett drops a sure catch in field goal range to tie it, not to mention the intentional grounding before that play that knocked them out of range in the first place.

Two Ravens losses in the playoffs after dominating both sides of the ball, but finding ways to lose possession and give up easy TDs and/or stopping drives near the Ravens' goal line. Plus, more blocked field goals.

The AFC Championship against the Raiders where the Titans got the lead, then were going to get the ball back, only to fumble it in their own territory and lose the lead going into halftime.

The Super Bowl where Anthony Dorsett tripped and fell and allowed Isaac Bruce to score an uncontested TD. Not to mention, the 1-yard-short play which was all kinds of wrong.

Between the Titans and the Braves, I think I've experienced enough highs knocked down to lows. I have heard a great many people say, "Well, I'd rather be in your position than to follow my team." I'd say, try it. It's clearly not fun. Back in the late eighties when all I had was a crappy Braves team and a just-as-crappy Falcons team, you could find solace in that they were bad and you didn't have to worry about it. You don't invest any heart in the matter because you know that they're not likely to go anywhere. You just hoped they could win this time. If they didn't, you expected it.

These teams (Titans, Braves) do not make the special plays necessary to win and/or the other teams do make the special plays necessary to win. Or, it's a bad decision or something that was a strength inexplicably turns into a weakness at the crucial time. It's a bad combination of lousy events that occur in games that will be close.

I'm just saying you would think with all the times I've seen a team I follow go to the postseason (or have the potential to go to the postseason), I would have seen numerous times where my team took control of the game and put it away, or at the very least, wouldn't allow the other team to make that big play. I can count the special plays on one hand probably, in 20+ years of following sports, that my team made. I would explode trying to count how many times a team made a play against my team.

Perhaps some of it is that I focus so much on the negative, I forget the positive. But going back through the ages, the only plays I can remember being truly amazing for my team and devastating for the other team are the Music City Miracle and Francisco Cabrera's game winning single in the 1992 NLCS against the Pirates (Pirates fans definitely know the pain). I can't even make a case for anything in the 1995 World Series run that truly fits: David Justice's HR in Game 6 that proved to be the game winner is close, but then I had to bite my nails through the rest of the game hoping the Indians didn't score.

I'm just looking for my team to make an important play in a meaningful way. It's ridiculously rare.

Just For Mike

Here Mike, 23 Films from 1984 that I would watch before Amadeus (The Best Picture Winner), and I don't think I'm alone:

BROADWAY DANNY ROSE, THE KILLING FIELDS, STOP MAKING SENSE, A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET, KARATE KID, GREMLINS, PARIS,TEXAS, BEVERLY HILLS COP, THE COTTON CLUB, 1984, THIS IS SPINAL TAP, ROMANCING THE STONE, TEMPLE OF DOOM, ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA, GHOSTBUSTERS, UNDER THE VOLCANO, THE GODS MUST BE CRAZY, STRANGER THAN PARADISE, TERMINATOR, A PASSAGE TO INDIA, STARMAN, DREAMSCAPE, BROTHER FROM ANOTHER PLANET

This being said, I do love "Amadeus," so once again what an incredible year for film. And it's only a matter of opinion except for the fact that I'm right and you're wrong. Enjoy. See you at Trivia next week.

Flickchart Rankings

Still a ways to go, but here is my Flickchart top 20 out of 511 ranked:

1. The Godfather
1972
Francis Ford Coppola

2 2001: A Space Odyssey
1968
Stanley Kubrick

3. The Natural
1984
Barry Levinson

4. Manhattan
1979
Woody Allen

5. Star Wars
1977
George Lucas

6. Amadeus
1984
Milos Forman

7. The Seven Samurai
1954
Akira Kurosawa

8. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
1984
Steven Spielberg

9. GoodFellas
1990
Martin Scorsese

10. Annie Hall
1977
Woody Allen

11. Vertigo
1958
Alfred Hitchcock

12. Hoosiers
1986
David Anspaugh

13. The Third Man
1949
Carol Reed

14. Ferris Bueller's Day Off
1986
John Hughes

15. Raiders of the Lost Ark
1981
Steven Spielberg

16. Glory
1989
Edward Zwick

17. The Exorcist
1973
William Friedkin

18. Apocalypse Now
1979
Francis Ford Coppola

19. The Godfather Part II
1974
Francis Ford Coppola

20. Smoke
1995
Wayne Wang

How Football(Soccer) Works: A Guide for Americans

So Chris has asked me a few times about the setup of soccer, and how all of the many competitions are formed. This is my attempt to lay out a generic setup that is basically followed by every club team and national team throughout the world. There is plenty of variety in different countries, of course, but these are the basics. I'll start with the club teams.

---

LEAGUE: Every soccer country that even pretends to be serious has its own league. In most of the world, this is ten to twenty teams, who play each other two to four times, for a total of around forty games. In Latin America, they will often split the number of games in half and declare two champions a year. Some countries, like ours, have a post-season to determine the winner, but none of the top leagues do this.

Most countries have promotion and relegation, often called pro/rel, where you can move up a league or down a league based on how well you finished the previous season. For example, if this was in place here, the AAA baseball champion would be in the big leagues the next season, and the Nationals misery would only last one more year as they'd be demoted. This leads to an incredible 24 tiers of football in England.

England: Premier League
Argentina: Primera División Argentina (two leagues per year)
USA: MLS


CUP: Most countries with a league also have a cup tournament. This is a single elimination tournament that lasts the entire year and can comprise of teams from almost any league in the country. Almost anyone can form a team to enter. Just to make a point of this, I could round up the readers of this blog and form a team, and theoretically we could win this cup if we never lost a game. That is pretty cool. A few years ago an amateur team from Dallas made the last 16 before losing to the LA Galaxy.

England: FA Cup
Argentina: None
USA: Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup


CONTINENTAL CHAMPIONSHIP: Every continent (Europe, North America, South America, Africa, Asia, Oceania) has a tournament to declare a continental champion. Through various methods, teams that do well in their league, and sometimes who win their cup, are entered into this tournament the following year. For example, the top four English teams (Manchester United, Liverpool, Chelsea, and Arsenal) will play in next year's tournament. Every continent is different, but eventually one winner is determined. The European Champion's League is the biggest title in all of club soccer.

Europe: UEFA Champion's League
South America: Copa Libertadores
North America: CONCACAF Champion's League


SECONDARY CONTINENTAL CHAMPIONSHIP: This is similar to the continental championship, but basically takes the next best teams. Cup winner usually get automatic qualification into this tournament. In England, last years fifth and sixth place finishers, as well as their cup winner are entered into the following year's tournament. Think of it like the NIT, but back when only 32 teams made the NCAA tournament, and so it still meant something, especially to the smaller teams.

Europe: Europa League (formerly UEFA Cup)
South America: Copa Sudamerica
North America: None


LEAGUE CUP: Some countries have a second cup that only the top leagues can enter. This is rarely as prestigious as the main cup, but still, it's silverware, and it's nice to get your hands on.

England: League Cup (aka Carling Cup)
Argentina: None
USA: None


SUPERCUP: The previous year's cup winner and league winner play a glorified pre-season game, which opens the season. A trophy is awarded, and nobody turns it down. This is the least prestigious trophy, but it does mean a new season has started!

England: Community Shield
Argentina: None
USA: None


CONTINENTAL SUPERCUP: Some continents have the winner of their two main continental competitions play each other in a one off game. It's not taken too seriously, but it's still nice to win.

Europe: SuperCup
South America: Recopa Sudamericana
North America: None


WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP: Every year, the FIFA Club World Cup is contested between the winners of all six continental champions. It is a quick single elimination tournament that has always featured the South American and European champions in the final. It is a very big deal in South America, and is a nuisance for the European team. Still, it's considered poor form for the European team to lose it, and it never hurts to declare yourself a world champion.


So, how could Manchester United have won seven titles last season? They won the English League, English League Cup, FIFA Club World Cup, and English SuperCup, but lost the finals of the continental championship, exited from the FA Cup in the semi-finals, and lost the European SuperCup to Zenit St. Petersburg. So, only four. Can any team ever do a clean sweep?

---

Okay, now for the national teams. This will be faster:

WORLD CUP: The big one. Every nation tries to qualify, and each continent has its own qualification method.

CONTINENTAL CHAMPIONSHIP: Every continent has its own title. Most are once every four years. Some, like in Europe, are almost as big as the World Cup.

Europe: Euro (even numbered years that are not World Cup years)
South America: Copa América (year after World Cup)
North America: Gold Cup (odd numbered years, but only one that is year after World Cup is really taken seriously)
Africa: Cup of Nations (every two years, but might be changing)
Asia: Asian Cup (year after World Cup)
Oceania: Nations Cup (even numbered years that are not World Cup years)

CONFEDERATION'S CUP: Every four years, one year before the World Cup, the host nation gets to test drive the car. South Africa learned that they still have some work to do. The six continental champions, World Cup champion, and host are all invited, for a total of eight teams. This is often not taken that seriously until you lose to the United States, at which point you are terribly embarrassed and wish you'd taken it more seriously. Just like the Copa Americana, it is generally pretty up in the air until Brazil decides to actually try, and then they win another trophy. This year they started trying at half time of the final.

FRIENDLIES: You may hear of an international game called a Friendly. This is an exhibition game.

---

Well, hope that was enlightening. You can see how a player can get tired of playing so many games. I tried to keep to the basic, but it's forever entertaining as every country does its own thing, and curiosities abound. I hope that cleared up some of your questions on this strange world.

Did Anyone Actually See This?

Because I doubt any of you actually subscribe to the Tennessean. But this is insane, and is a perfect example of why not only will I never subscribe, I am actively rooting for their failure.

1984: What A Year For Movies

"They don't make them like they use to" is a saying that is as cliched as when it was first spoken, but I came across this list of films that came out 25 years ago, in 1984. Wow!

Ghostbusters, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, The Terminator, This is Spinal Tap, Amadeus, Beverly Hills Cop, Gremlins, The Karate Kid, Once Upon a Time in America, A Nightmare on Elm Street, Sixteen Candles, Romancing the Stone, The Natural (I included this for a couple of weird contributors to this site; I still hate the film as much as I use to), Top Secret, Police Academy (Not good but a classic in some people's minds), Splash, Revenge of the Nerds, Starman, Repo Man, Firestarter, Bachelor Party, Night of the Comet, All of Me, Cloak and Dagger, Dreamscape, 2010, Broadway Danny Rose, Purple Rain, Body Double, Stranger Than Paradise, Stop Making Sense, The Cotton Club, Star Trek III, Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter.

Just look at the variety of awesomness (In some cases awesomely bad; although I left out titles such as Cannonball Run II, Meatballs II, and the great late night staple, Hardbodies.) in this listing. I wonder if 25 years from any given year this decade we will be able to come up with as fun of a list. I don't know, but I don't think so.

Flickchart: Crack for Movie Lovers

I almost feel like I have to put a warning up about this before writing anything else, because it is addictive as hell, but really fun to boot.

I just discovered flickchart today. It's basic set-up for those that don't know is very simple, but oh so fun. Two film titles will appear in front of you (Most of which are with a poster) and you select one of them and move on to the next pair. It starts ranking all of your favorite films as they all go head to head. It's entirely random if you do it under the "All Movies" section. This almost makes it more fun when you have stuff like "Snow White and the Seven Dwarves" vs. "Pootietang." However, you can also rank among specific genres and even start having your top films go head to head when you have enough chosen.

I've ranked close to a 1,000 films, so I will show you my top 20. It's fairly interesting how everything turns out:

My Top 20 (So Far)
1. Psycho (1960)
2. Dangerous Liasons (1988)
3. The Thing (1982)
4. The Godfather (1972)
5. Planet of the Apes (1968)
6. The Godfather Part II (1974)
7. Casablanca (1943)
8. North by Northwest (1959)
9. Chinatown (1974)
10. Layer Cake (2004)
11. Harold and Maude (1972)
12. Raising Arizona (1987)
13. Platoon (1986)
14. Angel Heart (1987)
15. Rocky (1976)
16. The Birds (1963)
17. Fargo (1996)
18. Superman II (1981)
19. Ed Wood (1994)
20. Heat (1995)

While this would probably not be close to my personal top twenty, this is a good sampling of my tastes. Your also limited to the titles they have on the site, which is quite a few, but they keep adding. There is a good interview with the founders on aintitcool which was where I first heard about it.

I mean "Raising Arizona" is probably not even one of my five favorite Coen brothers films nor is "The Birds" one of my ten favorite Hitchcock films. I still don't know why "Layer Cake" wont' go anywhere. It was one of the first films I ranked and it keeps popping up against awful films so it sticks around. The first twenty you rank will be your top twenty and will fall later on as you start ranking others. I love "Layer Cake," but I'm not sure it would even be in my top 200.

The site is in its early stages; they claim they are still beta testing but then say they are past that. There doesn't seem to be a huge selection of older Foreign films, so Mike, your list will probably be pretty crazy at first. So I don't know, but it's a lot of fun, and I figured you guys would get a kick out of it.

Steve McNair

We would be remiss, I suppose, for not commenting on Steve McNair considering we are a Nashville-based blog.

I did some research: The L & N Line has referred to Steve McNair 53 times (including this one) since our "birth" back in February 2003. There are a few random mentions, to be sure, within those posts, but I'm rather proud to see that we painted a fairly accurate picture of the man who is being so heavily discussed after his murder July 4.

Within these posts we mention his toughness, his leadership, and lament some of his deficiencies at QB, including this gem from Mike:

Also, McNair has a few games with low passing each year, and it usually doesn't matter. This is why he can play on my team any time, but never on my fantasy team.

McNair's ability at quarterback was never one to be filled with eye-popping stats, but he still won.

By the way, Mike: You happen to mention two athletes who would later die in one post. Cory Lidle and McNair get mentioned (as does Neil O'Donnell), and a particular phrase seems to stand out in it: "bloody excited." All out of context, but chilling nonetheless. I'll also note that I was living in the towns both people died in at the time of their deaths.

Also, we had our justifiable questions about McNair from KW with this post. The subject was Pacman Jones, but the subject of "hero worship" is well-discussed, briefly touching on the DUI arrest and how this town gave Steve McNair a huge pass on it. I kind of wish this blog extended back to the nineties, when McNair was heavily booed back in the day. Remember when McNair got the same treatment as Vince Young (even though I don't think there's a chance in hell Young will ever be McNair), and the Titans faithful wanted Neil O'Donnell all the time? The man made huge strides in this town to go from that to being forgiven for stuff like DUIs.

Plus, we discussed an embarassing moment in the McNair/Titans history, when he went unsigned due to that amazing $50 million bonus he was promised after all the times McNair renegotiated his contract to stay in Nashville. The worst of it was when he was barred from going into the weight room. A "didn't know any better" gem comes from Jonathan in the aftermath of this (bold letters are my emphasis):

So, Chris Mortensen has the inside scoop on the Steve McNair story. McNair is supposedly claiming that he will not help mentor a young QB if that's the route the Titans take with their number three pick. Whether he said this or not, how is this even news? When has McNair ever claimed to be a mentor to a young QB? Wouldn't that mostly take place in practice which McNair rarely participates in? The funniest part about the supposed big breaking story was how it alludes to Brian Billick's comment about there being a great over thirty QB out there, and he said he wasn't talking about Kerry Collins. Could he be talking about Steve-O? Maybe, maybe not. But somehow Mortensen takes this to mean that McNair would love to play for Baltimore. You want to attest to the truthfulness of Mortensen's reporting, fine. But he is the one that had that breaking story a couple months ago where Jeff Fisher was going to end up as the coach of the Rams. Good scoop, Chris. That came to be true.

Not two weeks ago I heard the story of McNair helping people out after the tornado that hit downtown Nashville in 1998. Jeff Fisher was talking about how worried he was his franchise QB was going out with a chainsaw (I suppose to cut down broken trees or loose tree limbs) in the aftermath of that storm. And of course, he helped out his home state of Mississippi after Hurrican Katrina. McNair has begun to take on a Paul Bunyan-esque legend for his various good deeds, and we may never know all of them. One caller on a national show over the weekend mentioned how he met McNair, became friends with him over the years, and how the caller's daughter went to school claiming her dad knew McNair and how the classmates made fun of her for lying. And then, catching wind of this, McNair came to their school and gave all the kids signed jerseys, basically as an "I told you so" Show and Tell.

Another man came on a national show and talked about how without any inquiry on his part, McNair "caught wind" that a youth football league didn't have enough money to buy equipment and registration fees, then went out and bought those things for this group of kids.

We still don't know everything about the reasons or circumstances for Steve McNair's murder, nor the woman Sahel Kazemi with whom he was found. We know he was a flawed hero, which I feel is the best kind, because it means that despite weaknesses we may have, we still have the ability to do lots of good. This is not to say that if we find out he was cheating on his wife it makes everything OK; it just means that a great guy has human flaws like all of us.

Here's one of my favorite plays from McNair, the penultimate play of Super Bowl XXXIV, in Spanish!

Billie Jean at Motown's 25th Anniversary

This is the one. The best song, the best performance, the best lip syncing. The debut of the Moon Walk. 50 million viewers. Hard to top, huh?

What Bugs Me About Transformers

The interesting phenomenon on the web right now is the overwhelming response to Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. There isn't really that much of a disconnect from the critics who hate it and those who comment on those critics' websites, but the people who have set out to defend the big-ticket sequel defend it passionately. My review is here.

By the time the movie is done with the weekend, I estimate it will make around $180 million or so, meaning roughly 25 million people will have watched it (assuming that number doesn't include a great many repeat viewers). It made $60 million after one day, which will be its largest day by far.

I don't really have much of a problem with people who like the movie...well, OK...maybe I do. I think what irks me more is that people who defend the movie say something like this: "Well, it's robots and destruction, and I love that and boy does this movie give me a lot of it!" They'll also rattle off the cliche, "Well, you can't expect every movie to be Citizen Kane," as if any intelligent person would walk into a movie like Transformers expecting a transcendent film experience. Note to people who say this: NO PERSON WALKS INTO A MOVIE LIKE TRANSFORMERS AND EXPECTS CITIZEN KANE. Not one person does. This observation is idiotic. We are all now dumber for having heard it.

On Roger Ebert's Sun Times Journal, he discusses the movie in an addendum to his 1-star review, and there are many comments afterwards. One that stuck out had these things to say:

I knew what to expect going in and I got it. I was exhausted when I left the theater but, really, who expected this to be 'the one' that put Michael Bay over as a legitimate filmmaker? Didn't Transformers 1 give you a hint? What sequel has been smaller and more intimate?

Before any of you go see the movie, just think about these words:

Robots
Fighting
Explosions

That's all you need to know. If that's not what you're up for, then by all means go see The Hangover. Or better yet something even more worthwhile like Sita Sings the Blues (thanks for bringing that one to our attention, Roger.)

This is a common defense. I bring attention to the "expected this to be the one that made Michael Bay a legitimate filmmaker" line, which no one has said, or has implied, but yet someone feels like the reason why we're hating this movie is because of "lofty expectations" such as these. That's garbage. Note also the particular attention to bringing up an obscure movie that Ebert likes as if only obscure movies will ever get Ebert's thumb to go up. Meanwhile, a movie like The Hangover, which certainly isn't Citizen Kane either, got a 3-star review from Ebert. For good reason: it was pretty damn funny and wasn't bloated beyond belief with fat.

The other is the checklist: robots, fighting, explosions. Here's where I start to get into my main objection to why people defend this movie. If the movie had just this, had just the three things that are mentioned on this checklist, the movie would get better marks from me. However, we also get:

Long, boring, and incoherent exposition, plus:
Multiple, disconnected plot threads that jack the movie to 2 1/2 hours, and also:
Racist robots, all in the name of humor, not to mention:
Mass confusion of plot and action.

The last one people generally agree to disagree on, because, hey, as long as there's all this action who cares if it's confusing? But to me it means that you could do the scene in any way you want and people will be happy. It's lazy, and it's lazy for an audience not to expect more. By the way: I estimate there's about 20 minutes total of actual robot fighting in this, so what are the other two hours? If I'm wrong on the estimate, it just means it felt that way.

What baffles me about people who defend Transformers is how they can forgive the extremely long stretches where there are no robots, fighting, or explosions. Because in the middle of all this is a filmmaker's need to make it something more than it is, which tips Michael Bay's hand that this movie is not as people are defending it.

You make this movie clock in at 1:45, with a big robot baddie, his minions, and a bunch of good guys, all with particular strengths and weaknesses, throw them in a jar and shake it. Then you can exploit Megan Fox to the hilt. Exploit her, dammit! Show lots of ass and panty shots, shirts that barely cling to her chest, have her sucking on a banana. Exploit her for all she's worth. Note that this plot is flimsier than the one that is actually in Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. But at least I can understand it, it's not dishonest, and I'm done with what I came to see a lot sooner.

The Yankees We Descend From the Cloud

All I did last night was read translations of foreign sport newspapers. This is a good roundup of the fun I had. Let's just say sleep came much later than usual.

Oh, and football (err, soccer) commentary is much better overseas. We are a truly naive soccer country. But that helped yesterday. We didn't know that Torres and Villa and Xavi were supposed to kill us. I bet many of the players barely know who they are... much like most of you, coming to think of it. Incredíble!

Thinking Too Much About Michael Bay's Genitalia

Is it just me or after watching the preview for the new "Transformer's" movie for the umpteenth time do you not think that Michael Bay probably has a really small dick? Is this not the equivalent of the guy who keeps buying bigger and faster cars? This movie doesn't even look like a movie; it looks like a hodgepodge of explosions and Megan Fox's assets. I don't necesarrily have a problem with this; the film will make a shit ton of money, but will any of us remember it or care about it the next day?

Oh, how I do miss on occassion the pre-internet days of summer movie going. Where you actually went into something like the latest "Indiana Jones" or "James Bond" film and it hadn't been forced down your throat with marketing gee whiz. Now with each preview leading up to the release of each film it's as if a bunch of grown men are whipping their junk out on the table to see who's got the biggest money maker. Which might completely negate what I orginally said about Bay since this should be the biggest money maker this Summer. However, I still think the dude has to be overcompensating for something, and I will still go see the film; I mean Megan Fox is really hot!

Penguins Stanley Cup Champions

The Penguins give Pittsburgh their second championship of the year, ousting the hated Red Wings 2-1 in Game 7 in Detroit. It's a game that had the same kind of tenor as the Miracle on Ice in 1980, as the Red Wings simply missed chance after chance in situations in which you normally see them take advantage. The team that looked like should have won simply didn't.

I was definitely rooting for the Penguins in this game, but I'm a sucker for home crowds and had a sick need for Detroit to make something happen. This is why it would have been great had this game been in Pittsburgh. Home crowd going nuts. It doesn't get better.

Marian Hossa: How bad do you have to feel right now, losing with Pittsburgh last year and now losing TO Pittsburgh?

Always enjoy seeing a team that loses the championship winning the championship the next year against the same team.

Sasha Grey

Traci Lords couldn't quite do it. Neither could Jenna Jameson. A few mainstream actors have gone all the way on film, but mostly in "art" films. Reading about Sasha Grey and the new Steven Soderbergh movie, The Girlfriend Experience, it's highly possible we might see someone have dual careers as an adult film star and a mainstream actress, and somehow be successful at both.

Grey comes off pretty wicked smart in most everything I've read, which makes her career path puzzling. What made this very pretty, smart, and sexy girl get into like...real hardcore porn? And thus far, the attention garnered for her performance in Experience hasn't stopped her from continuing on with her original work.

Could America be ready for this kind of celebrity? If Grey starts showing up in more mainstream stuff and starts skyrocketing as a legitimate actress, will studios allow her to be in a multi-million dollar blockbuster or Oscar-contender when there will be people who will flat out not watch the film just because of her presence? I get this thought of her acting in some Walden Media production where kids will be introduced to her in a completely different way (not that I feel like Walden would ever give her that chance). Plus, if she ever got to be a popular actress, would she leave porno behind? I would suppose so...but she's such an interesting figure I'd like to think she'd, every once in awhile, slip back into it.

It would be fun to see her in some Oscar-winning, stuffy British film playing a Jane Austen heroine and then three months later we find out she's done about ten adult films since the film's release to Awards night. Even if she doesn't, that body of work is still there...can you imagine being unaware of her adult work, discovering her as a mainstream actress, knowing her only as that, and then someone shows you a treasure stash of movies where she can be seen in all the various forms of intercourse known to man?

It's perhaps too soon to be speculating this, but Sasha Grey is already closer than anyone else to having this dual career than anyone else has ever been. It would be an interesting, weird chapter in celebrity history--but remember the path has been pretty much paved by Paris Hilton, Kim Kardashian, and Pamela Anderson to be perceived as pop whores and not have it really affect their success (it definitely helped Hilton). And Grey seems smarter than all of those chicks combined.

The culture has become primed for this for more than a decade. We don't bat an eye anymore when it comes to this kind of thing. Just a couple of years ago, we saw a former stripper named Diablo Cody take home an Oscar for her original screenplay, Juno. I honestly think this is going to happen. It's going to take awhile for Sasha Grey to be accepted for both, but as long as she comes off intelligent and charismatic, it shouldn't take her long.

PS: Also let's not forget Stormy Daniels and her bid to become a US Senator. Synergy!