Isn't it? I sure hope not -- I sure hope I didn't just watch my team sleepwalk through a home playoff loss to the Ch*c*g* B*lls. It sure looked to me like they were playing some sort of an extended exhibition, because I've seen them in the playoffs, and it didn't look anything at all like that.
I know Garnett's down, and any realistic chance of hanging Banner Number Eighteen went with him. I get that. But that's no reason to drop Game 1 to the freaking B*lls. So I'm doing my part -- Flogging's going green. Now let's see you do your part, and I don't want to see another loss this round.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
If You Have Nothing Worthwile to Write. . .
Just a thought I had the other day -- what happened to colors? I mean colors used to be colors, right, like red, blue, yellow, purple, whatever. Not that the cardinal colors or whatever were sufficient, but of course we weren't necessarily limited to those, so it was ok. We could modify any color in any number of ways. No, not shackled simply to "blue" we could have light blue or dark blue. When light and dark aren't enough, we could even modify it with adjectives from outside the traditional realm of color. "Sky blue," "electric blue," "sea blue," "midnight blue," the opportunities are almost endless. Even if they're not endless, however, we could combine colors -- "blue-green" or what have you. And now the opportunities really are virtually endless.
And all of this before we even get into the colors that we don't really make use of anyway, like fuchsia, indigo, magenta, crimson, vermilion, mauve, teal, and taupe, to name a few.
Why is it, then, that things have suddenly become colors?
You guys, salmon isn't a color, it's a fish. Charcoal isn't a color, it's a carbon residue (I'll admit, I had to look that one up). Rasberry isn't a color, it's a berry. Our sofa is considered "mocha" (although it cost less). Mocha isn't a color, it's a freaking flavor!
Now I confess, there's no good reason why this should bother me. It's purely a product of my own mild nueroses, and I understand that. But still, where will this end? Will it stop with fish, berries, and flavors? Who's to say that it won't get worse and worse until someday someone describes something that's a sort of pale, unattractive pink (see how I just took a real color and modified it for a more specific purpose?) as simply "Ross." Besides, it had been too long since I'd written anything on here, and I just had nothing better to say.
And all of this before we even get into the colors that we don't really make use of anyway, like fuchsia, indigo, magenta, crimson, vermilion, mauve, teal, and taupe, to name a few.
Why is it, then, that things have suddenly become colors?
You guys, salmon isn't a color, it's a fish. Charcoal isn't a color, it's a carbon residue (I'll admit, I had to look that one up). Rasberry isn't a color, it's a berry. Our sofa is considered "mocha" (although it cost less). Mocha isn't a color, it's a freaking flavor!
Now I confess, there's no good reason why this should bother me. It's purely a product of my own mild nueroses, and I understand that. But still, where will this end? Will it stop with fish, berries, and flavors? Who's to say that it won't get worse and worse until someday someone describes something that's a sort of pale, unattractive pink (see how I just took a real color and modified it for a more specific purpose?) as simply "Ross." Besides, it had been too long since I'd written anything on here, and I just had nothing better to say.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
The Devil's In the Q&A
So not too long ago Mark Driscoll and anther person debated the existence of Satan with a couple other guys on Nightline. I didn't hear about it until after it was done, but then I was curious, especially since mostly all my pastor said about it was about Driscoll's shirt. I didn't really care about the shirt, I wanted to see the debate. So I youtube'd it. It's up in about 10 segments if you're interested.
Anyway, at the end they had an audience question bit. I always hate those. They just never go well when the average person tries to expose the brilliant person (that goes for both sides of this, as well as most any other, issue). Anyway, one woman directed a comment to Driscoll that his belief that Jesus is the only way to God was arrogant and narrow-minded (or some variation of thereof). My question is simply, "Can we do away with this once and for all?"
At the heart of the idea is, essentially, the belief that, if you think you're right and others are wrong, you should think differently and be more open/tolerant/whatever of different beliefs. Isn't it really the same as saying "You think differently than I do, and you ought to change to think more like me?" Isn't that the exact same thing?
Look, the Christ-followers who are happy that those who aren't connected to Christ are headed to a God-less eternity need to be slapped down, absolutely. And there surely are arrogant Christ-followers just like there are arrogant athiests, agnostics, Muslims, Scientologists, whatever. But is there anything arrogant about believing something? Do you believe that there is? Is that arrogant?
Christ-followers shouldn't be throwing stones at those who believe differently, and a lot of them (us, to be honest) have done way too much of it. But it just makes no more sense for those who think differently than us to throw stones at us for believing differently.
Can we please agree on that?
Anyway, at the end they had an audience question bit. I always hate those. They just never go well when the average person tries to expose the brilliant person (that goes for both sides of this, as well as most any other, issue). Anyway, one woman directed a comment to Driscoll that his belief that Jesus is the only way to God was arrogant and narrow-minded (or some variation of thereof). My question is simply, "Can we do away with this once and for all?"
At the heart of the idea is, essentially, the belief that, if you think you're right and others are wrong, you should think differently and be more open/tolerant/whatever of different beliefs. Isn't it really the same as saying "You think differently than I do, and you ought to change to think more like me?" Isn't that the exact same thing?
Look, the Christ-followers who are happy that those who aren't connected to Christ are headed to a God-less eternity need to be slapped down, absolutely. And there surely are arrogant Christ-followers just like there are arrogant athiests, agnostics, Muslims, Scientologists, whatever. But is there anything arrogant about believing something? Do you believe that there is? Is that arrogant?
Christ-followers shouldn't be throwing stones at those who believe differently, and a lot of them (us, to be honest) have done way too much of it. But it just makes no more sense for those who think differently than us to throw stones at us for believing differently.
Can we please agree on that?
Sunday, March 29, 2009
I'll Be Honest
I was hoping for some good fan karma on that last post. Not that the sentiments weren't genuine, and I know that having shots fall is too much to ask, but why couldn't the universe pay me back with -- oh, I don't know -- some hustle on defense? A sense of urgency when you're down double-digits in the 2nd half of a tournament game? Every member of the opposing team cramping up simultaneously for an hour or so (which just *might* have been long enough to creep back into contention)?
For real, I'm starting to question whether this karma deal has any validity at all. I know it goes against the philosophy of so many, but is it possible that what I type into my keyboard here doesn't effect the game in Memphis? What's next, are we also to believe that the announcers calling somebody a good free throw shoooter doesn't suddenly and drastically lower their chance of hitting? Are we to believe that mentioning that we're having a decent day at work doesn't suddenly cause chaos to ensue? I know, I know. I'm taking this loss awfully hard and talking crazy. There just has to be a more reasonable explanation, right?
For real, I'm starting to question whether this karma deal has any validity at all. I know it goes against the philosophy of so many, but is it possible that what I type into my keyboard here doesn't effect the game in Memphis? What's next, are we also to believe that the announcers calling somebody a good free throw shoooter doesn't suddenly and drastically lower their chance of hitting? Are we to believe that mentioning that we're having a decent day at work doesn't suddenly cause chaos to ensue? I know, I know. I'm taking this loss awfully hard and talking crazy. There just has to be a more reasonable explanation, right?
Respect and Sympathies, Card Nation
UofL fans, you're the classiest and most reasonable fan base, college or pro, that I've lived with. A few bad apples, of course (not to name names, but the guy on WKRD at 3:00 who yells about everything isn't much of an ambassador), but across the board you're excellent fans and beautiful people. You know that I'm no fan of your team, but you deserved a far better finish than what you got today. I know it' s no consolation, but for your sake, I'm sorry.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Foul This
A few thoughts after a weekend of watching more basketball than I've probably seen all year:
1) Despite the relative lack of upsets, it's still been a great first weekend with some great games. Siena/Ohio State was incredible, and Wisconsin/Florida St. going on simultaneous to it was great also. Oklahoma St./Tennessee was excellent, and even though they all escaped, the top seeds had some real tests in the 2nd round. So don't let anybody look at all the high seeds left and say that it's sucked. Maybe it's a little more exciting when the upsets happen, but there were still plenty of great games.
2) On a different note, I hate that all the chalky's brackets are being rewarded. Don't get me wrong, I didn't take ETSU to the Final Four, and my bracket's even doing all right (except for my runner-up Wake Forest -- they DO put the "demon" in "deacons" don't they? Wasn't the ACC supposed to be all powerful and crap? Ridiculous!), but they guy currently leading my bracket pool chose nobody higher than a 5 seed in the round of 16, and the basketball gods have been smiling upon him. *sigh*
3) Does anybody else think that basketball would be a better game if they just made it a foul everytime somebody swatted or grabbed a ball that was clearly in another player's control? Swats and grabs are difficult to officiate and result in a lot of bad calls, plus it's basketball, not wrestling. If one dude has the ball the other team should try to take it away through stolen passes or playing sound positional defense, not swatting or grabbing. I'm not asking for more fouls, of course, as much as less reaching, poking, grabbing, swatting. I just think it would make for a cleaner more entertaining, more skill-oriented game.
4) What is it about some players that they show their parents about 6 times during every game, but never any "other" parents? Are the other 9 dudes on the court at any given time orphans or what? Seriously, how many times have we seen the parents of Blake and Taylor Griffen (I've been watching OU all year, of course, and it happens about 6 times during EVERY home game), the kid from Siena whose father has ALS, and the 7"1' 290 lb mountain of a man from UNI? Answer: a LOT. How about the parents from every other player in the tournament? None. Can anybody explain this to me? I ask a lot of rhetorical questions on here, but I'm really kind of curious if anybody could explain this one to me.
5) Great. The next OU game is simultaneous to the next UofL game. And the on-line feeds haven't worked for me. So what? Do I try to go out and arm wrestle for a table somewhere? I'm 145 and arm wrestling really isn't my thing. This really isn't supposed to be an issue this late in the tournament, is it? Oh, to be in a place where the local team is out and nobody cares anymore.
1) Despite the relative lack of upsets, it's still been a great first weekend with some great games. Siena/Ohio State was incredible, and Wisconsin/Florida St. going on simultaneous to it was great also. Oklahoma St./Tennessee was excellent, and even though they all escaped, the top seeds had some real tests in the 2nd round. So don't let anybody look at all the high seeds left and say that it's sucked. Maybe it's a little more exciting when the upsets happen, but there were still plenty of great games.
2) On a different note, I hate that all the chalky's brackets are being rewarded. Don't get me wrong, I didn't take ETSU to the Final Four, and my bracket's even doing all right (except for my runner-up Wake Forest -- they DO put the "demon" in "deacons" don't they? Wasn't the ACC supposed to be all powerful and crap? Ridiculous!), but they guy currently leading my bracket pool chose nobody higher than a 5 seed in the round of 16, and the basketball gods have been smiling upon him. *sigh*
3) Does anybody else think that basketball would be a better game if they just made it a foul everytime somebody swatted or grabbed a ball that was clearly in another player's control? Swats and grabs are difficult to officiate and result in a lot of bad calls, plus it's basketball, not wrestling. If one dude has the ball the other team should try to take it away through stolen passes or playing sound positional defense, not swatting or grabbing. I'm not asking for more fouls, of course, as much as less reaching, poking, grabbing, swatting. I just think it would make for a cleaner more entertaining, more skill-oriented game.
4) What is it about some players that they show their parents about 6 times during every game, but never any "other" parents? Are the other 9 dudes on the court at any given time orphans or what? Seriously, how many times have we seen the parents of Blake and Taylor Griffen (I've been watching OU all year, of course, and it happens about 6 times during EVERY home game), the kid from Siena whose father has ALS, and the 7"1' 290 lb mountain of a man from UNI? Answer: a LOT. How about the parents from every other player in the tournament? None. Can anybody explain this to me? I ask a lot of rhetorical questions on here, but I'm really kind of curious if anybody could explain this one to me.
5) Great. The next OU game is simultaneous to the next UofL game. And the on-line feeds haven't worked for me. So what? Do I try to go out and arm wrestle for a table somewhere? I'm 145 and arm wrestling really isn't my thing. This really isn't supposed to be an issue this late in the tournament, is it? Oh, to be in a place where the local team is out and nobody cares anymore.
Friday, March 20, 2009
It's the Most Wonderful Time of the Year
A handful of quick thoughts after day 1 of the greatest sporting event in the history of sporting events:
1) By bracket's doing GREAT! Which can only mean one thing -- it all falls apart today. At least OU's through.
2) It's one day, and I'm already sick to death of about 6 specific commercials. I know, they keep it free, and so it's a good trade-off. But still, can we get a *little* variety? How many more times am I going to have to watch the dude jump his bike or the kid dodge-ball himself? Sonic at least has a couple different ones, but they're also recycled from years gone by ("Don't you BRING that weak tot action!" That line always gets me, I admit.). *Sigh*
3) The cheap shots on B Griffen have to stop. Seriously. It was ridiculous when the thug from USC blasted him in the package. Did anybody have any idea that things would actually get WORSE from there?
4) Can anybody else get the on-line video feed to work? I sure couldn't. Again, *Sigh*.
1) By bracket's doing GREAT! Which can only mean one thing -- it all falls apart today. At least OU's through.
2) It's one day, and I'm already sick to death of about 6 specific commercials. I know, they keep it free, and so it's a good trade-off. But still, can we get a *little* variety? How many more times am I going to have to watch the dude jump his bike or the kid dodge-ball himself? Sonic at least has a couple different ones, but they're also recycled from years gone by ("Don't you BRING that weak tot action!" That line always gets me, I admit.). *Sigh*
3) The cheap shots on B Griffen have to stop. Seriously. It was ridiculous when the thug from USC blasted him in the package. Did anybody have any idea that things would actually get WORSE from there?
4) Can anybody else get the on-line video feed to work? I sure couldn't. Again, *Sigh*.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
