It is readily apparent that there is simply too much money sloshing around the current Bowl Championship Series system (formerly known as Division I-A AKA big-time football) to get anything to change in favor of a playoff system. We've all heard the arguments for and against a college football playoff system, which basically boil down to this:
For: Let the players decide who really is the best team on the field.
Against: A bunch of really specious arguments, none of which make any sense whatsoever.
I don't even want to get into the reasons why the arguments against a Div I-A playoff don't make any sense; they just don't. For those who say you can't take these players away from their studies for that long, who are you trying to kid? Many football factory schools don't make their star players attend classes anyway, and if the athletes in Division III (none of whom have a hope of playing at the NFL level) can have a playoff system, then why can't we have one at the Div I-A level?
There was a brilliant proposal last year on Yahoo! Sports, and I don't remember who wrote it, but it basically said this: put the top eight teams according to their rankings at the end of the season into a playoff system. (Sure, you'll get griping from the number 9- and 10-ranked schools, but that's better than the current system.) It would take three rounds -- three weekends -- to decide the champion, which is not much different from today's bowl game schedule. For the first two rounds, let the higher-ranked team play at home. That means additional home ticket sales, additional revenue for the school, and the fans don't have to travel ungodly amounts to see and support their team. Plus, wouldn't you just love to see a warm-weather team like LSU, USC, or Florida go north to play in Ohio Stadium or Happy Valley in December? It would remove a lot of the advantage those teams enjoy in warm-weather venues, that's for sure. For the final game, call it whatever name you want, and play it wherever you want, but then the fans only have to travel once for the actual championship game.
Now, a lot of the fans and sportwriters that defend the current system blather on about lots of different quality-of-life arguments related to Div I-A football. To wit: every week is important, even those September games (forget that very few non-conference games mean a darn thing as the football factories schedule Div I-AA patsies for easy victories, Appalachian State over Michigan notwithstanding); with 38 bowl games, you have 38 teams that finish on a high note (and only about two or three of those bowls mean anything -- hell, keep playing all the Armed Forces Emerald Nuts Poinsettia Aloha California Raisin Humanitarian Bowls you want); tradition, tradition, tradition (also forget that the traditional bowl pairings have really only been around since the 1920s or later [in the case of the "Grandaddy of Them All"(R) Rose Bowl, the Big 10 and Pac 10 have sent their conference champs to meet there only since 1947] -- in the entire course of human history, that's a speck of time); speculating on bowl matchups and who is in versus who is left out of the current system makes for great debate (for sportswriters and talking heads on Saturdays); etc. etc., blah blah blah.
Here's my problem with that. Can anyone follow what this writer is talking about relative to Oregon State and the BCS? Never mind for one instant that for Oregon State to crash the BCS system, they have to finish in the top 16 to win an at-large bid and they currently sit at 21 in the BCS rankings. I just get extremely tired with all the speculating about potential matchups and bowl pairings. Nothing is simple like: "Win or go home." A person can hurt his or her brain trying to keep up with all the possibilities.
Maybe the sportswriters want it that way, just to keep their jobs interesting. The bowl commissioners, who have no ties to the NCAA or college football other than being able to raise enough money to keep their bowl game afloat from year to year (seriously, check out how many commissioners from the Rose Bowl actually do anything at all related to college football), definitely don't want to upset their apple carts. Any playoff system would have to find a way of keeping those people happy, which would take a ton of money. They have a vested interest in keeping the current system alive and well, thank you very much.
I did like Barack Obama's response on MNF, when Chris "Ethel Merman" Berman asked him what he would change about sports, if he could change one thing as President of the United States (POTUS). John McCain delivered a very serious, thoughtful answer about stopping the spread of performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) in sports. Obama went with a fan's response, in favor of a Div I-A playoff in football. Now that he is President, he still can't make that happen, but it is nice to dream.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
What Price Sexual Abuse?
There was a criminal case that flew through the courts here recently. It involved a pretty disgusting man named Jon White, and I think I can use his name legally since he is now serving a 60 year jail term after being convicted on 10 counts of aggravated criminal sexual battery. He was a second-grade teacher at Thomas Paine Elementary school, and the girls he abused were 7- and 8-years old.
Yeah. Pretty darn sick.
Well, of those 10 counts, only eight were related to felony actions here in Champaign County. The other two came from when White was an elementary school teacher in McLean County, which is the next county over. The sicko was fired from that job in McLean for viewing pornography on a school computer and having inappropriate communication with a fifth grader, and yet he able to obtain a letter of recommendation from the principal who presumably fired him.
When the sexual assaults became known here in Champaign County, White's recent past in McLean County became grist for the inevitable lawsuits that followed. The issue of whether or not he was guilty was never in question, apparently. He pled guilty to lesser charges in order to avoid a jury trial, which thankfully also spared the Jane Doe victims from having to testify. Several civil lawsuits against White from victims' families are pending, I think.
The real issue became the fact that the families filed numerous Jane Doe lawsuits against the Urbana School District that hired White, alleging malfeasance in the hiring process. The families claimed that whoever was in charge of hiring for Urbana schools decided to go ahead on White, even though they knew the reasons for his firing from the McLean County schools.
There must have been some logic in that argument. The local paper just reported that the first of those lawsuits was just settled for $300,000 and that there be no public admission of liability on behalf of the Urbana School District. So, the hiring manager was not liable for the actions of the person who was hired, but they're going to pay $300K for the family's pain and suffering. And now, the bar has been set for all the other Jane Does who were abused by this sicko.
Is $300K really what that deep-seated emotional scarring is worth for a little girl who has to live with that the rest of her life?
Yeah. Pretty darn sick.
Well, of those 10 counts, only eight were related to felony actions here in Champaign County. The other two came from when White was an elementary school teacher in McLean County, which is the next county over. The sicko was fired from that job in McLean for viewing pornography on a school computer and having inappropriate communication with a fifth grader, and yet he able to obtain a letter of recommendation from the principal who presumably fired him.
When the sexual assaults became known here in Champaign County, White's recent past in McLean County became grist for the inevitable lawsuits that followed. The issue of whether or not he was guilty was never in question, apparently. He pled guilty to lesser charges in order to avoid a jury trial, which thankfully also spared the Jane Doe victims from having to testify. Several civil lawsuits against White from victims' families are pending, I think.
The real issue became the fact that the families filed numerous Jane Doe lawsuits against the Urbana School District that hired White, alleging malfeasance in the hiring process. The families claimed that whoever was in charge of hiring for Urbana schools decided to go ahead on White, even though they knew the reasons for his firing from the McLean County schools.
There must have been some logic in that argument. The local paper just reported that the first of those lawsuits was just settled for $300,000 and that there be no public admission of liability on behalf of the Urbana School District. So, the hiring manager was not liable for the actions of the person who was hired, but they're going to pay $300K for the family's pain and suffering. And now, the bar has been set for all the other Jane Does who were abused by this sicko.
Is $300K really what that deep-seated emotional scarring is worth for a little girl who has to live with that the rest of her life?
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
A Message to You Rudy
For some reason, I just want to post this awesome video from The Specials, one of the best ska bands ever!
There are actually two memories that I always connect to The Specials and ska.
The first is from when I was a junior in high school, and our English teacher asked everyone in the class to name different types of music, just to see how many we could put up on the blackboard. All the usual suspects came flying out, from rock, rap, reggae, country, western ("We got both kinds, Country and Western!"), folk, etc. etc., which also included all the various flavors of rock 'n' roll: rockabilly, classic rock, big hair rock, heavy metal, speed metal, death metal, etc.
As the class generally wound down from everyone trying to out-do each other with the different types of rock, I offered up one word: Ska! You would have thought I was speaking in a different tongue by the reaction from the rest of the class. People laughed at me, saying ska wasn't even a word, much less a type of music. To which, at the time, I could only lamely say that it was the combination of rock, jazz and reggae. When they laughed even more, all I could offer up was that The Police sang ska. That shut them up a little, since most kids at the time idolized Sting and The Police.
"Stop your messin' around..."
My second memory is of seeing The Specials play live in Las Vegas back in 1998, the last time I visited there. I was actually in Vegas for Red Flag; every so often, they let the Herk guys come in and fly a few missions, just to give the fighter pukes the opportunity to "shoot" slow-moving targets. (Very slow-moving!) The week before The Specials came to town, I scalped my way into the sold-out concert by the Brian Setzer Orchestra at the Hard Rock casino. This was at the height of the swing revival, and those tickets were hard to come by! People were all dressed up in Zoot Suits and poodle skirts, and it was a rocking good time to see people try to swing dance when the floor was that crowded! The only bad thing about the BSO show was that some of the people crowding the floor were really there just to be seen at the "popular" event. They weren't fans of the music as much as they were trend-spotting and trying to be hip.
Well, as much fun as I had seeing the Brian Setzer Orchestra play live, it was nothing compared to seeing The Specials play live! I'm sure they no longer had their entire complement of original band members by then. The tickets were much easier to buy, and in fact the crowd was probably half that of the BSO show. But everyone who was there to see The Specials play was truly a die-hard ska fan, and I remember taking a break from dancing just to see several hundred heads all bobbing in time to the music in unison! That was an awesome sight! We had so much more fun at The Specials' show.
"Better think of your future... else you'll wind up in jail..."
There are actually two memories that I always connect to The Specials and ska.
The first is from when I was a junior in high school, and our English teacher asked everyone in the class to name different types of music, just to see how many we could put up on the blackboard. All the usual suspects came flying out, from rock, rap, reggae, country, western ("We got both kinds, Country and Western!"), folk, etc. etc., which also included all the various flavors of rock 'n' roll: rockabilly, classic rock, big hair rock, heavy metal, speed metal, death metal, etc.
As the class generally wound down from everyone trying to out-do each other with the different types of rock, I offered up one word: Ska! You would have thought I was speaking in a different tongue by the reaction from the rest of the class. People laughed at me, saying ska wasn't even a word, much less a type of music. To which, at the time, I could only lamely say that it was the combination of rock, jazz and reggae. When they laughed even more, all I could offer up was that The Police sang ska. That shut them up a little, since most kids at the time idolized Sting and The Police.
"Stop your messin' around..."
My second memory is of seeing The Specials play live in Las Vegas back in 1998, the last time I visited there. I was actually in Vegas for Red Flag; every so often, they let the Herk guys come in and fly a few missions, just to give the fighter pukes the opportunity to "shoot" slow-moving targets. (Very slow-moving!) The week before The Specials came to town, I scalped my way into the sold-out concert by the Brian Setzer Orchestra at the Hard Rock casino. This was at the height of the swing revival, and those tickets were hard to come by! People were all dressed up in Zoot Suits and poodle skirts, and it was a rocking good time to see people try to swing dance when the floor was that crowded! The only bad thing about the BSO show was that some of the people crowding the floor were really there just to be seen at the "popular" event. They weren't fans of the music as much as they were trend-spotting and trying to be hip.
Well, as much fun as I had seeing the Brian Setzer Orchestra play live, it was nothing compared to seeing The Specials play live! I'm sure they no longer had their entire complement of original band members by then. The tickets were much easier to buy, and in fact the crowd was probably half that of the BSO show. But everyone who was there to see The Specials play was truly a die-hard ska fan, and I remember taking a break from dancing just to see several hundred heads all bobbing in time to the music in unison! That was an awesome sight! We had so much more fun at The Specials' show.
"Better think of your future... else you'll wind up in jail..."
Monday, November 10, 2008
The Perfect Eclipse Analogy/Metaphor/Simile
Alas, too late for my last post about the Mitsubishi Eclipse did I realize what would make the perfect analogy/metaphor/simile for the Eclipse. Now, I'm smart enough to realize that these three words are similar in usage, but are in reality quite different in meaning. The following definitions are from Dictionary dot com, but I really thank my sister, who graduated from Ohio State with an English degree and who nailed the differences cold.
---------------------------------------
a·nal·o·gy
---------------------------------------
met·a·phor
---------------------------------------
sim·i·le
---------------------------------------
So, to use a simile, the sexy rounded rear end and otherwise humdrum front end of the Mitsubishi Eclipse is like the sexy rounded rear end and otherwise humdrum front of Stacy Keibler. I think it makes for a perfect analogy, and it also gives me the opportunity to post pictures of Keibler here:
Now, I admit she has a very pretty face, but what really sells calendars and pictures of Keibler is her fantastic rear end. She has no chest to speak of, although she probably isn't as flat as Debra Messing is. I also thought she was terrific on ABC's Dancing With the Stars, and was sad when she was voted off the show. That was the season won by Drew Lachey, with a close runner-up performance by Jerry Rice. When they interviewed her on the way out the door, I couldn't believe how nice and complimentary she was to her competitors, the judges, and to everyone involved with the show. I was impressed that anyone that smoking hot could be so nice! Since then, I've seen that everyone being voted off the show is just as nice and complimentary, so perhaps all the celebrites are under very strict orders to be gracious as they depart.
Anyway, I thought of that comparison and just had to include it here.
---------------------------------------
a·nal·o·gy
| Pronunciation Key n. pl. a·nal·o·gies
|
met·a·phor
| Pronunciation Key n.
|
sim·i·le
| Pronunciation Key n. A figure of speech in which two essentially unlike things are compared, often in a phrase introduced by like or as, as in "How like the winter hath my absence been" or "So are you to my thoughts as food to life" (Shakespeare). |
So, to use a simile, the sexy rounded rear end and otherwise humdrum front end of the Mitsubishi Eclipse is like the sexy rounded rear end and otherwise humdrum front of Stacy Keibler. I think it makes for a perfect analogy, and it also gives me the opportunity to post pictures of Keibler here:
Now, I admit she has a very pretty face, but what really sells calendars and pictures of Keibler is her fantastic rear end. She has no chest to speak of, although she probably isn't as flat as Debra Messing is. I also thought she was terrific on ABC's Dancing With the Stars, and was sad when she was voted off the show. That was the season won by Drew Lachey, with a close runner-up performance by Jerry Rice. When they interviewed her on the way out the door, I couldn't believe how nice and complimentary she was to her competitors, the judges, and to everyone involved with the show. I was impressed that anyone that smoking hot could be so nice! Since then, I've seen that everyone being voted off the show is just as nice and complimentary, so perhaps all the celebrites are under very strict orders to be gracious as they depart.
Anyway, I thought of that comparison and just had to include it here.
Sunday, November 9, 2008
New and Old Mitsubishi Eclipses
Yesterday, while driving to see my family in Dayton, OH, I kept playing "Interstate Tag" with a 2008 Mitsubishi Eclipse. We kept swapping spots on the highway, as the other driver and I would drive at different speeds at different times. I had my cruise control on, so I blame the other driver! I readily admit I'm no car designer, nor do I have any expertise in industrial design. However, I still feel eminently qualified to discuss my observations as a consumer and potential new car buyer.
What I saw was this: the rear end of the 2008 Eclipse looks an awful lot like an Audi Twin Turbo, or TT. Both are somewhat smallish two-door sports cars, with rounded tail sections that look very similar. Here's a picture of the two rear ends side-by-side:
The car I saw on the highway had to be a 2008 model of the Eclipse, because Mitsubishi revamped its design for the front of the car to more closely match the front end of the Audi TT. Here is a picture of the front end of a 2008 Eclipse, which has no character whatsoever:
The front pictured above is completely nondescript, with rounded features and nothing to create any excitement. There's no character, no edges, and the curves for the headlights and fenders didn't even match the curves found on the rear of the car. Here is a picture of the revamped front end of the 2009 Eclipse, side-by-side with the 2009 TT, and the similarity is unmistakable:
So the good news is that the engineers at Mitsubishi realized their previous models of the Eclipse needed to be re-worked. The car I saw on the highway looked really good only from behind. The car did have the wing on the back, which was fine, and I liked the placement of the taillights and the overall framing of the rear end. I just couldn't get out of my head how similar the rear end was to the Audi TT's rear end.
But then I saw the side and front end of the Eclipse, and couldn't believe how lousy they were, especially compared to the TT. It was just a blah rounded front end, with nothing remarkable to recommend it. The two ends of the car simply did not coexist well at all. So at least the engineers at Mitsubishi realized they had to do something to improve the Eclipse's looks, and they could do worse than copying the front proboscis style of Audi. I'm still not completely sold on the new front end of the Eclipse, but it is better than it was before.
It's most interesting that Mitsubishi now copies the European style after collaborating on the Eclipse throughout the '90s with American automakers. Who can forget that the Eclipse and the Eagle Talon were pretty much the sa
me car throughout the '90s? Pictoral evidence is on the left, but when a consumer bought one car, he or she basically bought whichever version of the car he preferred. The performance of those cars was good, if not great. I do remember a good friend of mine who owned either a Talon or an Eclipse, and he posted the second fastest time on a slalom course for amateurs during a weekend racing event. The Eclipse/Talon was not the fastest car in straight-line speed, but they certainly had good suspension and could corner well.
The bottom line is that I was intrigued by the Eclipse when I saw it from behind. The first thought that went through my head was that it could be a fun alternative to the TT, with much the same style but at a far lower price. The Audi TT starts around $32K invoice, while the Eclipse starts around $19K invoice, so the difference on price is remarkable. When I saw the sides and front end of the Eclipse, I couldn't believe how awful they were, and how they didn't match what I saw from the rear of the car. Seeing the change in the front end of the 2009 Eclipse online means I would reconsider that car, but only if I were really in the market for a new smallish sports car.
It's still fun to think about, however.
What I saw was this: the rear end of the 2008 Eclipse looks an awful lot like an Audi Twin Turbo, or TT. Both are somewhat smallish two-door sports cars, with rounded tail sections that look very similar. Here's a picture of the two rear ends side-by-side:
The car I saw on the highway had to be a 2008 model of the Eclipse, because Mitsubishi revamped its design for the front of the car to more closely match the front end of the Audi TT. Here is a picture of the front end of a 2008 Eclipse, which has no character whatsoever:
The front pictured above is completely nondescript, with rounded features and nothing to create any excitement. There's no character, no edges, and the curves for the headlights and fenders didn't even match the curves found on the rear of the car. Here is a picture of the revamped front end of the 2009 Eclipse, side-by-side with the 2009 TT, and the similarity is unmistakable:
So the good news is that the engineers at Mitsubishi realized their previous models of the Eclipse needed to be re-worked. The car I saw on the highway looked really good only from behind. The car did have the wing on the back, which was fine, and I liked the placement of the taillights and the overall framing of the rear end. I just couldn't get out of my head how similar the rear end was to the Audi TT's rear end.But then I saw the side and front end of the Eclipse, and couldn't believe how lousy they were, especially compared to the TT. It was just a blah rounded front end, with nothing remarkable to recommend it. The two ends of the car simply did not coexist well at all. So at least the engineers at Mitsubishi realized they had to do something to improve the Eclipse's looks, and they could do worse than copying the front proboscis style of Audi. I'm still not completely sold on the new front end of the Eclipse, but it is better than it was before.
It's most interesting that Mitsubishi now copies the European style after collaborating on the Eclipse throughout the '90s with American automakers. Who can forget that the Eclipse and the Eagle Talon were pretty much the sa
me car throughout the '90s? Pictoral evidence is on the left, but when a consumer bought one car, he or she basically bought whichever version of the car he preferred. The performance of those cars was good, if not great. I do remember a good friend of mine who owned either a Talon or an Eclipse, and he posted the second fastest time on a slalom course for amateurs during a weekend racing event. The Eclipse/Talon was not the fastest car in straight-line speed, but they certainly had good suspension and could corner well.The bottom line is that I was intrigued by the Eclipse when I saw it from behind. The first thought that went through my head was that it could be a fun alternative to the TT, with much the same style but at a far lower price. The Audi TT starts around $32K invoice, while the Eclipse starts around $19K invoice, so the difference on price is remarkable. When I saw the sides and front end of the Eclipse, I couldn't believe how awful they were, and how they didn't match what I saw from the rear of the car. Seeing the change in the front end of the 2009 Eclipse online means I would reconsider that car, but only if I were really in the market for a new smallish sports car.
It's still fun to think about, however.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Hollywood's Fascination with Assassins
I watched the movie Smokin' Aces (2006) the other night, and it got me started thinking about all the assassin movies that Hollywood has released recently. It's not just Hollywood, either. The European and Asian filmmakers have a long history of making films about hit men, so let's not forget about that. It could be that part of this uptick in assassin movies has something to do with American popular culture being influenced more and more by Japanese and Chinese culture.
When I did a quick keyword search on just the word assassin on IMDB, the Internet Movie Database (best resource ever!), it returned 445 hits. Some of those line items were empty, which is very curious, but they were missing other key films I consider as assassin movies, such as La Femme Nikita (1990), the Whole Nine Yards (2000), and The Boondock Saints (1999). A keyword search for the terms professional and assassin yielded just 12 hits. Obviously, IMDB doesn't index its movie resources all that effectively, and perhaps they rely on user inputs, which can be notoriously faulty.
Here's a very incomplete listing of recent films on assassins or professional hit men (and women!) that filtered through my consciousness as I thought about this topic:
First and foremost, in the majority of these films, Hollywood shows the hit man in a favorable light and/or makes the assassin the hero/anti-hero. I'm sure Hollywood types love to romanticize the idea of the hit man; it must also generate some edgy tension in terms of making the audience care about a person they really should hate very much -- an assassin who takes a precious human life for nothing more than money. It also doesn't get much easier for a writer to show the classic man vs. man or man vs. self conflicts than by using an assassin, does it? Some of the greatest heroes in Hollywood, like Al Pacino's Michael Corleone in the first Godfather (1972) movie, took turns as killers. Who can forget the line, "Leave the gun. Take the cannoli"?
Not too many of the movies listed above actually make the assassin be the bad guy or antagonist in the storyline. Clint Eastwood's In the Line of Fire does, as Clint's Secret Service agent tries to keep John Malkovich from assassinating the President. It's hard to tell when Hollywood and other movie producers really started making the anti-hero be the protagonist (obviously, I never went to film school), but La Femme Nikita, The Professional, and Pulp Fiction took that idea and ran with it.
La Femme Nikita always struck me as being a landmark film for several reasons. First, the idea that the French government would take a female punker and turn her into a professional killer was intriguing. The relationship between Nikita and her handler was very complex, and made for a strong storyline. I omitted the Bridget Fonda remake, Point of No Return (1993), from the list above because it was awful in comparison to the original. The writer and director of Nikita, Luc Besson, also wrote and directed The Professional, also called Leon in foreign markets.
Something about The Professional always struck me as being a little bit off. At the end of the movie, no matter how much Besson wanted me to care sincerely about what happened to Jean Reno's character, I just couldn't muster that sadness. After all, Leon was a killer, and a very good one at that. Gary Oldman was definitely the bad guy in the movie, so Leon was supposed to be the father figure for Natalie Portman and so much more. Maybe my own American sensibilities couldn't fathom the purported romance between Leon and the 12 year old Mathilda, or maybe I just didn't want to get that, as objectionable as it is. I've read that European audiences were much more open to that idea, which might change the whole character of the movie. At any rate, I was never sold 100% on The Professional.
The next movie that really portrayed assassins in a favorable light was Quentin Tarantino's Pulp Fiction. I'll never forget the review I read at the time that pointed out the relationship between the two assassins played by John Travolta and Samuel L. Jackson. That relationship was grounded in the dialogue between the two, and Tarantino has always been known for his dialogue.* The assassins played a significant part in the movie, to be sure. But the movie was not just about the two hit men, and there was a little redemption at the end for Samuel L. Jackson's character, which made it easier to stomach. It's probably the best movie I've seen that is not already in my DVD collection at home.
* Forget all the obvious examples from Tarantino movies, such as the opening of Reservoir Dogs (1992), or any lines from True Romance (1993), which he wrote. Those are classics, yes. But for me, the all-time Tarantino quote came from an otherwise forgettable movie called Sleep with Me (1994). If you've seen it, you know what I'm talking about. I'm not going to cut and paste the whole thing here, but you can read it yourself at IMDB here. If you haven't seen the movie, it's not worth your time to watch it just for the Tarantino performance.
I absolutely loved Grosse Pointe Blank with John Cusack precisely because the killer was so conflicted about his role in society. He continually says that "It's not me" when talking about him fulfilling a contract to kill someone. It's not personal, although the intended victim might not feel the same way. The movie works on so many levels because it does incorporate so much psychology into the storyline, and not just in the scenes with Cusack and Alan Arkin's Dr. Oatman character. When the hit man realizes he can truly never go home again (it's been converted to a Ultimart!), it is a classic scene. It also touches on the entire conflict of whether we allow our jobs or our professional lives to dictate how we are seen in society, of defining who we are as a person. It works on so many levels, not least of which because anyone who has returned for a high school reunion can totally relate.
Given all the examples listed above, I have to say that the "assassin as good guy" plot device is getting a bit tired. In Bruges was artfully done, and the acting was top-notch. The idea that a hit man could be completely conflicted about his career choice, and made even more so because of an unintended victim during a hit on a Catholic priest, was more realistic. In the movie I just watched, Smokin' Aces, one of the German hit men used a dead man's lips (played by Ben Affleck, and how on earth did he keep from laughing while someone else was manipulating his lips and eyelids?!) to request absolution from his victim. It boggles the mind, and was perhaps the deepest part of the movie.
I couldn't help but think that I would have really liked Smokin' Aces much more about 10-15 years ago. I'm sure I've matured in the intervening time, because the overly stylized violence just made me cringe. It was very juvenile in nature, and even though the cast did a very good job with the story, I wouldn't watch it again. That's been true for some of the Guy Ritchie movies, like Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels (1998). I remember seeing that movie in the theater and being impressed with how the characters' stories all came together. It was entertaining at the time. Later, when watching the movie with my sister and a few others, it seemed to be violence just for the sake of violence, and perhaps I've outgrown that.
At any rate, Hollywood continues to pump out movies about assassins. Given that Tom Cruise's Collateral was well received, and that the Coen Brothers won Oscar gold for No Country for Old Men, I expect that trend to continue. At least until people quit going to see these movies.
When I did a quick keyword search on just the word assassin on IMDB, the Internet Movie Database (best resource ever!), it returned 445 hits. Some of those line items were empty, which is very curious, but they were missing other key films I consider as assassin movies, such as La Femme Nikita (1990), the Whole Nine Yards (2000), and The Boondock Saints (1999). A keyword search for the terms professional and assassin yielded just 12 hits. Obviously, IMDB doesn't index its movie resources all that effectively, and perhaps they rely on user inputs, which can be notoriously faulty.
Here's a very incomplete listing of recent films on assassins or professional hit men (and women!) that filtered through my consciousness as I thought about this topic:
- In Bruges (2008)
- Pineapple Express (2008); a comedy, yes, but includes hit men
- Wanted (2008)
- Bangkok Dangerous (2008)
- Hitman (2007); based on videogame
- No Country for Old Men (2007)
- You Kill Me (2007)
- Smokin' Aces (2006)
- The Matador (2005)
- Mr. and Mrs. Smith (2005)
- Collateral (2004)
- Usher (2004); comedy about a hit man turned movie theater attendant
- Kill Bill, vols 1 and 2 (2003-04)
- the Bourne trilogy about the amnesiatic hit man (2002-07)
- Assassination Tango (2002)
- The Road to Perdition (2002)
- The Whole Nine Yards (2000)
- The Boondock Saints (1999)
- Grosse Pointe Blank (1997)
- The Long Kiss Goodnight (1996); Geena Davis takes a turn as a female Bourne
- Assassins (1995)
- The Professional (1994)
- Pulp Fiction (1994)
- In the Line of Fire (1993)
- Unforgiven (1992)
- La Femme Nikita (1990)
- The Eiger Sanction (1975)
First and foremost, in the majority of these films, Hollywood shows the hit man in a favorable light and/or makes the assassin the hero/anti-hero. I'm sure Hollywood types love to romanticize the idea of the hit man; it must also generate some edgy tension in terms of making the audience care about a person they really should hate very much -- an assassin who takes a precious human life for nothing more than money. It also doesn't get much easier for a writer to show the classic man vs. man or man vs. self conflicts than by using an assassin, does it? Some of the greatest heroes in Hollywood, like Al Pacino's Michael Corleone in the first Godfather (1972) movie, took turns as killers. Who can forget the line, "Leave the gun. Take the cannoli"?
Not too many of the movies listed above actually make the assassin be the bad guy or antagonist in the storyline. Clint Eastwood's In the Line of Fire does, as Clint's Secret Service agent tries to keep John Malkovich from assassinating the President. It's hard to tell when Hollywood and other movie producers really started making the anti-hero be the protagonist (obviously, I never went to film school), but La Femme Nikita, The Professional, and Pulp Fiction took that idea and ran with it.
La Femme Nikita always struck me as being a landmark film for several reasons. First, the idea that the French government would take a female punker and turn her into a professional killer was intriguing. The relationship between Nikita and her handler was very complex, and made for a strong storyline. I omitted the Bridget Fonda remake, Point of No Return (1993), from the list above because it was awful in comparison to the original. The writer and director of Nikita, Luc Besson, also wrote and directed The Professional, also called Leon in foreign markets.
Something about The Professional always struck me as being a little bit off. At the end of the movie, no matter how much Besson wanted me to care sincerely about what happened to Jean Reno's character, I just couldn't muster that sadness. After all, Leon was a killer, and a very good one at that. Gary Oldman was definitely the bad guy in the movie, so Leon was supposed to be the father figure for Natalie Portman and so much more. Maybe my own American sensibilities couldn't fathom the purported romance between Leon and the 12 year old Mathilda, or maybe I just didn't want to get that, as objectionable as it is. I've read that European audiences were much more open to that idea, which might change the whole character of the movie. At any rate, I was never sold 100% on The Professional.
The next movie that really portrayed assassins in a favorable light was Quentin Tarantino's Pulp Fiction. I'll never forget the review I read at the time that pointed out the relationship between the two assassins played by John Travolta and Samuel L. Jackson. That relationship was grounded in the dialogue between the two, and Tarantino has always been known for his dialogue.* The assassins played a significant part in the movie, to be sure. But the movie was not just about the two hit men, and there was a little redemption at the end for Samuel L. Jackson's character, which made it easier to stomach. It's probably the best movie I've seen that is not already in my DVD collection at home.
* Forget all the obvious examples from Tarantino movies, such as the opening of Reservoir Dogs (1992), or any lines from True Romance (1993), which he wrote. Those are classics, yes. But for me, the all-time Tarantino quote came from an otherwise forgettable movie called Sleep with Me (1994). If you've seen it, you know what I'm talking about. I'm not going to cut and paste the whole thing here, but you can read it yourself at IMDB here. If you haven't seen the movie, it's not worth your time to watch it just for the Tarantino performance.
I absolutely loved Grosse Pointe Blank with John Cusack precisely because the killer was so conflicted about his role in society. He continually says that "It's not me" when talking about him fulfilling a contract to kill someone. It's not personal, although the intended victim might not feel the same way. The movie works on so many levels because it does incorporate so much psychology into the storyline, and not just in the scenes with Cusack and Alan Arkin's Dr. Oatman character. When the hit man realizes he can truly never go home again (it's been converted to a Ultimart!), it is a classic scene. It also touches on the entire conflict of whether we allow our jobs or our professional lives to dictate how we are seen in society, of defining who we are as a person. It works on so many levels, not least of which because anyone who has returned for a high school reunion can totally relate.
Given all the examples listed above, I have to say that the "assassin as good guy" plot device is getting a bit tired. In Bruges was artfully done, and the acting was top-notch. The idea that a hit man could be completely conflicted about his career choice, and made even more so because of an unintended victim during a hit on a Catholic priest, was more realistic. In the movie I just watched, Smokin' Aces, one of the German hit men used a dead man's lips (played by Ben Affleck, and how on earth did he keep from laughing while someone else was manipulating his lips and eyelids?!) to request absolution from his victim. It boggles the mind, and was perhaps the deepest part of the movie.
I couldn't help but think that I would have really liked Smokin' Aces much more about 10-15 years ago. I'm sure I've matured in the intervening time, because the overly stylized violence just made me cringe. It was very juvenile in nature, and even though the cast did a very good job with the story, I wouldn't watch it again. That's been true for some of the Guy Ritchie movies, like Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels (1998). I remember seeing that movie in the theater and being impressed with how the characters' stories all came together. It was entertaining at the time. Later, when watching the movie with my sister and a few others, it seemed to be violence just for the sake of violence, and perhaps I've outgrown that.
At any rate, Hollywood continues to pump out movies about assassins. Given that Tom Cruise's Collateral was well received, and that the Coen Brothers won Oscar gold for No Country for Old Men, I expect that trend to continue. At least until people quit going to see these movies.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Obama's Mandate
I was happy and relieved to see that Barack Obama won in fairly convincing fashion last night, if only to prevent charges of disenfranchisement and another "stolen" election. Here are a few scattershot thoughts, in no apparent order, but I wanted to get them out there:
Obama won a relatively close popular vote by about six percentage points over McCain, but was able to collect a sizable lead in the electoral college by winning key battleground states of Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Virginia.
Almost 119 Million Americans turned out to vote, which is decent until you consider we are now a nation of over 300 Million. In very rough terms, that's still less than 40% of Americans casting a ballot for the next President.
**Edited on 11/6/08** The numbers I can find online still add up to only about 120 Million Americans having cast a ballot on Tuesday. But on The Newshour on PBS last night, they said the total number of votes cast was over 132 Million, and that the percentage of eligible voters who cast a ballot was something like 60%. Obviously, not all Americans being counted in the 300+ Million number are eligible to vote. The other discrepancy (between 120 and 132 Million) could be explained by news sites' refusal to update their electoral maps with the results from NC and Missouri.
Despite the anecdotal evidence (stories) of young Americans being energized by Obama and turning out to vote, NPR last night said the rate of first-time voters in this election (~10%) basically equalled the rate of first-time voters in the last election (~11%).
Missouri failed to vote for the next President for only the second time (ever? or just in the past 100 years?).
The Redskins once again correctly predicted the next President. Any time they lose their last home game before the election, the incumbent party loses the White House. That was true this year, as the Redskins lost to Pittsburgh 23-6 on Monday night, but was not true in 2004.
It appears that Senators from Arizona, no matter how popular and well-respected they may be in their home state, cannot get elected to our nation's highest office. The sample size is small, though.
My three-year-old son was watching the Today show with my wife this morning, as we tried to educate him about Obama being the next President. He cried out, "No Obama! No Obama!" But really, he just wanted us to change the channel from the news over to Curious George on PBS Kids.
We also enjoyed eating "Bumblebee Pie" yesterday, courtesy of my son. It was nothing more than cornbread to go with our chili-style meal, but it kinda looked like a pie before it was cut, and since we put honey on the cornbread, it suddenly had an association with bumblebees. So be it! I love how kids come up with different names for things!
It also made me think of when my parents renamed an apple turnover-style dessert in honor of Barry Goldwater after his defeat to LBJ in 1964. To this day, I think of that dessert come election time. My mom, as a Democrat, has refused to make it for decades.
A classic fearless prediction I saw in James Taranto's Best of the Web column last week: Obama will not be the first President to appoint an African-American to the post of Secretary of State.
Here is sincerely hoping that Obama's election will turn out to be a real game-changer on the topic of race relations in America. We are not far removed from Jim Crow, segregation, and disenfranchisement, as Obama pointed out in his victory speech last night. Things have changed a lot just since the Civil Rights Act was signed by LBJ in 1964. Let's hope we continue making progress and that this election marks real hope for healing and racial togetherness (unity is too strong a word) in the future. I really don't want a return to the Sixties.
I sincerely hope that Obama will practice what he preached on the campaign trail. That he will be a uniter, not a divider. That he will actually follow steps he himself set forth when he became the President of the Harvard Law Review, and appoint more conservative members to editorial positions than he did his liberal friends. They were upset with him then, but it showed that Obama had principles and wanted to make sure the best people were appointed to the right positions. Too much of politics today has become this: I funded your campaign, so what cherry position do I get in your Cabinet? More simply: What type of access to power can I buy? If Obama truly wants to govern the country according to principle, then he will appoint one or more Republicans (can anyone say Colin Powell?) to his Cabinet.
As a follow-on to that note, it could be that Obama very well understands the age-old principle of, "Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer."
Obama will also need to rein in members of his own party, members that see the large gains made by House and Senate Democrats, and who will want to drive a very left-leaning agenda simply because they have the votes to do so. Nancy Pelosi, I'm thinking of you!
If Obama wants to be a uniter, and to get away from the partisan politics that have both poisoned the atmosphere in Washington and caused everyday Americans to lose faith in their government as a whole. Let's not forget that the approval ratings for Congress is at all time lows, in the single digits. Something different needs to be done there.
To quote Forrest Gump: "That's about all I have to say about that."
Obama won a relatively close popular vote by about six percentage points over McCain, but was able to collect a sizable lead in the electoral college by winning key battleground states of Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Virginia.
Almost 119 Million Americans turned out to vote, which is decent until you consider we are now a nation of over 300 Million. In very rough terms, that's still less than 40% of Americans casting a ballot for the next President.
**Edited on 11/6/08** The numbers I can find online still add up to only about 120 Million Americans having cast a ballot on Tuesday. But on The Newshour on PBS last night, they said the total number of votes cast was over 132 Million, and that the percentage of eligible voters who cast a ballot was something like 60%. Obviously, not all Americans being counted in the 300+ Million number are eligible to vote. The other discrepancy (between 120 and 132 Million) could be explained by news sites' refusal to update their electoral maps with the results from NC and Missouri.
Despite the anecdotal evidence (stories) of young Americans being energized by Obama and turning out to vote, NPR last night said the rate of first-time voters in this election (~10%) basically equalled the rate of first-time voters in the last election (~11%).
Missouri failed to vote for the next President for only the second time (ever? or just in the past 100 years?).
The Redskins once again correctly predicted the next President. Any time they lose their last home game before the election, the incumbent party loses the White House. That was true this year, as the Redskins lost to Pittsburgh 23-6 on Monday night, but was not true in 2004.
It appears that Senators from Arizona, no matter how popular and well-respected they may be in their home state, cannot get elected to our nation's highest office. The sample size is small, though.
My three-year-old son was watching the Today show with my wife this morning, as we tried to educate him about Obama being the next President. He cried out, "No Obama! No Obama!" But really, he just wanted us to change the channel from the news over to Curious George on PBS Kids.
We also enjoyed eating "Bumblebee Pie" yesterday, courtesy of my son. It was nothing more than cornbread to go with our chili-style meal, but it kinda looked like a pie before it was cut, and since we put honey on the cornbread, it suddenly had an association with bumblebees. So be it! I love how kids come up with different names for things!
It also made me think of when my parents renamed an apple turnover-style dessert in honor of Barry Goldwater after his defeat to LBJ in 1964. To this day, I think of that dessert come election time. My mom, as a Democrat, has refused to make it for decades.
A classic fearless prediction I saw in James Taranto's Best of the Web column last week: Obama will not be the first President to appoint an African-American to the post of Secretary of State.
Here is sincerely hoping that Obama's election will turn out to be a real game-changer on the topic of race relations in America. We are not far removed from Jim Crow, segregation, and disenfranchisement, as Obama pointed out in his victory speech last night. Things have changed a lot just since the Civil Rights Act was signed by LBJ in 1964. Let's hope we continue making progress and that this election marks real hope for healing and racial togetherness (unity is too strong a word) in the future. I really don't want a return to the Sixties.
I sincerely hope that Obama will practice what he preached on the campaign trail. That he will be a uniter, not a divider. That he will actually follow steps he himself set forth when he became the President of the Harvard Law Review, and appoint more conservative members to editorial positions than he did his liberal friends. They were upset with him then, but it showed that Obama had principles and wanted to make sure the best people were appointed to the right positions. Too much of politics today has become this: I funded your campaign, so what cherry position do I get in your Cabinet? More simply: What type of access to power can I buy? If Obama truly wants to govern the country according to principle, then he will appoint one or more Republicans (can anyone say Colin Powell?) to his Cabinet.
As a follow-on to that note, it could be that Obama very well understands the age-old principle of, "Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer."
Obama will also need to rein in members of his own party, members that see the large gains made by House and Senate Democrats, and who will want to drive a very left-leaning agenda simply because they have the votes to do so. Nancy Pelosi, I'm thinking of you!
If Obama wants to be a uniter, and to get away from the partisan politics that have both poisoned the atmosphere in Washington and caused everyday Americans to lose faith in their government as a whole. Let's not forget that the approval ratings for Congress is at all time lows, in the single digits. Something different needs to be done there.
To quote Forrest Gump: "That's about all I have to say about that."
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
It's Anyone's Ballgame
Here's part of why I love the NFL: after nine weeks of football games, and with most teams having played eight games thus far due to bye weeks, here are the current standings:
We can see that many Divisions have a logjam of teams with the same won-loss records, although each team arrived at their record by different means. No one, really, is running away with a given Division, other than perhaps the Tennessee Titans at 8-0. But even the Titans have some holes and could suffer several losses before the end of the season. No team is dominating the way the Colts and Patriots have in recent years.
Several things really stand out to me. The Buffalo Bills just two games ago looked to be dominant in the AFC East at 5-1. After two consecutive losses, they are tied with NE and NYJ for the overall lead, but are behind on tiebreakers having lost both Divisional games thus far.
In the AFC North, the Steelers look as strong as ever, but the Ravens and their rookie QB are right behind them. With Ben Roethlisberger getting hurt again in last night's game, that Division could be a toss-up.
The AFC South appears to be Tennessee's to lose, but the Colts are always dangerous. It's not inconceivable to think that Indy could string together a couple of victories and challenge the Titans for the Divisional title. Indy does have Bob Sanders back in the lineup, and as long as he stays healthy, he improves both the defense and (strangely enough) the offense of the Colts.
No one seems to want to win the AFC West, with every team on a minimum two game losing streak. A Division leader at 4-4 but riding a three-game losing streak -- and 1-4 in their last five games? OMG!
So much for the NFC East being the toughest Division in football. Things change from week to week, and of course injuries have had a lot to do with the Cowboys being 2-3 in their last five games. The defending Super Bowl champion NY Giants look as good as ever, but it still blows my mind that their one loss came to the 3-5 Cleveland Browns!
The NFC North is anyone's Division at this point. Well, anyone except Detroit. Who ever thought that Chicago Bears fans would be crying over the loss of starting QB Kyle Orton to injury?
The Carolina Panthers have looked good this season, but they still have Tampa and Atlanta right behind them in the standings. The NO Saints have one of the most explosive offenses in the NFL right now, but they are 0-3 in the Division and are in danger of missing the playoffs.
The Arizona Cardinals are the one bright spot in the NFC West, and who saw that coming? Seattle has owned that Division for so long, a person could practically pencil in Seattle for the playoffs every single year, no matter what their record was. No longer. Not when the Cards are 5-3 and everyone else is 2-6.
One of the best things about the NFL is that so many teams remain mathematically alive for the playoffs, even deep into the 16 game season. Last year, during the final week of the season, there were only a few games that did not carry playoff implications of any sort. That was pretty amazing. Even teams that are 4-4 after eight games this season could put together a winning streak or two and finish 10-6 or better. An 8-8 team could win the AFC West, and don't think for a minute that Roger Goodell doesn't pray every day for that Division winner to have at least a .500 record!
So there is still a lot of football to be played, even though there are only eight games left for all teams. The Bengals, Cowboys, Buccaneers, and Redskins all have byes this week, the last bye week for any team in the NFL. Every game becomes that much more important for the rest of the season. Just one lucky bounce here, one fumble recovery there, or one tipped pass for an interception over there, can completely change a team's playoff fortunes at this point. Any given Sunday, indeed!
| American Football Conference - 2008 Regular Season | |||||||||||||||||
| AFC East Team | W | L | T |  Pct | PF | PA | Net Pts | TD | Home | Road | Div | Pct | Conf | Pct | Non-Conf | Streak | Last 5 |
| New York Jets | 5 | 3 | 0 | .625 | 208 | 187 | 21 | 25 | 3-1 | 2-2 | 2-1 | .667 | 4-3 | .571 | 1-0 | 2W | 4-1 |
| New England Patriots | 5 | 3 | 0 | .625 | 168 | 150 | 18 | 16 | 3-1 | 2-2 | 1-1 | .500 | 3-3 | .500 | 2-0 | 1L | 3-2 |
| Buffalo Bills | 5 | 3 | 0 | .625 | 182 | 169 | 13 | 19 | 3-1 | 2-2 | 0-2 | .000 | 3-2 | .600 | 2-1 | 2L | 2-3 |
| Miami Dolphins | 4 | 4 | 0 | .500 | 171 | 163 | 8 | 19 | 2-2 | 2-2 | 2-1 | .667 | 4-3 | .571 | 0-1 | 2W | 3-2 |
| AFC North Team | W | L | T | Pct | PF | PA | Net Pts | TD | Home | Road | Div | Pct | Conf | Pct | Non-Conf | Streak | Last 5 |
| Pittsburgh Steelers | 6 | 2 | 0 | .750 | 178 | 116 | 62 | 21 | 2-1 | 4-1 | 3-0 | 1.000 | 5-0 | 1.000 | 1-2 | 1W | 4-1 |
| Baltimore Ravens | 5 | 3 | 0 | .625 | 171 | 137 | 34 | 19 | 3-1 | 2-2 | 3-1 | .750 | 5-3 | .625 | 0-0 | 3W | 3-2 |
| Cleveland Browns | 3 | 5 | 0 | .375 | 142 | 160 | -18 | 14 | 1-3 | 2-2 | 1-3 | .250 | 2-3 | .400 | 1-2 | 1L | 3-2 |
| Cincinnati Bengals | 1 | 8 | 0 | .111 | 125 | 236 | -111 | 13 | 1-3 | 0-5 | 0-3 | .000 | 1-6 | .143 | 0-2 | 1W | 1-4 |
| AFC South Team | W | L | T | Pct | PF | PA | Net Pts | TD | Home | Road | Div | Pct | Conf | Pct | Non-Conf | Streak | Last 5 |
| Tennessee Titans | 8 | 0 | 0 | 1.000 | 199 | 103 | 96 | 21 | 5-0 | 3-0 | 3-0 | 1.000 | 6-0 | 1.000 | 2-0 | 8W | 5-0 |
| Indianapolis Colts | 4 | 4 | 0 | .500 | 167 | 177 | -10 | 21 | 2-2 | 2-2 | 1-2 | .333 | 3-2 | .600 | 1-2 | 1W | 3-2 |
| Jacksonville Jaguars | 3 | 5 | 0 | .375 | 160 | 172 | -12 | 17 | 1-3 | 2-2 | 2-1 | .667 | 3-5 | .375 | 0-0 | 2L | 2-3 |
| Houston Texans | 3 | 5 | 0 | .375 | 196 | 213 | -17 | 24 | 3-1 | 0-4 | 0-3 | .000 | 2-4 | .333 | 1-1 | 1L | 3-2 |
| AFC West Team | W | L | T | Pct | PF | PA | Net Pts | TD | Home | Road | Div | Pct | Conf | Pct | Non-Conf | Streak | Last 5 |
| Denver Broncos | 4 | 4 | 0 | .500 | 190 | 221 | -31 | 21 | 3-2 | 1-2 | 2-1 | .667 | 2-4 | .333 | 2-0 | 3L | 1-4 |
| San Diego Chargers | 3 | 5 | 0 | .375 | 224 | 199 | 25 | 25 | 2-1 | 1-4 | 1-1 | .500 | 3-3 | .500 | 0-2 | 2L | 2-3 |
| Oakland Raiders | 2 | 6 | 0 | .250 | 107 | 201 | -94 | 9 | 1-3 | 1-3 | 1-2 | .333 | 2-4 | .333 | 0-2 | 2L | 1-4 |
| Kansas City Chiefs | 1 | 7 | 0 | .125 | 126 | 223 | -97 | 14 | 1-3 | 0-4 | 1-1 | .500 | 1-4 | .200 | 0-3 | 4L | 1-4 |
| National Football Conference - 2008 Regular Season | |||||||||||||||||
| NFC East Team | W | L | T | Pct | PF | PA | Net Pts | TD | Home | Road | Div | Pct | Conf | Pct | Non-Conf | Streak | Last 5 |
| New York Giants | 7 | 1 | 0 | .875 | 226 | 129 | 97 | 24 | 5-0 | 2-1 | 2-0 | 1.000 | 5-0 | 1.000 | 2-1 | 3W | 4-1 |
| Washington Redskins | 6 | 3 | 0 | .667 | 171 | 168 | 3 | 17 | 3-2 | 3-1 | 2-1 | .667 | 5-2 | .714 | 1-1 | 1L | 3-2 |
| Philadelphia Eagles | 5 | 3 | 0 | .625 | 220 | 144 | 76 | 23 | 3-1 | 2-2 | 0-2 | .000 | 4-3 | .571 | 1-0 | 3W | 3-2 |
| Dallas Cowboys | 5 | 4 | 0 | .556 | 216 | 219 | -3 | 27 | 3-1 | 2-3 | 1-2 | .333 | 3-4 | .429 | 2-0 | 1L | 2-3 |
| NFC North Team | W | L | T | Pct | PF | PA | Net Pts | TD | Home | Road | Div | Pct | Conf | Pct | Non-Conf | Streak | Last 5 |
| Chicago Bears | 5 | 3 | 0 | .625 | 223 | 173 | 50 | 25 | 3-1 | 2-2 | 3-0 | 1.000 | 4-3 | .571 | 1-0 | 2W | 4-1 |
| Green Bay Packers | 4 | 4 | 0 | .500 | 210 | 178 | 32 | 24 | 2-2 | 2-2 | 2-0 | 1.000 | 3-3 | .500 | 1-1 | 1L | 2-3 |
| Minnesota Vikings | 4 | 4 | 0 | .500 | 182 | 188 | -6 | 19 | 3-1 | 1-3 | 1-2 | .333 | 3-2 | .600 | 1-2 | 1W | 3-2 |
| Detroit Lions | 0 | 8 | 0 | .000 | 137 | 239 | -102 | 15 | 0-3 | 0-5 | 0-4 | .000 | 0-7 | .000 | 0-1 | 8L | 0-5 |
| NFC South Team | W | L | T | Pct | PF | PA | Net Pts | TD | Home | Road | Div | Pct | Conf | Pct | Non-Conf | Streak | Last 5 |
| Carolina Panthers | 6 | 2 | 0 | .750 | 174 | 127 | 47 | 18 | 5-0 | 1-2 | 2-1 | .667 | 4-2 | .667 | 2-0 | 2W | 4-1 |
| Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 6 | 3 | 0 | .667 | 200 | 147 | 53 | 20 | 4-0 | 2-3 | 2-1 | .667 | 5-2 | .714 | 1-1 | 1W | 3-2 |
| Atlanta Falcons | 5 | 3 | 0 | .625 | 177 | 154 | 23 | 18 | 3-0 | 2-3 | 0-2 | .000 | 3-3 | .500 | 2-0 | 1W | 3-2 |
| New Orleans Saints | 4 | 4 | 0 | .500 | 216 | 195 | 21 | 27 | 4-1 | 0-3 | 1-1 | .500 | 2-3 | .400 | 2-1 | 1W | 3-2 |
| NFC West Team | W | L | T | Pct | PF | PA | Net Pts | TD | Home | Road | Div | Pct | Conf | Pct | Non-Conf | Streak | Last 5 |
| Arizona Cardinals | 5 | 3 | 0 | .625 | 234 | 184 | 50 | 29 | 3-0 | 2-3 | 2-0 | 1.000 | 3-2 | .600 | 2-1 | 1W | 3-2 |
| Seattle Seahawks | 2 | 6 | 0 | .250 | 151 | 210 | -59 | 16 | 1-3 | 1-3 | 2-1 | .667 | 2-5 | .286 | 0-1 | 1L | 1-4 |
| San Francisco 49ers | 2 | 6 | 0 | .250 | 171 | 230 | -59 | 17 | 1-4 | 1-2 | 1-2 | .333 | 2-5 | .286 | 0-1 | 5L | 0-5 |
| St. Louis Rams | 2 | 6 | 0 | .250 | 125 | 235 | -110 | 12 | 1-3 | 1-3 | 0-2 | .000 | 2-4 | .333 | 0-2 | 2L | 2-3 |
We can see that many Divisions have a logjam of teams with the same won-loss records, although each team arrived at their record by different means. No one, really, is running away with a given Division, other than perhaps the Tennessee Titans at 8-0. But even the Titans have some holes and could suffer several losses before the end of the season. No team is dominating the way the Colts and Patriots have in recent years.
Several things really stand out to me. The Buffalo Bills just two games ago looked to be dominant in the AFC East at 5-1. After two consecutive losses, they are tied with NE and NYJ for the overall lead, but are behind on tiebreakers having lost both Divisional games thus far.
In the AFC North, the Steelers look as strong as ever, but the Ravens and their rookie QB are right behind them. With Ben Roethlisberger getting hurt again in last night's game, that Division could be a toss-up.
The AFC South appears to be Tennessee's to lose, but the Colts are always dangerous. It's not inconceivable to think that Indy could string together a couple of victories and challenge the Titans for the Divisional title. Indy does have Bob Sanders back in the lineup, and as long as he stays healthy, he improves both the defense and (strangely enough) the offense of the Colts.
No one seems to want to win the AFC West, with every team on a minimum two game losing streak. A Division leader at 4-4 but riding a three-game losing streak -- and 1-4 in their last five games? OMG!
So much for the NFC East being the toughest Division in football. Things change from week to week, and of course injuries have had a lot to do with the Cowboys being 2-3 in their last five games. The defending Super Bowl champion NY Giants look as good as ever, but it still blows my mind that their one loss came to the 3-5 Cleveland Browns!
The NFC North is anyone's Division at this point. Well, anyone except Detroit. Who ever thought that Chicago Bears fans would be crying over the loss of starting QB Kyle Orton to injury?
The Carolina Panthers have looked good this season, but they still have Tampa and Atlanta right behind them in the standings. The NO Saints have one of the most explosive offenses in the NFL right now, but they are 0-3 in the Division and are in danger of missing the playoffs.
The Arizona Cardinals are the one bright spot in the NFC West, and who saw that coming? Seattle has owned that Division for so long, a person could practically pencil in Seattle for the playoffs every single year, no matter what their record was. No longer. Not when the Cards are 5-3 and everyone else is 2-6.
One of the best things about the NFL is that so many teams remain mathematically alive for the playoffs, even deep into the 16 game season. Last year, during the final week of the season, there were only a few games that did not carry playoff implications of any sort. That was pretty amazing. Even teams that are 4-4 after eight games this season could put together a winning streak or two and finish 10-6 or better. An 8-8 team could win the AFC West, and don't think for a minute that Roger Goodell doesn't pray every day for that Division winner to have at least a .500 record!
So there is still a lot of football to be played, even though there are only eight games left for all teams. The Bengals, Cowboys, Buccaneers, and Redskins all have byes this week, the last bye week for any team in the NFL. Every game becomes that much more important for the rest of the season. Just one lucky bounce here, one fumble recovery there, or one tipped pass for an interception over there, can completely change a team's playoff fortunes at this point. Any given Sunday, indeed!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
