Archives for the month of: January, 2015

Stings of isopropyl. Notes of Bourbon, whiskey, whisky, rye, and Scotch.

Wet and fluid. Burns. Tastes like whiskey, whisky, rye, and Scotch with a strong, strong Bourbon presence. Rinse and repeat.

Took about seven hours to finish the bottle.

Empty Glass:
Before passing out on the hardwood floor I threw the empty glass across the room, it shattered against the fireplace.

Yes you are the only one in the room, yes I am talking to you, and yes I do have a problem. Any more questions motherfucker?

Why didn’t John Boehner travel to Paris to represent America at the Unity Rally and stand with the people of Europe and all those other world leaders to show support for the freedom of the press and say “I am Charlie!”? The biggest rally France has had in modern times and he can’t make the time for it? I’m not feeling very proud to be an American today. Boehner skipping this event just proves he’s a muslim marxist who’s trying to destroy America and bring Sharia law here. God help us!

I wanted Green Bay to win but Dallas was robbed. The receiver had plenty of control of the ball in my opinion.

I think the officials and the NFL err on these calls in a “letting perfect be the enemy of good” manner. I think the receiver should be allowed to be a touch sloppy as catches in the NFL are hard to make. As long as the receiver isn’t obviously bobbling the ball I say “COMPLETE – FIRST DOWN!”.

I also think you shouldn’t be able to take a knee, I think you should have to run a play. So I might not see things as the NFL does.

What I saw is the receiver had control, then the defender knocked it loose a bit, and then the receiver regained control and maintained it until the ball hit the ground when it came a bit loose again but the receiver never let the ball completely loose, he even kept the ball in his hands after the ground caused to ball to move around in his hands. If that’s what happened, what was insufficient in the receiver’s effort? I know there are rules about amount of steps and “full control” while going to the ground and all, but I think all that’s catch-robbing and does not advance the spirit of the game or properly reward the receiver for doing all they can in a tough situation.

Is this a new or recent rule? A decade or two ago that was a catch no question.  And I remember when I was young this type of play was often ruled a touchdown.  Not that it should be called one today, but maybe the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction?

To me he had the ball cradled in his left hand against his left forearm for plenty of time as he came down with the ball — you see that clearly in the replay.  Also, the receiver stood up with the ball in his hands after hitting the ground, the ball never came completely loose or fully away from him or airborne in any way at any point after the receiver “caught” the ball. To me, even considering the rule as best as I understand it, the receiver had enough control (in his left hand as I noted above) to rule it complete.  AND: wasn’t he down, his knee down, before his hands and the ball hit the ground?

But I am not an official nor an expert on this rule. I’m just a viewer. One of the commentators said during the post-game show, “common sense says this is a complete catch” but that the “letter of the law” says otherwise. So if common sense, a viewer who isn’t rooting for Dallas (me), and the official making the call on the field right in front of the play all say “complete” why should there be a rule that doesn’t make it so? Time to revisit this rule I say and have been saying for a few years. Also, the receiver clearly showed a greater athletic effort than the defender, so in that match-up alone I think the call should favor the offense rather than the defense.  I know it doesn’t exactly work that way, but I’m sure you get what I’m saying.

Again, I think the rule is asking for 100% perfection from the receiver, and isn’t willing to give the receiver or the official who originally called the play on the field the benefit of the doubt or even wiggle room to say the receiver’s effort was more than good enough. And you’d think the NFL would want to see more complete catches, not fewer.

I’ve made a few of these lamps sales for sale.

pipe_lamp-00 pipe_lamp-03pipe_lamp-04 pipe_lamp-05






I’ve made a few of these lamps sales for sale.

Why don’t companies paint giant logos on their roofs these days? This is actually a Target store with a Starbucks inside it. Didn’t farmers used to paint the name of their farm on their rooftops way back when?


For division 1 college athletics, why not offer players free tuition for a four year degree redeemable at any time up until the player is 40 years old or so? The idea that the player must get a degree while playing should be challenged, as most players barely focus on academics, if at all. So end the charade and simply let players play, and if they wind up going pro and don’t want to ever get a degree, fine. Or they can get a degree after retiring from the pros if they wish. Similarly, if the player does not go pro after four years playing on a college team, then he/she can start work on a degree. Or the player can just take classes during the off season, either in college or in the pros, if they want.

My idea here is to more closely follow the military model where you do four years in the military and once that time is complete, you’ve earned a substantial fund toward college tuition. But the military does not ask you to study and take classes while you’re deployed, it knows that trying to be a full-time soldier and a full-time student is impossible. Thus let’s acknowledge that being a full-time division 1 athlete and a full-time student is impossible too (at least to the point where the student part is severely compromised) and let’s have the players do athletics and academics sequentially, not simultaneously.

Plus, isn’t a bit underhanded and unfair to award someone a scholarship and then not allow them the time to put in the proper effort of studying and learning to make the most of it?

Also, free tuition isn’t a perk, it’s a necessity as most of the players the colleges seek to draft simply cannot afford college. It would be pure exploitation to ask them to play division 1 ball and make all the required academic sacrifices to stay in the athletic program and on the team AND THEN hit them with $100K in student loan debt .

(And then pay them a salary while playing too.)

%d bloggers like this: