Updates, again

Well, so many of the things touched on have developed further since last I wrote. Let's recap:

Politics

Our Ohio primary was yesterday. I voted Dem (obviously) and chose Barack. I don't necessarily think Hillary would be a bad President, but I am SO OVER her method of choice to try and get there. I disagree with my pal Steve when he says that: "She's got Rhode Island wrapped up, and she really needs to at worst split with Obama today, so why not help deliver her Ohio and keep this very exciting (and young-voter-energizing) primary going for a bit longer?"

I think it's time to move on, unite the party, and focus on mopping the floor with Gramps McCain. All of the in-fighting does more harm than good, in my opinion, and both candidates have already shown they excel at getting people out/interested/participating. That's well and good, but at some point, the proverbial Greater Good has to be considered.

It is my opinion that Hillary--despite her good showing yesterday in winning both Ohio and Texas, though the latter by an insignificant margin (see Jonathan Alter's math for reference)--can't win the nomination outright without some seriously shady doings (see: superdelegates, for example, from the Plain Dealer: Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones of Cleveland, a national co-chair of Clinton's campaign, is a super delegate. Asked Tuesday night whether she would back Obama even if he won in her home district, as appeared likely, Tubbs Jones emphatically said no. "As I've said over and over again, I am committed to Hillary Clinton." [emphasis mine] - yep, sounds about right) and without going super-de-duper negative the rest of the way against Barack. What good does that do?

She's insinuating he is and/or has been a Muslim (he's not, and never has been).

She's insinuating that she somehow demonstrably has the experience to be the one answering the "3 AM phone call" about the terrorists coming for our children. Based on what? Living in the White House for 8 years and knowing where the phone is? She VOTED FOR A POINTLESS WAR, and he has been opposed to it from the start. How does that make her more qualified?

Then, of course, there's the whole Texas Caucus thing (Barack has continually done very well in the caucus setting, and 33% of the Texas Delegates were up for the grabbing in those post-primary caucuses). So, what's Hillary to do? Well, nothing like--after 8 years of screaming about the GOP [possibly] rigging elections--trying to rig the caucuses in your favor, just in case you lose the primary:

Hillary Clinton and her campaign is pushing for precinct captains for Texas' 8,000 Democratic polling places. They need to train folks to lead the caucus sessions that will determine more than 60 delegates after the primary voting is over.In training materials being handed out by the Clinton campaign, it is clear that they want to control those caucus sessions.The materials say in part, "DO NOT allow the supporter of another candidate to serve in leadership roles."It goes on to say, "If our supporters are outnumbered, ask the Temporary Chair if one of our supporters can serves as the Secretary, in the interest of fairness."The control of the sign-in sheets and the announcement of the delegates allotted to each candidate are the critical functions of the Chair and Secretary. This is why it is so important that Hillary supporters hold these positions."
http://trailblazers.beloblog.com/archives/2008/03/caucus-strategy.html

http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20080043115&ch=3/5/2008%2010:13:00%20AM

They were crying "FOUL!" when it looked like they were losing, all while trying to stack the caucuses with their own people. It smacks of Republican tactics so much that it makes me want to puke. She wants the nomination so badly that she's willing to employ the Joseph Stalin "scorching of one's own earth" tactics to get it. She's becoming the Larry Hughes of the democratic party (see below).

It's time for that shit to stop. Cutting off your nose to spite your face is a great way to win a general election. To wit, Lars says: I'm really not voting for HRC if she keeps going negative. I can't. If she had won the nomination without the insinuation of barack being a weak canadian muslim, then fine... but forget that. Bah. I'm just going to write in Terry Schiavo in the GE if Clinton is the nominee." Good job, Hillary.


Sports

Wow!

The Browns and Cavs have both been busy since I last wrote. Let's recap/address:

My musings in italics:

The Browns have some issues going into the 2008 draft and season:
1) Their defense was HORRIBLE. They won 10 games in spite of it. They are in dire need of defensive linemen.
Wow. The Browns traded their second round pick to Green Bay for Corey Williams, and their third round pick and Leigh Bodden to Detroit for Shaun Rogers. Some reactions:

Williams, 6-4 and 320 pounds, would probably play left end in the Browns' 3-4 defense. He played tackle in Green Bay's 4-3 alignment and was known for his quickness in getting to the quarterback. He had 14 sacks the last two years.
Cleveland Plain Dealer

Rogers no doubt will take over as the Browns' nose tackle. Williams, 6-4 and 313 pounds, joins Robaire Smith and Shaun Smith in a three-man rotation at the two defensive end spots. Shaun Smith also would spell Rogers at nose.
In dealing Bodden, the Browns give up on a rags-to-riches player who some in the organization felt slipped measurably last season. The move secures one starting cornerback job for Eric Wright and sets up a battle for the other one between Daven Holly and Brandon McDonald.
"I think [Williams will] be a really valuable addition to us, not only because of his rush ability on the inside but also his ability to play the run," Savage said. "We think he'll give us some legitimacy on the defensive front."
Cleveland Plain Dealer

2) They have no first round pick, having traded it for Quinn last year. However...
3) They have a restricted free agent quarterback in Derek Anderson, who may be worth a first round pick. They are actively trying to sign him to a three year deal, and possibly then work a sign-and-trade for someone willing to part with a first round pick.
Well, the Browns re-signed Derek Anderson for three years, and as we noted above, the Browns NOW no longer have their first, second, OR third round picks. DA doesn't appear to be going anywhere now. But, as Phil Savage notes:

Prior to completing the deal for Rogers, Savage said there was no defensive lineman in the draft worthy of selecting with the second-round pick, No. 56 overall.
"I knew there was going to be some sacrifice involved in trying to obtain a player we wanted, but in my mind, in our estimation, a legitimate veteran defensive lineman who's still got a lot of upside potential seemed to be a good fit for us," Savage said.
Cleveland Plain Dealer

Trading for defensive tackles Corey Williams of Green Bay and Shaun Rogers of Detroit left the Browns without a pick in the first three rounds of the April 26-27 draft.
Cleveland surrendered its No. 1 to Dallas last year on draft day to select quarterback Brady Quinn. Then Friday it gave up a second-rounder for Williams and a third-rounder for Rogers.
But general manager Phil Savage and coach Romeo Crennel didn't seem concerned.
"Brady Quinn is the first-round draft choice, Corey Williams is the second-round draft choice and Shaun Rogers is the third-round draft choice. We've jumped out in front and had our draft early," Crennel said. "As a result of having an early draft we were able to get experienced players who have been productive in the NFL."
Akron Beacon Journal

Free agency starts next Saturday. It will be interesting.
The Browns also signed New England's Donte' Stallworth to be their #2 receiver, a decent move that opens up more of the field, as the defenses aren't going to be able to double everybody. They've also had visits from some linebackers as well, which would only help a here-to-fore lousy defense.

Most importantly, the Browns (according to most pundits) got noticeably better, while no one else in the division has really done anything of note. The Browns tied the Steelers in record at 10-6, losing the head-to-head matchups and thus the division as well. One would hope these moves help to close that now infinitesimal gap even more.

***

Half of the Cavs players have been hurt at some point this year. They're hovering around 4th in the East, and there are rumors of a trade in the works. My hunch is that nothing will happen. Like usual. The Cavs will make the playoffs and lose in the second round to either Boston or Detroit.

Wow again! The Cavs pulled off a certified BLOCKBUSTER trade just before the deadline. I'll let Brian Windhorst break it down for y'all:

The deal is done. The details are here. Basically, Cavs get Ben Wallace, Joe Smith, Wally Szczerbiak, Delonte West and a second-round draft pick for Larry Hughes, Drew Gooden, Ira Newble, Donyell Marshall, Shannon Brown, and Cedric Simmons. Pretty crazy. And, I think, qualifies as the blockbuster. In full disclosure, the deal I was talking about last night was Hughes for Wallace and then the Cavs would be able to move Gooden for a shooting guard. It obviously got a lot more complex today.
Here is the instant reaction, one of the things being talked about within the Cavs front office over the last few days was the need to get someone in here to deal with potential matchups with the Celtics in the playoffs. Wallace could be that guy. He also gives them an edge in dealing with the Pistons as well. Szczerbiak is guy who is the type of player that works well with LeBron, he’s a shooter, although he’s had injury problems. Cavs are taking on some huge salary here, but they are not really extending their commitments. Wallace is signed for two more years (like Hughes) and Smith and Szczerbiak will have expiring contracts next season. West will be a restricted free agent.
To me the key here is just what Wallace brings. He’s not the player he was in Detroit, I think most people agree with that. But can he be a major defensive presence, especially come the playoffs. To me that will define this deal. Maybe he will, maybe he won’t. Lots of people are down on him and he’s not having a good year. He is the key in my mind.
ohio.com

ESPN's Bill Simmons--who is harder on most NBA teams and GMs than any sportswriter I know of--praised the deal:

As for the other big trade this week, kudos to Danny Ferry for somehow getting four of the best five players in an 11-player trade. That has to be some sort of record, right? I already made the case for Wally Szczerbiak and Delonte West helping the Cavs in my Trade Machine piece Wednesday (scroll down to trade 4A), but the Chicago guys pushed the deal over the top for me. First, Drew Gooden needed to go--he was too inconsistent and too much of a bonehead, and we neared the point when a fed-up LeBron might punch him in the face during a game about three months ago--and Joe Smith gives the Cavs steadier minutes and reliable production with those minutes. (Maybe Smith's ceiling isn't as high as Gooden's from game to game, but when you have LeBron you need consistency from the rest of the guys more than anything else.) Second, the fact Ferry was able to trade an overpaid guard who actually drove a frustrated Cavs fan to create a site called http://www.heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com/ and update it every day ... I mean, even if you got back a dead body for Larry Hughes, it would have been a moral victory.
Instead, the Cavs got back the Artist Formerly Known As Ben Wallace, someone who stopped being an elite rebounder and shot-blocker about three years ago, but someone with playoff experience and the ability to defend bigger guys like KG, Shaq or Duncan. He certainly makes more sense for the 2008 Cavs than Larry Hughes did. Anyway, I thought the Cavs could win the East before this trade, simply because none of the Eastern teams have someone who can match baskets with LeBron in a close game. Now? They're the favorites. Look, I love the Celtics, I watch them every game, it has been the most enjoyable season in 15 years. ... But a playoff series almost always comes down to one question as long as both sides are relatively equal:
Which team has the best guy?
Well, LeBron is better than anyone else in the East. So if you were beating Cleveland this spring, it was happening because your supporting cast was significantly better than LeBron's supporting cast. That's why this trade was so dangerous for Boston and Detroit; it shortened the sizable gap between guys 2 through 12 on Cleveland and guys 2 through 12 on Boston and Detroit. Now LeBron has four shooters who have shot 40-plus from 3-point range at least once in their career (Wally, Delonte, Boobie Gibson and Sasha Pavlovic), three seasoned rebounders (Wallace, Smith and Anderson Varejao), a scoring center (Zydrunas Ilgauskas) and, best of all, no Larry Hughes screwing up everything. LeBron is in a much better place than he was last year, and what's even more frightening is that he has been playing out of his mind since last April. I know the Celtics are 41-11, and I know the Pistons have been there a million times ... but still, how could you bet against LeBron in the East when he's playing like this?
espn.com

And finally, to hammer the Larry Hughes point home--as well as close the loop I opened above when I called Hillary Clinton the "Larry Hughes of the Democratic Party," let's check with Larry and with Patrick McManamon:

You remember Hughes. He's the former Cavs player who signed for a boatload of money a few years ago and then was unhappy playing on the same team as LeBron James, a team that a year ago played in the NBA Finals. Which is bizarre enough in itself.
Anyway, Hughes was traded to the Chicago Bulls recently for Ben Wallace and Joe Smith, and on Sunday, Hughes revealed why he plays the game. ''I play to enjoy myself,'' he said. Note the word ''myself.''
''Some people take this the wrong way, but winning a championship is not what I base everything on,'' he said. Sure hate to take that the wrong way.
''I was given an opportunity to play basketball, travel around and have fun doing it, and that's what I want to do,'' he said. ''I wouldn't take being unhappy and not being myself and winning. I would rather enjoy myself with 18,000 to 20,000 people watching the game and the people sending fan mail and those things, and be happy.''
There are times when a direct question is required. So it is here. And that question would be: Is this guy nuts? Are we to understand that personal fan mail is more important than winning, that it would be ideal to score 25 points every game and lose? At this point, it might be wise to smack yourself on the side of the head with the bottom of the palm to try to make this clear. And, of course, not take these words the wrong way.
Hughes couldn't stop there. He said he did not come to Cleveland to play point guard, that he came to run the wing a la James. ''I was asked to sacrifice for the team to win and for everybody, I guess, (to) get paid,'' he said. ''That is what was told to me, and I wasn't happy with that.'' Well, we'd sure hate to take that the wrong way.
But let's make this clear: In one fell swoop, Hughes made clear why the Cavs made all those last-second, trade-deadline moves. Hughes was simply not going to try to make things work with the Cavs, never mind the $12 million he was earning this year, and never mind the $4 million he made in bonuses the past two years because the team won, and never mind the fact that he was playing with the BEST PLAYER ON THE PLANET.
Rest assured, though, Hughes' ''issues'' go well beyond playing point guard. They might actually go to some kind of childhood trauma. Hughes was not happy, period, and he made his feelings known to the team all the way back to last season — when the Cavs went to the NBA Finals. Which apparently wasn't good for Hughes, because he thinks people sacrifice to ''get paid'' rather than to win.
The Cavs had to do what they could with Hughes, though. He was an unhappy player, but he was their unhappy player. So they put a lot of energy and work into trying to get what they could from him, given the difficulties of trading his contract. At some points this season, they actually got good minutes from him.
But it came to a point where things simply were not going to work. Now we know why.
Hughes' words are almost so mind-boggling as to be inexplicable. His assessments mean that he liked the loss Sunday because he got 23 points, even if he was shut down by James in the fourth quarter. Gotta love going 21-61 if you average 22, right? This sounds like a guy who would appreciate his own hemorrhoids.
Yes, it's easy to take shots at a guy who's leaving town, and the Cavs, to their credit, have only said thanks and best of luck. But it's near impossible not to notice Hughes revealing to the world what he's all about.
Whether he wanted to or not, Hughes has portrayed himself as a selfish doofus who doesn't care whether the team wins as long as he's getting his.
[emphasis mine]
ohio.com

Wow, what a couple of weeks it has been!

And here we are...

Another couple of months, another period of blogger neglect. For that, I apologize. Let's update where were are, now that we're toward the end of February:

WttMH Political Ticker

Wow, after all of the political whining I did here in 2006, it's hard to believe that we've gone this far through the Presidential primary season without so much as a comment!

Both races appear to be close to a final decision, as John McCain has all but locked up the GOP nomination, and Barack Obama is riding an insane wave of momentum, including 10 straight caucus/primary wins. There are some huge primaries coming up in Ohio and Texas on March 4th (hey, it's great that our primary actually counts!). If Clinton doesn't win them both, she's all but done. If she does win both, the water gets pretty muddy. There is an issue with "superdelegates" (those delegates who have no obligation to vote along the lines of the primary/caucus results) and whether they will vote in line with the election results or strike out on their own. It would seem to me that if Obama's momentum continues and he wins Ohio and Texas, they have little choice as the writing will be completely legible on the wall at that point.

So, let's break down the (most likely to win) candidates through my own lens of bias:

Dems:
Clinton: Meh. I voted for her husband once (since I wasn't old enough to vote for him in 1992), and despite the best efforts of the "moral" majority in the late 90's I thought he was a good president. Yeah, he got his dick sucked by an intern and lied about it (or, tried to spin himself out of the way, at least). But, the country's economy was strong and we didn't have any stupid pointless wars. As for his wife, I vowed to give her a chance this primary season, as I wanted to form an opinion other than what the media has had to say (or the GOP has had to say). As time has gone on in her campaign and Obama has gained the momentum, she's tried about everything she and her husband could think of to knock him down. It hasn't worked. If anything, it's backfired. The whole "plagiarism" thing was a farce, and they couldn't get away from it fast enough after everyone realized that it was a farce.

The more I hear her campaign, the less and less I like her. The most telling evening for me was back in January during the New Hampshire debate, in which she all but pounded the table to get people to pay attention to her "campaign on her 35 years of experience" and seemed very pissed off when no one seemed to care. Her every move seems calculated, and as for her "35 years of experience" I find myself scoffing; Universal Health Care Cards, anyone?

Bottom Line: She tried to make herself the proverbial "last one standing"--not by setting herself apart, but by destroying her rivals to the point where despite not being that great a candidate she's somehow set herself "above" the others. Obama has not only weathered that storm, but has turned it on its head. This country IS ready for a woman president; just not THIS woman. Pass.

Obama: I want to rally around this guy. I really do. He's young, he really connects with people, he says all the right things, he seems honest enough (admitting to drug use is a refreshing stance, since those jackals on the other side hate gays and abortions but are busy molesting male pages and getting their mistresses abortions when nobody's looking). But, he doesn't have a lot of experience. I love that he's been a civil rights champion, and by God it's about time this country has a minority president. (Sadly, however, I believe I could name several acquaintances that wouldn't vote for him *just* because of his skin color, which is maddening.) And, the repeated promise to close off the Oval Office to special interests and lobbyists would be insanely great for this country and its policy.

But, beyond that, what foreign policy or economic experience does he have? He's campaigning on the "Change!" platform, which--believe me--sounds amazing to my ears. But, color me cynical: how's he going to make change with so little experience? If he were to be elected, I would take a great interest in the makeup of his cabinet, as a President with less experience is going to need to be surrounded by *good* people (as opposed to sycophantic yes-men who support pointless invasions and campaigns of making people afraid of everything, thus allowing them to erode civil liberties in the name of patriotism and corporate greed).

He has the momentum; 10 straight state wins, and the power to get the vote out in the key states coming up. The best thing about his campaign that I can cite is that he has gotten SO many people involved in the process of democracy. The voter turnout in the primaries and caucuses this year has been simply mind-blowing, and for that he deserves credit. He may not be able to run the tight ship (no lobbyists, no special interests) that he promises to, but he's gotten people's attention, and gotten them off of their collective ass to get involved in the process of selecting a leader and being involved in government. If nothing else, that's a HUGE step in the right direction for America.

Bottom Line: He's got a bright, bright future. I think in a vacuum he'd be the perfect Vice President, but as we've discussed above, that would imply that there's someone who's more ready to be President. Can this country afford a learn-on-the-job guy? The best part is he's getting people involved, he's a breath of fresh air, and THAT'S a great start. As a registered Dem, he's probably going to be my guy on 3/4/08.

GOP:
Skeletor: Of course, I mean John McCain. John McCain is about 8 years too late. He wants us to stay in Iraq, which is a deal-breaker for me. The phrase "100 years" was used. To be honest, I would have given McCain a very fair shot back in 2000, but I lost all of my respect for him in the aftermath of that campaign. The Bush campaign put him through the wringer; they were just awful to him, and he basically rolled over and took it. And then, in 2004, he basically sold out. It seemed to me that the Bush camp basically went to him and said, "if you ever want a chance to be President in 2008, get in line NOW." And he did.

The biggest issue I have with McCain at this point is that he's basically now focused his campaign on Barack Obama, as it's looking more and more like that will be the match-up in November. Obama's message is: Hope, Change, Yes We Can! McCain has basically implied that that approach just won't work. No Hope, No Change, NO WE CAN'T!

Bottom Line: McCain is selling "more of the same" for this country, and there can't possibly be a scenario where that's what we need.

Squirrely McGee: Of course, I mean Mike Huckabee. Holy shit, am I even giving this guy the time of day? No. He used to eat fried squirrel, for God's sake! Really, he said they should amend the Constitution to make it jibe more with Biblical Law. Wowzers. How this guy won *any* states is beyond me.

Bottom Line: Pencil him in for Secretary of Varment Eating if McCain wins the general election in November. Hi-yooo!!


WttMH Sports Ticker

Browns Finish at 10-6, Still Manage to Miss Playoffs!
The Browns exceeded everyone's wildest expectations from the beginning of the year, winning 10 games after the opening weekend debacle. They sent six offensive players to the Pro Bowl, including Joe Thomas (man, I'm going to puff my chest about being right on that one!!).

The Browns have some issues going into the 2008 draft and season:
1) Their defense was HORRIBLE. They won 10 games in spite of it. They are in dire need of defensive linemen.
2) They have no first round pick, having traded it for Quinn last year. However...
3) They have a restricted free agent quarterback in Derek Anderson, who may be worth a first round pick. They are actively trying to sign him to a three year deal, and possibly then work a sign-and-trade for someone willing to part with a first round pick.

Free agency starts next Saturday. It will be interesting.

Indians Head to Spring Training Trying to Repeat and Get Over That Shitty Hump
The Tribe was 1 game from the World Series. They then lost 3 in a row and went home. C.C. Sabathia is going to be a Free Agent. Detroit has gotten better (trading for Miguel Cabrera and Dontrelle Willis) and the Tribe has basically stood pat (signed a Japanese Reliever, and some spare parts).

These are some of the issues facing the Tribe as Spring Training begins.

The Blue Jackets Suck
No surprises here. Tied for 8th place in the West at the All-Star break, they have gone 2-6-3 since the break. Nice work, guys. See you next fall.

Cavs Infirmiry Unit Hanging Around
Half of the Cavs players have been hurt at some point this year. They're hovering around 4th in the East, and there are rumors of a trade in the works. My hunch is that nothing will happen. Like usual. The Cavs will make the playoffs and lose in the second round to either Boston or Detroit.


Let's See... What Else?

Not much. This would be why it's been two-plus months since I updated my blog. I'll try to do better!

My heart breaks...

As I look out the west-facing window of my 9th floor office at the snow-swept landscape, my mind wanders out west to Omaha, Nebraska.

Earlier this year, I wrote some quickly-formulated thoughts in response to the Virigian Tech shootings, which also referenced earlier thoughts on an Amish school shooting/tragedy and some root causes relative to people not getting the help they need. In part:

• I attempted to take a stab at exploring the issues surrounding something like this once before, but it brings no resolution any closer to me.


• I'm going to fumble/punt here, so please bear with me... I understand the media has a duty to inform the public, and that this is the hugest story of the year by far. But, at what point does the media need to just back the fuck up? Whether they mean to or not, their need to get ratings and eyes glues to TV sets involuntarily adds a degree of celebrity to the people who commit these acts (bear with me, here; I use the term "celebrity" in the most macabre sense of the word). I think back to the movie "The Frighteners" where Jake Busey's character carved numbers into the foreheads of his victims because he was counting... and trying to outdo the serial killers before him. I don't like the need to label things like this the "Virginia Tech Massacre" or the "worst" school shooting in history (to me, this implies that we can assign a degree of evil or "badness" to something that really can't/shouldn't be quantified).


• To carry this a little further and dredge up something again from above, if this country doesn't wake the fuck up and take a good hard look at itself, this IS going to happen again. Whether we like it or not, there are bad people out there. I don't like giving them inadvertant goals or targets to strive for.

I re-read those thoughts, and then I read about the Omaha mall shooter being emotionally damaged throughout a portion of his life, and then telling his landlord moments before killing eight people and wounding five more that it would make him famous:

"He basically said how sorry he was for everything," Maruca Kovac said of the note. "He didn't want to be a burden to people and that he was a piece of shit all of his life and that now he'd be famous."

It turns my stomach. It makes me angry. But, most of all, it breaks my heart. Those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it.

Lest we forget...

I know it's been awhile, and I'm planning a more comprehensive update at some point in time, as I've been bad about keeping my blog moving.

But, with the retirement of the coach of the college football team I follow most, I wanted to take a moment to tip my cap to Lloyd Carr. Though I'm sure I will continue to be mocked by my Columbus/OSU friends and family for his recent failings against OSU (even as they continue to forget or not acknowledge that he, much like Tressel is doing now, simply FUCKING DOMINATED OSU for the first six years as Michigan's head coach), I think it's important to reflect back on the career of one of the true "good guys" of sports.


Yes, his sideline interviews were the stuff of legend when it came to his outward crotchetyness, but when one studies Lloyd Carr the man as well as Lloyd Carr the coach it becomes apparent that he truly is one of the great people of the sport. And, lest we forget, it's still just a game, and college athletics are still about the kids themselves.

Here's the perfect article about Lloyd's career, as told by The Wolverine's John Borton:

The best portion of a good man’s life,
His little, nameless, unremembered acts
Of kindness and of love.
— William Wordsworth

Lloyd Carr owns 13 Big Ten championship rings, dating all the way back to 1980, the year he joined Bo Schembechler’s staff as an assistant coach. He can flash five as Michigan’s head man, or haul out the diamond-studded national championship ring from 1997, representing a pinnacle few college coaches ever reach.

His football numbers speak for themselves — a 121-40 record, the seventh-best winning percentage (.752) among active college coaches, and the thirdmost victories in Michigan football history, behind only Schembechler (194) and Fielding Yost (165).

Carr led Michigan to the top of the mountain in 1997, a climb no U-M coach had completed since 1948. He kept the Wolverines competitive and clean, a rare combination in today’s college football world.

He also made a high-profile impact off the field, becoming the first coach in the history of Michigan’s athletic department to endow a scholarship. His efforts to raise funds for a new C.S. Mott Children’s and Women’s Hospital are widely recognized.

Everyone knows the headline-grabbers. But the behind-the-scenes Carr — the one who always somehow made time for little, nameless, unremembered acts — proved better than anything on ESPN.

Just ask Tim Baker, head coach at Constantine High School, tucked away in the southwest corner of Michigan. Baker’s football team won the Division VI state championship in 2004, running the Wing-T offense. His squad racked up huge rushing numbers, catching the attention of a man who loved to run the football.

Baker received a message one day after school and immediately knew it had to be a prank.

"The secretary came down and laid the note on my desk, and it said 'Call Lloyd Carr,'" Baker recalled. "Now the first thing I’m thinking is, 'Okay, which one of my buddies is pulling one on me here?' But I call the number back.

"A secretary answers the phone: 'Michigan football.' I’m going, 'Wow — these guys are good. They’re really setting me up here.' I’m still not buying into this. Then she puts me on hold and a Michigan broadcast of a game comes on.

"All of a sudden I hear, 'Coach Carr.' He has a voice that you just recognize. I just about came out of my chair."

After establishing just where tiny Constantine was, Carr supplied the sort of lift the locals will never draw from SportsCenter.

"He just congratulated us on our championship, said he enjoyed watching the game, and just complimented us up and down," Baker said. "It was quite a thrill for me to have a Big Ten coach of that caliber call.

"But the one thing I was really impressed with was that he was preparing for Texas in the Rose Bowl that year. And he had as much time as I wanted to have with him on the phone... I said this guy took time out for a little Division VI coach, to just call up and congratulate him. I just thought that was cool."

Michigan fans across the nation thought it was cool when Academy Award-winner Russell Crowe rolled into town for the Notre Dame game. Carr’s welcoming of his big-screen buddy drew nationwide attention, but the coach also put his efforts into lesser-known gladiators.

Nick Gasperoni, a senior trombone player in the Michigan Marching Band, collapsed on the football field in a Monday rehearsal following that victory. He’d suffered a potentially fatal heart arrhythmia, requiring CPR from band members and a shocking by a defibrillator to save his life and prevent brain damage.

Stabilized at the hospital, Gasperoni soon received a get-well card from the team, signed by Carr, Mike Hart, Jake Long and Shawn Crable. That act alone lifted the senior’s spirits, but he soon received a bigger boost.

Carr himself popped in on Friday afternoon of that week, a day prior to taking on Penn State.

"Remember, that at this point in the season, Michigan was only 1-2, thus it was a huge game to prove that this season wasn’t going to be a failure," Gasperoni noted. "Despite the looming game, there was Lloyd Carr, willing to give his time for a band member. I think it speaks volumes for his character, the character of Michigan athletics and the Michigan family in general."

U-M fan Brad Forney understands. His grandfather once coached former Michigan assistant Terry Malone in Detroit. When cancer began to engulf the grandfather, he received extensive treatment at the University of Michigan hospital to slow the dreaded disease.

During one hospital stay, Malone surprised him with a visit, spending several hours discussing life and Michigan football. Once the grandfather could walk again, Malone took him for a visit down to Schembechler Hall.

"Immediately Lloyd welcomed him in and referred to him as Coach Williams," Forney noted. "You wouldn’t believe the impact that had on my grandfather. He was so excited that someone as high up in the coaching ranks would call him by the name 'Coach.' Lloyd talked to him for about 30 minutes. They discussed football and strategies, and finally they went out to take in a practice.

"Grandpa met with the team before finally having to leave because his body just couldn’t take the standing anymore. Coach Carr told him that he was welcome anytime and that he was considered part of the Michigan family.

"My grandfather never got that chance — he passed away this past October. It seems like such a simple story, but this day helped my grandfather forget about his pain for a while, and it stuck with all of us. A man who fought in World War II, played minor league baseball, worked in the auto industry for 40 years, and coached for 30 years would look back on this as being the most exciting day he has ever had."

Forney wrote a simple thank-you note to Carr a week after his grandfather’s passing. He received in return a personal letter, Carr noting that he remembered the day and "Coach Williams" very well.

"This really made me realize how lucky we are to have someone like Coach Carr," Forney said. "It just amazes me what a standup person he is. No matter the time or situation, he holds up the values of a Michigan Man. Too often we get wrapped up in wins and losses, but this event in my life made me realize how great a leader he really is."

Kim Bergsma knows. This diehard Michigan fan and attendee at several of Carr’s women’s football academies wrote to the head coach on a number of occasions.

Just after the Wolverines reached the summit in ’97, she tumbled into a crevasse of a personal health crisis. She happened to mention it in one of her missives to the man in the big office.

"Less than one week later I got a large package from UPS from Schembechler Hall," Bergsma recalled. "In the box was a pick — the very same picks that were hung up in the locker room during the 1997 season for the Into Thin Air motivation — and on the pick are written the words: 'Kim: For your mountain. You will do it. Lloyd Carr.' I treasure that ice pick. It proudly sits on a shelf in our family room, and I see it every day, and remember. I will never forget sitting on the floor of my living room and weeping, not quite believing that this man had done this for me, and then writing to him to thank him and for the letter he wrote back to me. He is a special person."

Carr deserved better, football-wise, in his last days as Michigan’s head football coach. A team that could never get healthy clawed to the brink of a championship, only to suffer a numbing disappointment.

But that’s not how the man will be remembered, in 10, 20 or 30 years. For the football fixated, he’ll be the one who brought a national championship back to Ann Arbor after a half-century hiatus.

For many more, he’ll be the man who took the time to lift others up in times of great need.

Those acts gleam like no crystal football ever will.

I know that I, myself, have tended to get caught up in the wins and losses... I'm aware that not too long ago I advocated him leaving the program in this very space.

But, after an 8-game winning streak and a near-run at a Big 10 title all while battling injuries to the two most important players on the team, not to mention a complete snap-shot of the man's career, it's important to remember that one should be careful what one wishes for.

Lloyd's decision to step down probably came at the right time, both for him and for the program. And, with all of the Les Miles hullabaloo, who knows if the program will be super-competitive anytime in the near future.

But, while Michigan's football team might not have won too many of the "big ones" the past few years--and, while there's no such thing as a "perfectly clean" program in college sports these days--there's something to be said for having a coach who not only keeps your team mostly competitive but also never loses his convictions or his ethics. People like Pete Carroll would be wise to take a page from that book.

Thanks, Lloyd. Godspeed on whatever journey you take next.

A moment of silence for the fuckwits at ESPN...

Forsooth, who now do the media have to group-fellate, with the Yankees out of the playoffs? A moment of silence for the suits at the networks who tried so hard to get the Yankees/Red Sox series that most of the country hates...




Owned. Ownage. Pwned. Own3d. The violins... they play the weepiest music for you, Yankee Fan.

KEN-NY!!! KEN-NY!!! KEN-NY!!!

^{K-Love lets it be known that he's in the zone.}



12 - 3. Damn, dude.

Browns down, Browns up

So, it's been a couple of weeks. The Browns lost to Oakland, who sucks by the way, by going down 16 only to rally back to 17-16, only to go do 26-17, only to rally back and have a last-second 40 yard field goal attempt go through, only to find that the Raiders' coach took advantage of the NFL rule loophole that allows a coach to call timeout from the sideline just as the ball is being snapped on a field goal try, only to have to try the kick again, only to have it blocked.

There was much weeping and gnashing of teeth.


Then the Browns come home and dismantle Baltimore. Now, I know the stats favored the Ravens in every facet... except one: Browns 27, Ravens 13. Suck on that.

Uhh, sorry about that, Derek

I think it was me (yeah, it was) that wrote:

So, do I think the Browns are suddenly going to be awesome, now? Hardly. But, the trade was a necessary move that I think they'd been planning/hoping to make, whether it was sooner or later. It's now Brady Quinn's team. The players know it, and the front office just confirmed it with this move.

I watched the Berea Report last night, and it's fun watching all of our players trying not to say the wrong thing when the reporters try to bait them into picking allegiance to one of the QBs. Braylon Edwards looked like his head was going to explode Scanners-style when they asked him about it. He must have said, "I support whoever goes out there. I just want to play football," at least 7 times. Winslow was similar. Anderson's good, yea, we're fine. If you employ the fine art of listening to what they're not saying, it's pretty obvious they're all ready for Quinn.

I never thought I'd agree with Mary Kay Rotten-Crotch (Cabot), but she was like, You get the sense that they all want Quinn on the field, that it's time. You could tell in the Denver game in pre-season that Brady coming in kind of charged them up, and that they like the way he plays and the way he gets them the ball. The only one to come close to openly saying it was Steve Heiden, who (when asked if Quinn was “ready” before the start of the season, even) said: "You'll have to ask Brady that. But from what I've seen, I think he is."

Now, I don't think the Browns are going to the playoffs, or even going .500, with Quinn. But I think Quinn would give the offense a chance to be a lot better the rest of the year... Quinn's about as ready as he'll ever get at this point, and if the other players on offense want him in there (whether or not they'll come out and say it), it's clear that he probably gives them the best chance to win.

Wow. So, if I told you that a Browns QB went: 20-of-33, 328 yards, and five TDs, one INT, 121.0 rating... you'd probably think that Quinn had started, right? And that I looked like an idiot, right?

Well, you'd be right on one count.

Hey, Derek Anderson... my bad. Anderson played the whole game, and after starting 0-for-5 and hearing the boo birds, he simply went off. Jon and I sat there in astonishment. Edwards and Winslow both had 100-yard receiving days, Edwards had 2 TD catches (including one of the more amazing catches I've ever seen), Winslow had 1, and Jurevicius had two himself.

I can only imagine the "Charlie Frye Suicide Watch" in the Seattle locker room was at Defcon 1.

Add to that the 216 yards Jamal Lewis put up. Jon turned to me after Lewis had broken off the second of his insanely long runs and said something to the effect of, "Man, it sure is nice to see him doing that for us, and not to us."

It was just an offensive outburst... it was like the whole team had been offensively constipated for about 18 months, and finally got a chance to let it all out. The biggest thing that all of these stats say without actually spelling it out: The offensive line looked good yesterday. A 216-yard rusher, NO SACKS. It has to be the best "offensive-line-game" this team has played since they came back in 1999. This was the o-line we thought we were getting in training camp before Steinbach got hurt. Now he's back and looking more comfortable, and he and Joe Thomas simply owned the Bengals d-line on that left side. All of Lewis's big runs came behind Thomas and Steinbach. Also, Tucker comes back after two more games, which will only add more depth to the right side, a side that definitely improved from last week to this. And who knows... Bentley might be able to play some time in the second half of the season, which is even more depth... something the Browns have not had up front in a long time.

This is not to say there weren't things to be concerned with as a Browns fan... like the defense giving up 45 points themselves, including 6 TD passes by Palmer. But, the Bengals' offense is a well-oiled machine. The Browns defense is banged up, but there are some holes that need to be fixed, pronto. While it sucks not having a #1 pick next year, the Browns had better spend early and often in the draft on defensive linemen that can stop the run. The defense still plays this bend-but-don't-break game, but a good offense like the Bengals exploits the cushions they give. Until the Browns can get some push up front with their three down linemen, that's going to continue to be the case.

But, I gotta admit... I don't always like some of what he does (I thought bragging about jumping into the Dawg Pound was disrespectful, but then doing it and bitching about getting showered with beer is cry-baby/punk), but Chad Johnson is a fucking player. He was unstoppable, and some of the catches he made, I would just turn to Jon and say, "He caught that?? How in the fuck did he catch that?"

The whole game was just surreal. It was like watching Louisville and West Virginia play... no defense to be found anywhere!

So, where does this leave the Browns? Certainly not the 0-16 disaster that some were predicting. .500? I doubt it... the schedule is still really tough. But, there's some hope on offense, now, and hopefully there's no longer the distraction/rush of the Brady Quinn soap opera. I'd still be surprised if he's not starting shortly after the bye week, but at this point you ride the hot hand as long as he stays hot, and Anderson earned another start or two yesterday, without a doubt.

They *should* be able to go to Oakland and have a good chance to win, if they play offense like they did yesterday. Ditto with Miami in week 6. Baltimore at home will be tough, and New England on the road is basically a loss. But, if they could somehow sneak into the bye-week at 3-3, it would be cause for serious optimism for the Browns, especially since their schedule lets up just a bit after the bye week. Again, this was just one game. But, if they can build on what they did offensively yesterday going forward, 7 wins isn't entirely out of the question anymore. We'll just have to wait and see.

Most importantly, though... I also said:

As I said to a friend Tuesday: there are so many holes in the dam, but if they could patch one, it would give them the opportunity to bail water from the other problem areas. And, while trading Frye and paving the way for Quinn may look frantic and disorganized to the collective NFL media as a whole, Savage may have just stuck his finger into that hole in the dam.

At least for one week, the offense didn't leak any water. Now, if they can keep it that way and figure out how to bail some water out of the defensive boat, they might just have something here.

At least Norm MacDonald used to overtly call it "the fake news"

"Good evening everybody... and now, the fake news."

So began every Saturday Night Live Weekend Update sketch with Norm MacDonald at the desk. Perhaps ABC should consider adopting something similar...

The more I read about this whole Alexis Debat thing, the more it stinks. For more background, consider the following:
Washington Post
Attywood (this is a good one; very comprehensive of all of the ramifications and dovetails)
ABC News Blotter

From the Post:

A former consultant to ABC's investigative unit admitted yesterday that he put his name on a purported interview with Barack Obama that he never conducted.

Alexis Debat, a former French defense official who now works at the Nixon Center, published the interview in the French magazine Politique Internationale. He said he had hired a freelance journalist to conduct the interview, in which the Democratic presidential candidate supposedly said that Iraq was "already a defeat for America" that has "wasted thousands of lives." Debat said he had been unable to locate the intermediary, and the Obama campaign says no such interview took place.

From ABC:

Former President Bill Clinton, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Microsoft founder Bill Gates and former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan have added their names to the list of people who say they were the subjects of fake interviews published in a French foreign affairs journal under the name of Alexis Debat, a former ABC News consultant.

See a connecting thread between all of these "fake interview" subjects? If the Obama quotes are any indication, they're all anti-war people on the left, and are/were all painted as hippie pinkos in an effort to make them politically weak (although, how Gates fits in is a bit of a mystery to me... maybe the terrorists use Macs?).

From Attywood:

Debat -- a former French defense official who now works at the (no, you can't make these things up) Nixon Center -- has also been a leading source in pounding the drumbeat for war in Iran, and directly linked to some bizarre stories -- reported on ABC's widely watched news shows, and nowhere else -- that either ratcheted up fears of terrorism or that could have stoked new tensions between Washington and Tehran.

Good God... though ABC's Brian Ross says his information about Al-Qaida was generally "spot on," dude apparently could never prove he had a Ph.D., and is blaming these ghost interviews on free-lance consultants who apparently don't exist and/or can't be tracked down.

I, along with many, blamed the media's rubber stamping of the Iraq war on simple journalistic incompetence. But, does it run deeper than that? This dude is the "terrorism expert" on one of the major networks, and at the same time is publishing/reporting shit that either never happened or can't be corroborated--all while holding a prominent seat in a Washington conservative think-tank group?

Here's the one that kills me (from the ABC Blotter):

In fact, Stephane Dujarric, the deputy communications director for the U.N. secretary-general, said he called the fabricated interview to the attention of the editor of the magazine, Patrick Wajsman, in June 2005.

"I told him that if he went ahead with it, we would denounce the interview as a fake," the U.N. official said. "This was not some obscure guy. This was the sitting secretary-general of the U.N., and the magazine was told it was a fake," he said.

Despite that, Debat continued for the next two years to be cited as the author of interviews with a range of prominent U.S. public officials in Politique Internationale.

The U.N. official said a second supposed interview of Annan by Debat, posted earlier this year by Politique Internationale, was actually portions of a speech the secretary-general had given at Princeton University.

The magazine editor, Wajsman, told ABCNews.com he thought the problem with the Annan interview, one of the first he submitted, was "maybe a technical one" or a misunderstanding.

***

Debat told ABCNews.com yesterday the interview of Sen. Obama was not a fake but conducted for him by a freelance journalist named Rob Sherman in Chicago.

Debat says he believes he was "scammed" by Sherman, who he says he paid $500 to conduct an interview with the senator.

Repeated calls to a number for Sherman provided by Debat have gone unanswered, and today a reporter for the Daily Herald in suburban Chicago told ABC News the address for Sherman on a fax that Debat said he received from him does not exist.

Now THAT'S some journalistic incompetence! It's called fucking FACT CHECKING. And, when a spokesperson for the fucking SECRETARY GENERAL OF THE UN SAYS YOUR INTERVIEW IS FAKE, you should probably do a little legwork yourself. When they point out that it was pulled from a public speech he gave, maybe that should raise a red flag. And, I'm no free-lance journalist, but if you're sending me to interview a presidential candidate, I'm asking for a little more than $500. That would raise a red-flag for me, too.

But, what's the motivation? As Attywood asks:

But what is really going on? Is Debat pulling sensational stories from thin air, as was the case with Obama, to make a name for himself? Or in his role at the Nixon Center -- which still has close ties to Henry Kissinger and others in the conservatve foreign policy establishment like former Secretary of State James Baker, who spoke there recently-- is he serving a higher agenda of spin?

We may never know, as these people tend to circle the wagons better than any others in recorded history (see: Libby, Scooter).

The fact remains that Debat was the primary source for much of ABC's content relating to Iran and/or possible military/terrorist activity there. And, as we are all taught in kindergarten, where there's smoke there's usually fire.

Attywood:

His work should cause a re-examination of all of ABC News' investigative reporting on both terrorism and Iran over the last couple of years, because -- wittingly or unwittingly -- no other network has better served the Bush agenda in the Middle East.

For example, no story raised tension on the Iranian front more than this one -- which was instantly discredited by several knowledgable experts:

Iran has more than tripled its ability to produce enriched uranium in the last three months, adding some 1,000 centrifuges which are used to separate radioactive particles from the raw material.

The development means Iran could have enough material for a nuclear bomb by 2009, sources familiar with the dramatic upgrade tell ABC News.

The sources say the unexpected expansion is taking place at Iran's nuclear enrichment plant outside the city of Natanz, in a hardened facility 70 feet underground.

Was Debat -- who was aggressively working with Ross on other Iran stories at the time -- one of the sources on this, as well? If so, it would fit with Debat's modus operandi on the Times of London article.

As noted at the top, there are two radically different ways to look at this scandal. Either Debat is a lone wolf, a deluded self-aggrandizer whose main agenda is promoting himself. Or he is acting in his role at the Nixon Center as a conduit, spreading information and occasional disinformation at the behest of others.

Either way, this is unarguably yet another huge black eye for the American media. But if the latter is true, it could also raise major questions about American foreign policy, and about the future of war and peace in the Persian Gulf.

Some of my questions:

• The righties howled at Dan Rather in 2004 about the Bush/Air National Guard stuff that, while probably still true, couldn't be substantiated and referenced an apparently forged document... where are they and their megaphones now?


• How far down does this rabbit hole really go?


• How much of the news that we get in this country can we actually trust anymore?


• When does the population of this country get off its collective ass and demand more--both in terms of substance and of accountability--from its government and its media?

The US may never attack Iran, but if it does, after what we now know about the 2002/2003 reports of Iraq's WMD capabilities--as well as the continuing grizzly aftermath of our invasion--how can we honestly allow ourselves to place faith in the decision-makers that we're being told the truth?

Scary/disheatening shit, man. And this right as we commemorate 9/11 for the 6th unfortunate time. I'm no tin-foil hat wearer by any means, but it makes you wonder.

After considerable (in)digestion

I can't believe I'm actually writing this. I've had a day or two to digest the frantic Charlie Frye deal made by my beloved Cleveland Browns. There are many ripping the move, calling it "the act of a desperate team," and saying the team has "no plan" and no idea what it is doing.

I didn't disagree with those assessments upon hearing the news, though I myself was not sad to see Frye go (as you might surmise from my post below). But, the more I read, see, and hear (and read between the lines of what the players and the GM are saying), the more you can see they really do have a plan. Quoth Bill Livingston:

This was a big reversal of field after General Manager Phil Savage pleaded for the chance to see Frye with all the components of a respectable offense in place. Anything that gets Brady Quinn closer to putting down the clipboard and taking the snaps, however, is a positive move.

It's really always been about Brady Quinn. Savage announced in pre-season that the club had two tracks: the Frye/Anderson track to keep the team afloat, and the Brady Quinn development track. The only thing he couldn't tell us was when those two tracks converged. Apparently, the Frye/Anderson road took a big turn toward the Quinn road on Sunday, whether or not the team wanted it to.

More from Livy:

Frye was ill-served here with a revolving door of offensive coordinators, but so was Bernie Kosar years ago. Kosar also lacked Frye's good, but not great, athleticism. The difference is that Kosar proved quickly that he could play.

The feeling is that most of Quinn's teammates have that sense about him.

Amen. Let's face it: Charlie Frye was horrible on Sunday, and showed no indication that he had improved AT ALL over the course of his two-plus years in Cleveland. Whether that's entirely his fault, who can say. What I can say with fairly strong certainty is that the man has little field vision, no ability to read a defense pre-snap, and little sense as to when to get rid of the football and to whom it should go, a trait that is highly amplified when he's under duress.

It's like you can almost see the little angel and devil on his shoulder debating whether he should take off and run and try to make some crazy, University of Akron style throw on the run into triple coverage or whether he should stay in the pocket and try to make his reads through his progressions. Usually, the debate would take so long that before he could do one or the other he'd just get buried under a pile of defenders.

So, where does that leave the Browns? Livy?

The Browns look chaotic by doing this now. Yet trading a below-average quarterback who beat up on stiffs after a debacle isn't a big deal.

Word. While it appears that they are in total disarray, I'm beginning to think that's not really the case--maybe they're only in moderate disarray. Phil Savage basically alluded to the fact that, had one of the QBs played better in the pre-season, this trade (or a similar one for Anderson) would have happened then.

It also makes sense from the standpoint that, should they have held onto Frye and he had gone out and sharted his pants again on Sunday, his value would be completely in the crapper. And finally, there is also some degree of truth to the fact that they could have missed out on getting Dorsey back as the "mentor" to Quinn as he ramps up to get ready to play. So, while it's embarrassing that the Browns are the first team since the AFL/NFL merger in 1970 to trade the QB that started week 1 before the next game even happens, it was also a necessary means to an end, and we're not exactly talking about the second coming of Joe Montana getting traded, here.

So, the plan always was to tread water until Quinn was ready, but the suckiness of both veteran QBs in camp and on Sunday made the water a little choppier and has now accelerated that process. This made one of them expendable. Frye probably had more value on the trade market (I honestly still can't believe they got a 6th round pick for him) than Anderson, and now Anderson keeps the seat warm for Quinn. Frye being gone means Quinn gets more practice reps, which means he's ready to play sooner.

Many ask the question: well, wouldn't it have been smarter to axe one of these chodes in the pre-season to make room for Quinn? Yes, but since neither of them appeared to be any good, and since Quinn missed SO MUCH time due to his hold-out, Savage had to keep them both as a quasi-insurance policy (granted, a shitty one, but you get the idea).

So, do I think the Browns are suddenly going to be awesome, now? Hardly. But, the trade was a necessary move that I think they'd been planning/hoping to make, whether it was sooner or later. It's now Brady Quinn's team. The players know it, and the front office just confirmed it with this move.

I watched the Berea Report last night, and it's fun watching all of our players trying not to say the wrong thing when the reporters try to bait them into picking allegiance to one of the QBs. Braylon Edwards looked like his head was going to explode Scanners-style when they asked him about it. He must have said, "I support whoever goes out there. I just want to play football," at least 7 times. Winslow was similar. Anderson's good, yea, we're fine. If you employ the fine art of listening to what they're not saying, it's pretty obvious they're all ready for Quinn.

I never thought I'd agree with Mary Kay Rotten-Crotch (Cabot), but she was like, You get the sense that they all want Quinn on the field, that it's time. You could tell in the Denver game in pre-season that Brady coming in kind of charged them up, and that they like the way he plays and the way he gets them the ball. The only one to come close to openly saying it was Steve Heiden, who (when asked if Quinn was “ready” before the start of the season, even) said: "You'll have to ask Brady that. But from what I've seen, I think he is."

Now, I don't think the Browns are going to the playoffs, or even going .500, with Quinn. But I think Quinn would give the offense a chance to be a lot better the rest of the year. As I said to a friend Tuesday: there are so many holes in the dam, but if they could patch one, it would give them the opportunity to bail water from the other problem areas. And, while trading Frye and paving the way for Quinn may look frantic and disorganized to the collective NFL media as a whole, Savage may have just stuck his finger into that hole in the dam.

Quinn's about as ready as he'll ever get at this point, and if the other players on offense want him in there (whether or not they'll come out and say it), it's clear that he probably gives them the best chance to win.

And, this trade brings us one step closer to that happening.

Don't let the doorknob hit ya where the Good Lord split ya.

Charlie Frye has been traded.

Meh.

I don't really have much of a reaction, other than it was time. Dude looked like he flipped a switch on Sunday after kickoff that caused him to revert back to total rookie form.

My guess would be Dorsey gets re-signed and starts on Sunday. While this isn't the greatest of solutions, it does two things:
1) It puts the guy who probably knows the offense the best into the game, and
2) It means they're ready to start preparing Quinn to start sooner rather than later.

If they had force-fed the fans five more games of the Frye/Anderson rotating carousel of cow-plop..... ugh.


What I can't figure out is why a team would willfully give up a draft pick for this no-field-vision-holds-onto-the-ball-too-long-weak-armed-porno-crustache-having clod.

In all fairness, I wish him the best. It was obvious from day 1 that Charlie cared, that he worked hard, and that he has nothing but the most in terms of moxie and heart. It's just too bad he doesn't have that much talent at playing QB in the NFL.

Is "shit-tacular" a word?

If it is, it would seem to be the best word to describe the football of this weekend.

Lloyd must go. Romeo must go.

Weighing In

Hello, all two of you. It's been awhile! So, what's going on in Dan Land? You guessed it... BULLETED LIST TIME!

• Browns went with Frye as the starting QB, and haven't yet named a backup. They kept Derek Anderson (which surprised me, as you might guess from my posts below) and got rid of Ken Dorsey. I don't know what God Anderson prays to, but I suspect many offerings were made over the weekend.


• I played two rounds of golf this past weekend, and am looking forward to another this weekend with my good buddy Jon, in advance of our pilgrimage to the Browns home opener this weekend. The courses look hard as hell, and I suspect my lunch will be handed to me early and often. In case you haven't heard, I'm not that good at golf.


• The Tribe went 5-0 against reigning Cy Young winner Johan Santana this season. I only feel safe in saying that since we will not face Santana again this year, thus making me unable to jinx any further 2007 appearances against him. First time ever a team has gone 5-0 against a reigning Cy Young winner.


• I'm only going to talk about this once, because I have grown tired of it already (thanks, ESPN). You all only get one free shot, so make it count. I can make no excuses for Michigan losing to Appalachian State. None. But, here are some things to consider, while trying to "rank" how "embarrassing" this game may have been. You may call them excuses if you wish, I don't care. Again, I'm making no excuses for the game itself; Michigan got outplayed, made too many mistakes, and had some questionable coaching moves. For your consideration:
  
  1. "Dan, it was the first time a 1-AA team EVER beat a ranked AP team!!! LOL!"
  Consider that it was the pre-season ranking, and that now Michigan is no longer ranked. Aren't there teams ranked too highly every year in the pre-season? If the BCS accounts for teams' rankings as they change, shouldn't it be the same, here, too? Michigan clearly is/was not the #5 team in the country, and it was a ranking assigned to them based on pre-season projections. Had this been week 7 and Michigan had already crushed two or three decently ranked teams, then by all means... call Elias Sports Bureau.
  
  2. Appalachian State isn't a run-of-the-mill 1-AA team.
  First, let me say I'm NOT letting my boys off the hook: Michigan still should have won the game, and if they played 10 times this year, UofM would probably go 9-1 against them. That said, remember that Appalachian State is probably going to be the #1 ranked 1-AA school the entire year (two-time defending national champs with a win against Michigan now), whereas Michigan is now currently out of the polls (see above); the AP voters certainly don't think they're one of the top 25 in the country anymore. And, one could argue/guess that, if ASU was in division 1-A, they would probably come in as maybe 70th out of 119 teams (let's be honest, there are some SHITTY 1-A teams out there). So, does it make the ASU win look a little less of a monumental upset if you consider it a 70-over-at-least-26 upset? 16-over-a-1 in the basketball tournament, I don't think so. This isn't some team with a 15-19 record winning a play-in game beating Florida in the baseketball tourney. Applachian State is a good fucking team, albeit playing in a smaller division. I mean, hell... the Cleveland Browns beat two AFC playoff teams last season! Consider this post from a sports blog, which I read as part of CNNSI's coverage:
  
  I do not think Appalachian State is getting enough respect here. If I believed everything I'm reading, I would think a ragtag group of high school kids just beat the Colts or the Patriots. This is HARDLY the case!
  
  Appalachian State is, obviously, the best team that 1-AA has to offer. They have won the 1-AA title two years in a row and have some really good players on there. While I don't think they would be worldbeaters in 1-A, I do think that in the right situation they would be respectable and make it to a bowl.
  
  Put another way: I would consider Michigan getting beat by some sorry 1-A also-ran like UCONN, Florida International or even Indiana a MUCH bigger upset than this. (BTW that hurts, because I am a UCONN fan). This is an upset for all time, but let's chill out on the hyperbole, just a little bit.
  
  3. Big Ten fans should remember where they come from.
  Make fun of us? Sure, why not? I've lived in Columbus long enough that I've heard it all. But, rememeber, after 9 months of hearing how bad the Big Ten is, how does this help you, OSU fan? Or you, Penn State fan? It doesn't. It makes your team look just a little bit worse, simply by association. What if Michigan beats you later this season? I'm sure you can all take the Peter Gibbons defense ("Yeah? Well that may be. But at least I never slept with Lumberg."), I guess, but you can't deny the fact that it makes the conference look worse.
  
  4. At least we didn't lose our home opener by 30, like Notre Dame did.
  This doesn't really help Michigan at all. It does, however, make me feel just a little bit better. Why? Because fuck Notre Dame, that's why.
  
  I've said my piece. I'm over it. It's like I told friends: I look at it now like the beginning of any Browns season. Whatever expectations I had are now gone, so I'm not going to dwell on it anymore. I'll just drink my beers, eat my chicken wings and bratwursts, and enjoy the so-called football. Everything else is gravy.


• House of Cards played a lack-luster show this past Saturday night at Scarlet and Grey. Nothing really important here, other than we're at least back to playing after my self-imposed hiatus while changing jobs and going to Ireland.


• Speaking of which, I changed jobs. Not sure if I mentioned that here. Onward and upward! I now work for my old company's parent company's Global Production and Manufacturing group, doing project management for our Pegasus online LMS/Assessment platform. I'll leave you all to discuss what that might mean in the grand scheme of things.


• And, speaking of Ireland, we finally got pictures uploaded and sent around on Snapfish. If you were not one of the lucky ones to receive the honor of seeing these pictures, please e-mail me and I will send them your way. Also, I do actually plan to document our trip here, but as we know I'm a lazy blogger and that has fallen pretty far down on the old "to do" list of late.


• Along the lines of e-mailing me, if anyone reading here was planning on finding themselves tailgating/pre-gaming for the Browns home opener this weekend, and would like to meet up for a drink (*cough*Steve*cough*), please e-mail me as well.


• Michael Vick. Hmm. Jon touched on this in his most recent entry (in short, he's tired of hearing about it, thinks Vick shouldn't be allowed back in the NFL, and is annoyed by people crying that it's a race issue). Rather than leave a huge-ass comment, I'll post my thoughts here:
  I totally agree. The climate of the news media in this country over the past five to six years has become such that I can barely even watch anymore. It's become all about selling papers/magazines, and getting eyeballs glued to TV sets. In the world of infinte 24-hour news (including ESPN) channels, everyone is clammoring for something to broadcast, to get people to watch, to get the ad dollars. They no longer care as much about the news as they do about being unique, and making money off of people (and, one could argue, off of people's tragedy). I mean, I love "Showdown: Iraq!" and "Terror at Virginia Tech" graphics and theme music as much as the next guy, but...
  
  It gives platforms to people who shouldn't have them, be they political hacks and blow-hards from both sides of the aisle, the Nancy Graces of the world who will say anything to be controversial, and have no real business being on TV, and in the sports world, people like Pedro Gomez (whose only job most of the last two years has been filing daily reports about Barry Bonds). It trivializes journalism to the point where the real journalists left in this country are so hard to find, it drives people like me away from the media altogether, and creates a largely dumbed-down population who only get sound bites and watered down news.
  
  The reason I take this round-about relative to Michael Vick is twofold:
  1: This allows people to further agendas, such as "Oh, this is about race." No, it really, really isn't. Just like Chris Rock's old rant/joke about OJ Simpson: "This isn't about race, it's about fame. If OJ wasn't famous, this wouldn't be news. If OJ drove a bus, he wouldn't even be OJ. He'd be Orenthal, the Bus-Drivin' Murderer." But, I digress. There's no way to say that Vick is being treated in a racially unfair way, because a white NFL quarterback has never been federally indicted for running a dog-fighting ring and executing dogs. How can you compare and say Vick is being treated unfairly because he's black? If anything, he's being treated unfairly by the media, but not by the Justice System. And, do we honestly think the media would let a story about a famous white person go, if he/she we accused in a federal trial for *anything*? It's not like the Feds had some circumstancial case and Vick is/was being railroaded. It really is all about fame. If it was me going to trial for this, seeing as how I don't have any money to hire awesome lawyers, I'm going to the clink for a long time, and I can damn-sure bet you wouldn't be hearing about this on your 6 o'clock news unless you lived in Columbus, and even then the story would come and go in a matter of days. Vick's going to be getting off easy, if anything.
  
  And, 2: I love my dog, and neither my wife nor I could imagine our lives without him. I think what Vick and his co-defendents are/were accused of doing is horrible, and I could never imagine doing such things to ANY living thing, for entertainment or otherwise. But let's not miss the bigger picture as well: while this stuff is totally cruel, inhumane, and makes my stomach turn, it also saddens me that there are tens of millions of adults and children in the country without health care, and there are American soldiers dying every day for no discernable (to my eyes, anyway) reason in Iraq. Shouldn't the media be talking more about that shit, too? I know Michael Vick puts butts in seats and gets the protesters out in force for both sides, but can't we all agree that there are bigger fucking issues that we should be dealing with?
  
  As to whether or not Vick should play again, I'm fairly ambivolent. He's going to have to prove a lot to ever really get a chance to do so, because the American public will not be quick to forget this. The other thing to remember is that new commish Roger Goodell is ruling with a pretty iron fist, and this thing has been embarrassing to him and his league. He won't let that go by lightly. Vick has AT LEAST a year to sit AFTER he gets out of the can, if not longer. I've heard 2010 at the earliest. That makes him 31 (I believe), and having not played NFL football for 3 years. Again, he's going to have a lot to prove, even just from a physical standpoint, to make it back to the League. And this is a QB who was never that great a passer to begin with, a QB who runs first, and who will at that time be past his relative prime as an athlete. As Red said in The Shawshenk Redemption, "They send you here for life, and that's exactly what they take." Time slows for no one, man.


• Damn, that was a long-ass, John Kerry style bullet point! Karl Rove would fire my ass immediately!


• My work fantasy football draft was yesterday. My team eats it. Raw. My Browns-Tailgater-Crew team is much better, and that was a computer auto-draft as I was out of town. The lesson? I think you know.

Well, that's all folks. Hope your eyes don't hurt.

Quoth Sir Mix-A-Lot: "Boom - Triple-up - Boom boom boom"

The Indians are still effectively dead to me, but it's always nice when your team pulls a triple play:

^{Cleveland Plain Dealer}

I simply can't allow myself to get my hopes up

Damn you, Browns. There, I've said it. As you can tell from my previous post about last week's pre-season game, I don't give the Browns much chance this year.

So, what do they do? They go on the road in the pre-season game with probably the most meaning (relative term, of course) of the four--the so-called "dress rehearsal" where the starters usually play well into the 3rd quarter--and play pretty well.

I just can't allow myself to get my hopes up. I just can't do it.

Some highlights:

• Whence came this offense? All three quarterbacks looked semi-decent on Saturday. Frye all but clinched an opening day start by directing an opening 80-yard touchdown drive. Included in the drive were a nice 13-yard scramble on third down to pick up a first, and a very very nice fade pass to Braylon Edwards over his shoulder.


• The offensive line hasn't been a liability so far. That's all I'm willing to say at this point.


• Ok, I said it jokingly last week, but... I now hate Phil Dawson. ANOTHER missed field goal. It's getting to the point of being inexcusable.


• Brady Quinn, you're beginning to make a believer out of me. A nice, nice drive against the Broncos' first team defense (and with our second team O-line and running back) that ended with a beautiful touch pass to Jurevicius in the end zone that was in the perfect spot, but was ruled incomplete because the ref didn't think he got his feet in (on replay, I think it merited a challenge, but we'll get to that later on). Another drive after a turnover resulted in a touchdown. I didn't see any badly thrown balls (one drop). Plus, you got your d-bag hair cut (albeit, involuntarily in an apparent hazing ritual). It now solidifies in my mind that Frye starts until the bye week, and then Quinn starts.


• Great question on the PD's "Hey Tony" bit: Hey, Tony: When will Brady Quinn master fumbles, interceptions, false starts, illegal procedures, delays of game and wasting timeouts so he can join the starting unit? Priceless.


• Where the hell is our run defense?


• I touched on the whole coaching thing last week, and while the team generally looked better prepared and focused this week, there are a couple of things I don't get. You're willing to try going for it on 4th and 2 (I assume, I guess, because it's preseason), but you're not willing to challenge the ruling on Jurevicius's catch in the end zone? To me, the goal-post angle showed that he poked his right toe down after catching the ball and the other angle showed his left foot in bounds. Isn't that worth a challenge?? It was a beatiful, back-breaking play. Instead, not even a whimper and we settle instead for a missed field goal.

All in all, though, it was definitely a more inspiring performance, and while probably not a strong indicator of seasonal success, it certainly filled me with hope that the Browns can be more competitive, if not win more games.

At least until someone blows a knee out.

Suckiest Bunch of Sucks that Ever Sucked: The Redux

I'm pretty sure I've used that blog title before in reference to the Browns, so forgive me for plagiarising myself (and for also having now stolen something from myself that I had already previously stolen from the Simpsons, which is where I steal most of my good material anyway...).

Some thoughts after watching Browns JV Football on Saturday:

• I’m now very sold on Antwan Peek. He and Wimbley combined have been the bright spot on an otherwise crap-tacular defense. McGinnest can take his time coming back, if he likes. Peek might have been a FA bargain.


• So long, Derek Anderson. Better get that resume ready. You had me until the "2-burned-timeout, 2-penalty, 1 interception from first and goal at the 2" part of your second drive. Fumbling on the first snap of the fucking game didn’t help, either. When Ken Dorsey makes you look like a chump, it might be time to re-evaluate where you are in life.


• Speaking of getting one’s resume ready, if I were Andra Davis, I’d be looking over my shoulder early and often. Leon Williams may be closer than he appears in the rear-view mirror.


• Give Jamal Lewis the ball more. The way our QBs are playing, it’s the only way the offense has a chance. I say this knowing that he’ll probably break down in week 10.


• While it was nice to see Quinn play well, I’m pretty sure I could have completed one or two of those. Like Terry Pluto pointed out, both Tim Couch and Luke McCown had awesome second-half rallies in the pre-season, once upon a time. I would like to see Quinn get some time with/against starters at some point, possibly this week. He did throw a couple of nice balls, and despite some super-soft coverage was always throwing to the right guy and putting the ball in a spot where our guy and only our guy could catch it. That’s more than I can say for the other bum QBs we have. I hold fast to my feeling that he should start coming out of the bye week. Let Frye get pummeled the first few games.


• Is it time to seriously consider getting a new kicker? I mean, I like kickoffs to the 9 yard line and missed 35 yard field goals as much as the next guy, but...


• Our defensive line still looks soft. And doughy.


• I want to like the coaches. Crennell seems like a nice enough guy. But, I’m tired of reading quotes like: "We didn't have the concentration or the focus that we needed." That’s all on you, Romeo. Further, when Leigh Bodden tweaks his ankle in the SECOND PRE-SEASON GAME, under no circumstances should he ever go back into the game. Put some ice on it and hit the stationary bike, for the love of God. Stuff like that ALL reflects back (poorly, I might add) on the coaching staff, which in turn all falls at the feet of Romeo.


• On a humorous note, I enjoyed (just a little bit) seeing the Browns’ #20 getting run over by TJ Duckett. I could have sworn Earl Little was back out there getting flattened by Duce Staley in Pittsburgh. I’m sure he graded out at 96 and deserves to go to the Pro Bowl, wherever he might be.

All in all, a very disappointing game to watch, Quinn’s first performance notwithstanding. My prediction of 6-10 is now down to 4-12, with us crying in our beers on draft day 2008 as playoff-bound Dallas picks a stud at the #4 pick using our first-rounder.

But, really, why should draft day 2008 be any different than any other disappointment as a Browns fan?

Ashes to ashes, and dust to dust

As Jesus Christ once said, "It is finished."

It would seem that the Indians have all but licked a stamp on the envelope that has their playoff aspirations neatly tucked into it. After a 6-2 loss--at home--at the hands of the Tigers (who, themselves, have been wallowing in suckitude for quite some time as of late) that involved stranding 5 runners on base in the last three innings of a tie game (including the leadoff man on second base in the bottom of the ninth when the score was still 2-2, which was promptly followed by THREE [as in, not one, not two, but THREE] straight strike-outs to end the inning), it is apparent to me that the Tribe is DONE. As in, stick a fork in them.

Some notes:
1) The entire offense (and I mean, ENTIRE) is slumping. They have been for a month. How is that possible?! Hafner is hurting. Martinez, who had been as consistent as humanly possible in the entire first half, looks lost. Sizemore is treading water. The Lofton trade hasn't paid any real discernable dividends. Were it not for Sizrmore's 2-run jimmy in the first inning, they would have been shut out for 10 innings last night by a team that has been struggling to pitch well for the greater part of a month.

2) Speaking of pitching (though directly related to hitting), the Tribe has consistently WASTED tremendous starting pitching since the All Star Break. Tribe starters have been on the ass-end of 1-0 decisions MULTIPLE TIMES in the last month. Inexcusable.

3) Eric Wedge is steadily losing my support. I've always been fairly ambivolent about Wedge's job performance. On one hand, he doesn't always make the best moves, but he's seeming to learn as he goes over the years. This team has grown up together, and their yearly improvement would seem to lend some credence to the idea that Wedge has done *some* things well. But, last night left me scratching my head. Tie game, bottom of the ninth. Leadoff man hits a double. Now, pretty much any and everybody that's ever watched baseball KNOWS you HAVE TO BUNT HIM TO THIRD. It shouldn't even be an option. No thought should have to go into this move. It should be like when the doctor hits that spot under your knee, and your knee jerks. Leadoff man gets to second base with no outs in the bottom of the 9th inning in a tie game = sac bunt. Daniel Webster couldn't convince me otherwise.

But, there was Jhonny Peralta, NOT bunting, and (oh so predictably) striking out. To be fair, the two hitters that followed him struck out as well, but that's neither here nor there. As Lars pointed out to me in an e-mail this morning, if you have no faith that Peralta can't get a bunt down, pinch hit for him with your utility infielder who CAN get a bunt down. What are you saving it for? If you score there, the game's over and it doesn't matter what it does to your lineup.

This isn't rocket science. It's inexplicable.


So, until further notice, I'm now back in my Randy Quaid from Major League 2 role. I'm shoveling dirt on the Tribe's season, because they don't appear to have any fight left in them.

At least I have Browns football to look forward to.

Oh, wait.

Funniest Road Sign Ever, a.k.a. The Name of All of My Fantasy Football Teams This Year

While driving in, around, over, and through Ireland, Melissa and I happened upon this one road sign, which will pretty much be at the top of the "Random Road Signs" Pantheon for the foreseeable future. I give you:

Tribe puts Christmas tree up early; looks under it; finds a Pronk

^{Sports Illustrated}
The Indians bagged themselves four more years of Pronk.

And for less money than most people thought, too. Think his .262/14/57 (as compared to .322/25/74 at the break last season) has anything to do with it? Now, I think two things will happen, one of them good, one of them not so good.

1) Hafner will settle in, no longer worrying about all of this contract pressure crap, and will go on the kind of second half tear we're used to seeing (hopefully without getting hit by a pitch to put him on the DL for a month, unlike the last two years--tangent alert!--for a good time, ask Larz about the 2005 plunking from Mark Buehrle and get out of the way... it's a fun exercise). If he starts hitting like he normally would, the rest of the league should watch out.
Grade: Thumbs Up

And...

^{Sports Illustrated}
2) The Tribe FO will let C.C. Sabathia walk after next season. Come on; the notoriously tight-assed Larry Dolan just committed $90 million to Jake Westbrook and to Pronk. I think deep down, the Tribe Brass know that Sabathia has pitched himself so far out of their mid-market price-range (I'm thinking he's probably going to get Barry Zito/Johan Santana-type money, to compare some young/comparable lefties) that they're going to lock everyone else up (which they've done quite nicely, BTW) and hope and pray that they win a World Series in 2007 or 2008 while they have him. They'll pull a Thome move and offer him something that they know he won't take, and say, "See? We tried."
Grade: Meh/Thumbs Down

I know in my heart they probably can't keep Sabathia, unless Dick Jacobs comes back and starts paying to keep players like he did in the mid- to late-90's. Dolan has always said he'd "spend when the time was right," but given the fact that the fans have not yet come back like they should be doing (the team has 52 wins at the all star break, people!!) he may be hesitant to plunk down $130 million to keep C.C..

But, hey... it's a start. And, if the Tribe somehow were to put it together and win it this year or next, it would certainly soften the blow of losing the Big Lefty.

It's just nice to have Pronk around for a few more years.

Stepping Lightly

I've been wondering what sort of a post can follow up a quasi-eulogy for someone so wonderful, and it's been like on Studio 60 where, during flashbacks, we learned how hard it was to find something to make fun of after 9/11.

However, I went to CNN.com this morning, and found the story that irks me enough to pick up the proverbial pen again.

The President commuted Scooter Libby's prison sentence.

In a written statement commuting the prison sentence, issued hours after Monday's ruling, Bush called the sentence "excessive," and suggested that Libby will pay a big enough price for his conviction.

"The consequences of his felony conviction on his former life as a lawyer, public servant, and private citizen will be long-lasting," he said.

I'm sure they will. Apparently, perjury, obstruction of justice, and lying to investigators IN A CASE OF TREASON isn't really grounds for prison these days. I mean, hasn't poor Scooter suffered enough?? The toll all of that lying and grenade-falling-on must have taken... I mean, I don't know how he made it through!

Seriously, though, what kind of precedent does this set?

Plame had worked in the CIA's counter-proliferation division before the March 2003 invasion. She told a congressional committee in March that her exposure effectively ended her career and endangered "entire networks" of agents overseas.

That's not grounds for going to jail? Two and a half years in prison for *that* is "excessive"? What the fuck??

Nancy Pelosi ain't high on my list right now, but for once I agree with her:

Reaction on Capitol Hill was swift. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, said the president had "abandoned all sense of fairness when it comes to justice."

"The president's commutation of Scooter Libby's prison sentence does not serve justice, condones criminal conduct, and is a betrayal of trust of the American people," she said.

Exactly. You know if I leaked a CIA operative's name and/or lied to cover it up, I'd be in freaking maximum security Guantanimo right now. I probably wouldn't even get a trial. If I did, there's no way I could afford any kind of solvent legal representation. Equal justice under the law, indeed. Worse, still, is that Libby is appealing his conviction. If he can drag it out long enough, Bush probably can give him a full pardon when he leaves office next year.

I've never been a big "IMPEACH! IMPEACH!" kind of guy, despite my well-documented distaste for this administration, but for the love of God... it's time.