The Rogue League

Halo 4 Review

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Tue, 13 Nov 2012 16:32:00 +0000

As with my comparison of MLB 12: The Show vs. MLB 2K12, I think this review will have some value because I am not a professional video game reviewer, but rather a regular dude like you.

When reviewing an FPS game, it seems like one can't help but compare it to something else. In this case, with Halo 4 coming out around the same time as Call of Duty Black Ops 2, people are naturally going to compare them. So rather than resist what seems inevitable, I will address Call of Duty in general (but not Black Ops 2 specifically) in this review. (Note that this review is focused only on the multiplayer aspects of the games mentioned.)

First, a disclaimer: I have been and probably always will be a fan of Halo. I played Halo 2 extensively in college. I've played Call of Duty Modern Warfare 1 and 2, as well as Black Ops 1. There are three main reasons I can't ever seem to get behind them and why I always seem to go back to Halo. I will address these issues I have with CoD while at the same time pointing out the advantages that I think Halo generally has.

1) Aim down sight: I have just never liked how your weapon, when drawn, takes up so much of the screen. Less significantly, but still importantly, I don't like that I have to hold two triggers (as opposed to one) to fire a weapon. In fairness, if this had been the system with which I began playing first-person shooters, I would probably feel the opposite way. But the fact is that I did begin with Halo's system, and I find it difficult to switch to an ADS system. And before anyone comments, yes, I know you can hip fire, and get really good at it, such that you don't have to ADS as much. But this actually leads well into my second point.

2) Strategy: Basically anyone from casual to die-hard Call of Duty players will agree that there is simply less strategy to Call of Duty, and much more of a "run and gun" style. The learning curve is far less steep. Nobody can really deny this, and in fact, many CoD players point to these facts actually as key distinctions which makes the game more fun. Well, perhaps for some, but not for me. The less strategy there is, the less thinking you're doing, and the more the game devolves into simply who has the best twitch reflexes. And while basically any FPS game will test your twitch reflexes, I am looking for more of a mental test than CoD provides.

3) Vehicles: Beyond anything else, what I and other gamers look for in games is for them to be fun. This is why we play. To me, vehicles introduce a fun element of mayhem that cannot be provided by foot soldiering alone. They also provide a lot more explosions, which I think we can all agree makes for a better game. I could almost overlook the other flaws of CoD games entirely if they just had vehicular combat. And quite frankly, I don't understand why they don't have it already. I can't possibly be the only person who thinks they should. My guess is they have limitations on the multiplayer engine that is preventing it so far, but I think they will likely introduce vehicles in the future.

So, now that I have established why I prefer Halo to Call of Duty, the question still remains, is Halo 4 worth playing? I say yes, and here's why.

Halo 4 is the fastest Halo game yet. I think this was really necessary. I hear CoD fans say Halo is too slow, and that was a valid point. But this is now largely a non-factor due to the fact that everyone can sprint now. However, it doesn't feel too fast, which is also important. Halo 4 also now has personal ordnances/power-ups, which are great. Now I'm sure a lot of you are thinking something like "well that's just a ripoff of CoD, they're so late to the game." There's really no denying this, but how many things did the first Modern Warfare rip off from the Halo franchise? Games borrow from each other, big deal. The question is, does it work for what the game is trying to do, and does it make it more fun? In the case of Halo 4, the answer is yes.

Aside from faster play and ordnance drops, Halo 4 is also much smoother than 3 or Reach. This is crucial in an FPS. Of course Halo 4 also has new maps, new vehicles, and new weapons. They are all good. And Halo 4 now has loadouts, with better weapons and abilities available for the more you upgrade your player.

Again, the question I go back to is, is the game fun to play? Yes, Halo 4 is really fun to play. And it's easy and fun to track your stats on Halo Waypoint online.

So now to answer the big question "should I buy it," I break down the buyer into three categories:

If CoD is your thing and you have no interest in Halo, I don't know that this game will change your mind. I mean, maybe, it could. But there seems to be this war between CoD and Halo, which I don't really understand. Why can't you play both (if you want to)? The only way it really makes sense is if you can only afford one game. That doesn't seem like a majority of gamers, though. So, if you're a CoD fanboy, keep playing it.

If you used to play Halo but now play CoD, I think Halo 4 makes significant inroads to winning you back. Why did you move to CoD in the first place? There are many reasons, but I think Halo 4 addresses most (if not all) of them, to the extent that I think you could enjoy Halo again.

If you are a Halo fan, but were disappointed with some of their recent offerings (read: Reach), whether or not you've played CoD, Halo 4 will not disappoint you. And even if you're a Halo purist, you can play the "Pro" playlists without loadouts, ordnance drops, and armor abilities. From what I've seen in the early going, though, people really like the new features.

2012 - The Year America Changed

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 18:48:00 +0000

This is mainly a sports blog, and as such I try to stay away from political stuff. But in light of the recent presidential election, I cannot restrain myself, and must offer some words from the heart.

I was and am a Mitt Romney supporter. I am not, however, a straight-Republican ticket voter. I believe above all that we need to elect people who are good and honorable, and will govern according to the will of the people, regardless of party affiliation. Further, I believe that the traditional American values and ethics as exist within the Constitution need to be honored and upheld.

Mitt Romney has served people throughout his life, both in the private and public sectors. He has donated tens of millions of dollars to charity. Perhaps most telling, he doesn't proclaim his selfless service before the world. Instead he only grudgingly allows others to tell that story. Truly, Mitt Romney isn't just a good, decent, and honorable person, he is in fact a great person.

It is not shocking to me that there are people in this country that fall for phrases like "yes we can" and "Romnesia," or that believe stupid things like "Mitt Romney is going to take away your birth control." It's not shocking that there are people who think that government exists to redistribute wealth, or that there are people who choose to believe lies. What's shocking, and quite frankly, heartbreaking, is that those people now outnumber the rest of us.

I suppose the title of this post is somewhat inaccurate-- 2012 isn't really the year America changed, it's the year that change became so obvious that we can simply no longer ignore it. Mitt Romney didn't lose the election. America lost. The citizens of this great nation gave up a chance to elect someone who truly could have made real progress, helped to heal our nation, and bridge the widening partisan divide. Instead they chose to re-elect a rock star with a pathetic record and a progressive agenda not embraced by the majority. In short, they elected someone with a lot of style but very little substance.

I'm upset that my guy didn't win, but I'm far more upset, and disheartened, by the American electorate. We will all pay heavy prices in the future, foisted upon us by a new majority.

Welcome to the SEC, little brothers

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Sun, 09 Sep 2012 03:39:00 +0000

Joe Paterno's True Legacy

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:38:00 +0000

Things could have been so very different.

Consider for a moment: Joe Paterno had as much power, if not more, than anybody else at Penn State during his career. So what if he had actually taken as seriously the allegations from the 1998 incident as any one of us would have? What if he had actually cared enough to learn the abused boy's name? What if, as his pretended legacy would have us believe, he actually cared about doing the right thing? Had he had that geniune concern for another's well-being, combined with the power that he did have, he could have made things right. No, he couldn't have had that child be un-abused. But he could've had Sandusky fired on the spot. He could have had him prosecuted much sooner than he ultimately was. And most importantly, he could've protected scores of children in the future. If you think about it, you realize that someone with that much power indeed could have done much good with it. Joe Paterno could have been a true hero.

But in the end, Paterno cared more about himself and the reputation and image of himself and his employer than innocent children. Apart from the actual abuse, this may be the saddest part of this whole story. Because if you believe in an afterlife, as I do, then he has a very long time to live with these facts.

Softball Season Stats

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 20:25:00 +0000

For the three of you that actually read this blog, here are my stats from my recently completed season of softball for the company I work for. Due to occasional injury/lack of desire, I only played in about half of the games. Here are the stats, including some sabermetrics:

G 6

AB 16

H 9

AVG .563

R 5

2B 2

3B 0

HR 0

RBI 0

K 0

BB 0

GIDP 0

OBP .563

SLG .688

OPS 1.250

ISO .125

GB 44%

LD 44%

FB 12%

As you can see, I'm a line drive/ground ball hitter, hence the lack of triples and homeruns and lower isolated power (ISO). I'm most pleased with the overall high average and high line drive percentage. I was most disappointed with the lack of RBI's. In fairness, however, I was on base a lot, and scored runs as a result, but typically batted leadoff or second in an inning, so I didn't have many RBI chances (only two if I recall correctly).

I resent Chevrolet's presumed place within Americana

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Wed, 30 May 2012 15:14:00 +0000

Perhaps you've recently seen one of these terrible commercials produced by Chevrolet. Indeed, Chevrolet is a part of American History. But to go so far as to equate it with baseball, hot dogs, and apple pie? No.

Let's be honest, Ford was first. Whatever your feelings of the Ford vs. Chevy debate*, the Ford company was first. If there is going to be any particular car brand that will be, in song, singled out as representing a vital part of Americana, it will be Ford, not Chevy.To even draw the association at all I find very presumptuous, and so for Ford to not do so causes me to have greater respect for them and, in turn, less respect for pompous Chevy.

*If you have them. I'm not sure this "rivalry" even exists outside the Deep South.

Halo 4 Release Date is November 6th, 2012

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 19:43:00 +0000

Honestly, I hope this game will live up to the hype that is sure to be generated between now and November 6th. I can remember how big September 25th, 2007 was when Halo 3 was released. The Halo franchise has been and is a phenomenon that might never be matched in the history of video gaming again. I know that is high praise, but this is the franchise that basically invented modern networked multiplayer combat. Here are just a couple of the known changes in this year's installment:

Loadouts - This is a significant break from the Halo tradition, but one I feel is long overdue. There are times where I just want to run around with rockets. There are other times where I want to hang back with the battle rifle and pick people off from far away. There are still other times where I just want to go ape crazy with the sword. I hope that with custom loadouts all of those options (among others) are available.

Exploration of John's character - This could be really good, or maybe a little stupid and cheesy, but I doubt it will be horrible and a dealbreaker. Basically, just keep it plausible and engaging and it should be fine.

Why Red fights Blue - In a nutshell, the answer is that it's a giant fighting simulator (think Holodeck on Star Trek). Well, ok. I mean, I don't really care why red fights blue, just that red continues to fight blue. Multiplayer is what keeps this franchise breathing, so add whatever storyline you want to it, just keep it around.

There are other changes but these are the most significant. If this game ends up as good as everyone hopes it will be, it will break every video game sales record, and maybe even overall entertainment records. 343 Industries has some unprecedented expectations to meet. Here's hoping they'll make a perfect game.

Food Review: Taco Bell's Locos Tacos

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 15:31:00 +0000

When I first heard about Taco Bell's new Loco Taco, which is a regular taco but with a shell made out of Doritos, I couldn't believe that I hadn't ever thought of it and also couldn't believe that it hadn't been invented sooner. It's that obvious and genius.

You can imagine what this is. Imagine a bunch of doritos smushed into a shell shape, and then filled with taco bell regular taco stuff. That's what it is. It's good, I just wish it were as good a food item as it is an invention. I wouldn't make a special trip for it. And this is coming from someone who makes reference to Taco Bell menu items in regular conversation. So, yes, it's good, but no, don't go out of your way to get it. Just pay the price ($0.30) to upgrade your regular taco to it the next time you're there.

MLB 12: The Show vs. MLB 2K12

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Mon, 12 Mar 2012 19:47:00 +0000

For those looking for an MLB baseball video game to play this season, you have two choices: MLB 12: The Show and MLB 2K12. This review is written mainly for those people who are trying to decide between the two games. And being that I am not a professional reviewer, but rather an average dude like you, you may get some value from this. I will divide this comparison review into 6 elements: Gameplay, Graphics, Animation, Presentation, Sound, and Fun Factor.

Gameplay: As gameplay is such a broad topic for any video game, I'm going to sub-divide it into the four main categories most relevant to baseball: Batting, Pitching, Fielding, and Baserunning.

Batting: You may have heard that batting in The Show is more difficult than in 2K. That is an accurate statement. However, with time and practice, batting slowly becomes easier in The Show. I can't really say the same for 2K-- it's just fairly easy and never really changes from that. Of course, in either game you can adjust sliders and difficulty to make it easier. I think the sense of reward in hitting is better in the Show because you really have to exercise patience and wait for your pitch. However, in this way, The Show is not as much a "pick up and play" game as 2K, which is something important to note if that's what you're looking for. In 2K, where and how well a ball is hit seems less connected to where a ball was actually pitched and hit than in the Show. For example, I can constantly hit pitches that are low or outside (or both) 400 feet. It doesn't even seem to matter which hitter I have. That seems a bit unrealistic. In The Show, it seems more like good pitches (and even some bad pitches) can't be hit well regardless, or it's at least rare. What I see in batting overall in both games is that players can be streaky, but in 2K it seems like you can overcome that streakiness to a degree if your timing or guesswork is good.

Pitching: There isn't really any other way to say it: Pitching is better and more fun in 2K. Even the most ardent Show supporters will generally agree with this statement. With either analog or classic pitching, 2K's version is easier and more rewarding. You can hit your spots much more consistently. I wish the same could be said for The Show, where pitching can be engaging and rewarding, tends to be merely functional, but at times can be hair-pulling frustration. Perhaps I played too much MVP 2005, but to me, if you hit the meter perfectly, you should hit your spot, or dang close to it. 2K does this. The Show does not. I can't even tell you how many times I've missed my spot by a fairly large margin even though I hit the meter what I felt to be close enough to perfectly. And that is even with the sliders (pitch control and pitch consistency) fully turned up to my advantage. So, it can be maddening, so much so that I make occasional use of the option to fast forward to the next half-inning. And so it's worth pointing out here that, oddly, this is where The Show still can manage some advantage. Because I would guess that most gamers prefer hitting to pitching, and 2K doesn't offer a fast forward option.

Fielding: The two games are largely the same in this regard. They both have a tendency to feel a little floaty at times. They both can make it unrealistically difficult to throw unless you adjust the default sliders. It's odd that they are so similar in this regard, but perhaps it's because this is (I'm guessing) the most overlooked portion of a baseball video game.

Baserunning: Again, here the games are not very different, except in terms of how baserunners are controlled. The Show uses a button plus icon system, while 2K uses a select runner and press trigger system. Both work fine. In some cases you might prefer one way, then the next day prefer the other way. I don't really think one is better than the other, just different. I will note, however, that default running in 2K seems a tad too slow, so you will want to adjust the slider.

Graphics: There isn't much in the way of comparison between the games. This is one of two areas where The Show is leaps and bounds better than 2K. If you'd never played either, you would play 2K and say, wow, those are pretty good graphics. And then you would play The Show and say, wow, those are phenomenal graphics. They are that much better, but I want to also emphasize that 2K's graphics are not garbage. And in terms of simply playing a game of baseball, either will serve. Each game realistically represents the stadiums, day and night game lighting, and the fans. In all of these cases, the Show is better. Where 2K is by far the furthest behind, however, is in the player models themselves. More specifically, some (but not many) of the player's faces in 2K are anywhere from not very recognizable to downright inaccurate. I have yet to see this be the case for the Show. If this isn't a big deal for you, then I think the graphics element are neither a deal breaker for 2K nor a deal maker for The Show.

Animation: I know not everyone will feel this way, but for me, this is very nearly a deal breaker for 2K. The animations are that bad. They can be clunky and awkward as to be nigh unto unwatchable. It is the one and only way in which this game is truly ugly, and I don't use that word lightly. And, unfortunately, animations are part of nearly every play (other than a strikeout, walk, or homerun). The animations are virtually never an issue in The Show. Everything looks so much more fluid and natural. Sure there is the occasional throwing off the wrong foot by an infielder, but that is really about it.

Presentation: People tend to say 2K presentation is better, and while I would agree with that, The Show is really not too far behind. For me, presentation is a lot more than commentating. It's having relevant statistical data on screens at batter walk-ups. It's accessibility to around-the-league data in game. It's also commentators talking about these things. In this regard, both games do it well, 2K just does it better. I will note, however, that in the Show you can mute any (or all) of the 3 broadcasters individually. You can only mute all or none of the broadcasters in 2K. And I can't stand listening to Steve Phillips and John Kruk. Thus, when I play the game, I set the game audio to "In the Stands." It's a little more immersive anyway and some people in the crowd say funny things sometimes. In the Show, I only mute Eric Karros.

Sound: See also what I wrote about Presentation. I don't really understand assigning a really significant grade to sound in a non-guitar-hero-type video game, but I understand many people do it, so here goes. As far as realistic sounds of the game, both do it well, but a little differently. I would say the advantage goes to the Show but only slightly. The main beef I have with the Show is sometimes special moments don't feel as special as they could based on crowd reaction. You may read that and say "hey, that's a big deal." But then consider that the majority of the crack of the bat sounds in 2K sound like the bat broke, even when it didn't. This seems worse than a sometimes lacking crowd. (Of note, every crack of the bat sounds good and authentic in The Show.)

Fun Factor: In the end, this is why we play video games, right? This is all people really want to know. 2K is a fun game. The Show is a fun game too. They just both get there in different ways. If I could only pick one game to play, I would pick The Show. But if someone picked the game for me and picked 2K, I wouldn't be sad.

These are many words for just two games. In the end, I say you will have fun with either game. I think the Show is better, but not by miles and miles like many (most?) on the Internet would have you believe. If I could change only one thing about 2K, it would be the animations, and if I could change another, it would be the player models. If I could change only one thing about The Show, it would be pitching consistency, and if I could change another, I wouldn't change anything else. So, take that for what it's worth.

Brain Crushing Stupidity

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 05:21:00 +0000

Much has been written in the vein of "the BCS needs to go away." Let me add one more voice to this fray.

This has simply gone too far. LSU-Alabama part II should never have even happened. In NCAA Football 12, a sign is featured that reads "Every Saturday Proves who's Number 1," yet another sign saying what ESPN stands for. Except that the BCS, and ESPN by extension as their television partner, clearly don't stand for this.

During the 2011 season, LSU proved every Saturday that they were the best team. They proved they were better than Alabama on November 5th. Yes, Alabama had turnovers and missed field goals and mistakes in that game. It's football. Those things happen. LSU still won.

One of the biggest (only real?) arguments I've heard in favor of the BCS is that it makes the regular season games so much more meaningful. ("How could we have a playoff system and let an 8-4 USC team win a national championship? Harrumph!") Except this year, regular season games meant NOTHING. LSU beats Alabama, but hey, why not let them have another chance, right? It doesn't matter that they didn't win their division or conference, aren't they the second best team, and so therefore, by BCS fiat, they MUST play the best team, LSU?

The problem is that the BCS presents us with the false choice, namely, that there must be a #1 vs. #2 game at the end of the season. The second, and in this case, much bigger, problem, is that the BCS did not provide any caveat in the rules to exclude teams that haven't won their conference. Such caveats exist to make it to a BCS game in the first place, particularly for the non-AQ conferences. But for only the most important game of the season? Hell no, throw that rule out!

And so what we are left with is the utter ridiculousness we witnessed tonight. If AP voters had any guts they'd vote LSU #1 anyway. But I don't have much faith that will happen.

Disclaimer: I'm not an LSU fan.

College Football Rankings: Week 4

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 21:17:00 +0000

Dropped Out: Ohio St. (terrible) (13), Tennessee (18), Auburn (19), Mississippi St. (20), Michigan St. (23), Arizona (24)

I feel confident with those first six teams, but after that, it's very difficult to place 7 through about 15.

Sorry Clemson, but no, you don't get a ranking yet. But you will if you beat Florida State this weekend. Speaking of the Seminoles, I'm not as sold on Oklahoma's defense as I am on the fact that Florida State doesn't have much of an offense (and specifically, an offensive line). I think that as the season progresses, this win will not look as good for Oklahoma as it does now.

BYU: 7 turnovers? I have no words. I haven't been this disappointed in my alma mater in a long time. Brandon Doman, you need to get this offense going. We have a huge OL, use it to our advantage. We better not look that crappy against UCF this Friday.

College Football Rankings: Week 3

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Mon, 12 Sep 2011 15:47:00 +0000

Dropped Out: Utah (20), BYU (21), No. Illinois (24), Nevada (25)

The only notable change in the top 15: Ohio State drops four spots for shamefully staying close with Toledo at home.

The old adage of "if a head coach listens to the fans too much, he'll one day end up among them" didn't seem to apply in Texas. Midway through the second quarter with BYU already winning 13-0, Texas fans were calling for the benching of QB/Armpunter Garrett Gilbert. Mack Brown listened, and Texas came back to win 17-16. Does anyone even doubt had Gilbert stayed in that game that BYU wouldn't have won? I wish Texas hadn't figured this out until next week, but I'm proud of BYU keeping this game close in a hostile environment. Through the first two weeks, BYU has looked better than Utah on both sides of the ball, and I expect them to win against their rivals this weekend in the Holy War.

Even though the game kept going back and fourth, I never really had much faith that Georgia could beat South Carolina. In my recently completed first dynasty season in NCAA Football 2012, South Cackalacky went 13-0 and lost to Oklahoma in the BCS National Championship Game, for whatever that's worth.

I'm happy that Vegas lost TWICE in the Utah-USC game.

Notre Dame LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL 0-2

College Football Rankings - Week 2

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Wed, 07 Sep 2011 18:17:00 +0000

Rk Team Rec Pvs

1 LSU 1-0 1
2 Boise St. 1-0 3
3 Oklahoma 1-0 7
4 Alabama 1-0 4
5 Stanford 1-0 2
6 Wisconsin 1-0 9
7 Florida St. 1-0 6
8 VA Tech 1-0 13
9 Ohio St. 1-0 11
10 Arkansas 1-0 10
11 Oklahoma St. 1-0 12
12 Nebraska 1-0 14
13 Florida 1-0 15
14 Oregon 0-1 8
15 Miss. St. 1-0 17
16 Texas A&M 1-0 20
17 Arizona 1-0 19
18 W. Virginia 1-0 21
19 S. Carolina 1-0 18
20 Utah 1-0 16
21 BYU 1-0 22
22 Baylor 1-0 --
23 TCU 0-1 5
24 No. Illinois 1-0 25
25 Nevada 0-0 24

I watched quite a few of the games this weekend. Here are a few thoughts:

BYU deserved to win that game and fortunately Mississippi's lack of discipline and coaching came through in the end. The Cougars' red zone problems worry me, especially against such a crappy team as Ole Miss. An upset over Texas this weekend would be surprising. It doesn't really matter how bad Gilbert or whoever their quarterback is, BYU has a lot of problems on offense to work through. Texas is currently a 7 point favorite and that feels about right.

Baylor and RG3 are probably better than I'm giving them credit for, but TCU's defense was shockingly bad. I will not be surprised at all if Air Force beats them this weekend. Vegas apparently thinks the same thing as they are only 2 point favorites (TCU) as of this post.

Undoubtedly the worst uniforms this weekend were worn by Georgia, and they played as if looking like Power Rangers had deflated their egos. That said, Boise State is legit. Only a road game at San Diego State stands in the way as a possible upset. Otherwise, I think they get through their schedule undefeated. Whether the voters reward them with a BCSCG appearance is another matter.

The Blog is kind of back: 2011 College Football Preseason Top 25

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Tue, 26 Jul 2011 01:52:00 +0000

After nearly three years, during which I met someone, got married, bought a house, and had a child, I have finally sufficiently caught up with life that I can sort of maintain a blog again. Undoubtedly the updates will not be as frequent as they were in the past, which is to say, erratic. But from time to time I enjoy writing about certain things, on which I have commented on this blog before, namely:

Baseball
Football
New Taco Bell Menu Items

So with this new update, I present my preseason top 25 for this year's college football season. Normally I don't like preseason rankings but I am as Antonio Banderas would say Desperado for football to start, so desperado in fact that I was recently caught watching SEC Media Days on ESPNU. And it wasn't even live. So with no further Adu, I present my Top 25 as of today, with previous year's record.

1. LSU 11-2
2. Stanford 12-1
3. Boise St. 12-1
4. Alabama 10-3
5. TCU 13-0
6. Florida St. 10-4
7. Oklahoma 12-2
8. Oregon 12-1
9. Wisconsin 11-2
10. Arkansas 10-3
11. Ohio St. 12-1
12. Oklahoma St. 11-2
13. Virginia Tech 11-3
14. Nebraska 10-4
15. Florida 8-5
16. Utah 10-3
17. Mississippi St. 9-4
18. South Carolina 9-5
19. Arizona 7-6
20. Texas A&M 9-4
21. West Virginia 9-4
22. BYU 7-6
23. Missouri 10-3
24. Nevada 13-1
25. Northern Illinois 11-3
Surprise picks: I think most would call Florida State at #6 a surprise, perhaps crazy. I think they have the talent, and they are adjusting well to new coach Jimbo Fisher. This is still Florida State, they still get great recruiting classes every year. I'm not predicting a National Title, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did happen.

Notable absences: Auburn (14-0, will struggle without college football's best athlete on the ~~payroll~~ field); Michigan State (11-2, proven to be fully a tiger of the paper variety after this debacle); Central Florida (10-3, coached by a waste of flesh rivaled only by a criminal).

week 3 college football preview: ohio state livin' on a pray-uh

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 02:32:00 +0000

Coach creasy bear is resurrecting the weekly preview, at least for this week. Let's take a look at this weekend's most intriguing matchups:

#2 Georgia at South Carolina - The Gamecocks came out limp last week versus lowly Vanderbilt, quickly losing the top 25 ranking they earned after shutting down North Carolina State the previous week. On offense, they are rather inconsistent. The Ol' Ball Coach clearly hasn't been able to recruit the same level of talent in Columbia as he could when at Florida. Still, they have a stingy defense, especially against the pass. And somehow, for some reason, they always seem to show up when they play Georgia. The Bulldogs Knowshon Moreno (edit: not pronounced like the last name of Ace Ventura: Pet Detective star Dan Marino) will probably get his 100+ yards. But I predict QB Matt Stafford will struggle, as he has the past two times he's faced SCAR. Bulldogs win, but it will stay close until a late touchdown. Georgia 27-13

UCLA at #18 BYU - UCLA was able to beat Tennessee two weeks ago despite throwing four interceptions in the first half alone. But they had two things working for them in that game that they won't have this Saturday: homefield advantage, and the opposing defensive coordinator being incompetent. I think QB Max Hall will have a good game through the air, and the Cougars will get it done on the ground too. BYU is very tough to beat in Provo. I like the direction the Bruins are headed, but I'm not ready to concede this victory. BYU 30-24
(Update: My original score prediction was 46-30. Obviously, I should've kept that one.)

Unranked Michigan at Unranked Notre Dame - Given my distaste for both of these teams, I like to explicitly point out that neither is ranked. As for the game, on the one hand, the Irish have homefield advantage. But how much will that really mean, given that they had that last week too versus a terrible San Diego State team and barely beat them thanks in part to a controversial fumble call that kept the Aztecs out of the end zone. On the other hand, you have a Michigan team, which improved last week after having lost to Utah, but still didn't look that great. I look at the coaches: Charlie Weis is getting top 10 and 15 recruiting classes, and has done nothing with it. Rich Rodriguez, while a good offensive-minded coach, doesn't yet have personnel that fits his system. I'm pretty sure this is going to be a fairly ugly game, with each side turning the ball over their fair share, and it will be decided by an either dumb play or great play, depending on who you're rooting for. Since I'll be rooting for neither, no matter who loses, I win. Notre Dame 20-19

#10 Wisconsin at #21 Fresno State - "Anyone, anytime, anywhere." That's Fresno Coach Pat Hill's motto. After beating down Rutgers in their first game, I immediately took notice of the Bulldogs. After North Carolina went into NJ and beat the Scarlet Knights even worse than Fresno did, suddenly I wasn't quite as impressed, with either Fresno or Rutgers (especially Rutgers...that might be my worst conference champion pick ever). Fresno does have quality players on both sides of the ball. Their fans will be fired up for a game versus a Top 10 opponent, even though they have no apparent real rivalry with the Big 11. However, Wisconsin is very strong and disciplined. Head Coach Bret Bielema has done a superb job replacing a legend in Barry Alvarez. He will have his team ready and focused. I can't see them giving this game away, which, in my opinion, is the only way they could lose it. Wisconsin 31-14

#5 Ohio State at #1 USC - As I think about this, the ABC Primetime, game on Saturday night, one question continually goes through my mind: How is Ohio State not going to get killed? Here are some key facts:

- Chris "Beanie" Wells will not play, according to the HC Sweater Vest
- Rey Maualuga is a freak
- Todd Boeckman is.....not that good

How Ohio State can win: USC is not really going to have to respect Buckeyes' running game with Wells out. Boeckman is obviously going to have to play an outstanding game. He can't turn the ball over. In fact, nobody on the Buckeyes can turn the ball over. They will have to rely heavily on their defense and special teams, like a vintage Virginia Tech Beamer-ball team. Also, USC is going to have to beat itself somewhat, which frankly, they have shown an ability to do sometimes (how else do you explain them losing at home to a 6-touchdown underdog last season?). QB Jonathan Sanchez does, at times, appear to have mental lapses. The Buckeyes are going to need him to throw picks, and for the Trojan running backs to be careless with the football. They'll also need them to miss field goals, kick punts short, and not cover their kicks well.

Any of these things doesn't seem particularly improbable. But for them all to happen seems virtually impossible. And I'm not sure Ohio State can win otherwise. Yes, they're ranked in the Top 5, but does anyone actually believe that? I think all people are thinking about is how bad they've looked the last two times they've played an elite team on a national stage. To what extent are Buckeye players themselves thinking this? To me, that is the biggest question of all. USC 35-17

the big long college football preview

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 00:28:00 +0000

Here is the post that ~~all~~ six of you have been waiting for. It's time for the Rogue League's 2008 college football preview. Conferences and teams are listed in order of strength as I perceive it. As suggested by the title, you may wish to grab a sandwich for this post. It's big, long, and satisfying.

SEC

The SEC will have a bit of a down year, I think. But still, this is top to bottom the strongest and deepest league in the nation. Georgia is the media's early favorite to win not only the conference but also the national title. They're good, but I'm not buying the national title hype. Four straight games away from Athens, versus LSU, Florida, Kentucky, and Auburn, make it virtually impossible they'll finish the season unbeaten. Their O-Line is young and not very deep. But as long as they avoid laying down like dogs in any game, like they did versus Tennessee last year, they've got enough talent to win the East. I'd prefer to see Florida win the division but I think that, despite a Tebow run at a second Heisman trophy, they'll still have some problems on defense, which will likely let them down in a couple of games. They should still play on New Year's Day, and it actually wouldn't surprise me if they did win the division. Tennessee should continue to be strong on defense but lost six of their front seven defensively. Expect a 9-3 regular season and their 56th appearance in the Capital One Bowl. South Carolina... is it me, or does it seem like the college game has passed Spurrier by? He's handed over play-calling to the OC this year but we'll see how long that will last. That said, their schedule is as favorable as one in the SEC East can be. This is a good darkhorse pick to win the division. Kentucky will struggle with their top QB Andre' Woodson now gone. And Vanderbilt will struggle because they are Vanderbilt. In the West, LSU is again the favorite. It seems a lot of people are overlooking them because they lost their quarterback. But these people seem to forget that Matt Flynn was kind of not awesome, so I don't think it will be that big a deal. Their losses on defense will be more significant. Still, I can't see any team other than Auburn possibly making a run. Speaking of those Tigers, they're supposedly instituting a no-huddle spread offense this year. I'll be curious to see if they actually have the QB play and overall speed necessary to pull that off, especially versus the tougher teams they'll face like LSU, Tennessee, and Georgia. Still they are very good defensively, and that will help them finish in the upper half of this division. Mississippi State returns from their first 8 win season in 200 years. They return a lot of starters on both sides of the ball, but their offense is still abysmal. I could see 6 wins and sneaking into a bowl. (Also, the parallel successes of Sylvester Croom and Cleveland Browns coach Romeo Crennel last year is really kind of weird to me for some reason.) Alabama I could see finishing anywhere from 1st to 6th, so for this post I'll put them right here in the meaty middle of the pack. Nick Saban is unquestionably a great coach, but I wonder how good of recruits he's really able to attract to Tuscaloosa. The schedule is somewhat daunting this year, with an opening game in Atlanta versus a strong Clemson team, and later road games at Georgia, Tennessee, and LSU. If the Tide can simply avoid losing to Auburn for the 80th consecutive time, they should call it a successful season. Arkansas will be kinda bad, but watch for Petrino to get the Razorbacks competitive again within a year or two. Ole Miss is still Ole Miss.
The pick: Georgia over LSU in the SEC Championship game

Pac 10

The Pac 10 remains, and will until some NFL owner offers Pete Carroll $100M, the playground of USC. I think they might be five deep at every position, including long-snapper and punter. They'll be solid on both sides of the ball, and their schedule is rather favorable. Only QB play could possibly derail this team's chance at a national title. Mark Sanchez is good but prone to mental errors at times. I still like them as a national title contender. After USC, I think there's a sizable drop to the rest of the league. Arizona State appears to be at the top of that crop. Dennis Erickson has once again turned around a team in very little time. Their defense still really needs to improve, and they'll get a tough early-season test against Georgia. Seven conference wins gets them to another Holiday Bowl or better. How soon will UCLA rise again to glory? I think this year is too much to ask, but they'll give plenty of teams problems. Their defense was already pretty good except for that embarrassment against Utah. Their offense will greatly improve under Neuheisel and Chow. Oregon seems to be strong every year. I've always kind of wondered how they get kids to go up there instead of USC or UCLA. The Ducks need to find a good QB, and if they do, they'll improve on their Sun Bowl berth from last season. California has unusual uncertainty on offense but their defense should be solid. Another bowl for Jeff Tedford. Oregon State somehow keeps winning games despite having tons of guys nobody's ever heard of. They may sneak into a bowl, possibly. Will this be the year Mike Stoops leads Arizona to greatness? In a word, no. Their offense should be decent, but their defense will be lacking. Too many tough conference games leave them home for the bowl season. Washington features "Tebow of the East" Jake Locker, only a sophomore this season. But inconsistent RB and defensive play will be their downfall. A fun game will emerge among the fans: Where will Ty Willingham coach next? My guess: Toronto Argonauts. Jim Harbaugh's Stanford defense should be tough. Their offense will struggle a little. This team could surprise though. A bowl could be in the cards for the cardinal this season or next. Washington State continues to reel from the departure of Mike Price (remember him?).
The pick: The Trojans

Big 12

The Big 12 has improved greatly over the past two seasons, but are just edged out by the Pac 10 for place as the second strongest conference. Beginning in the South division, Oklahoma appears to be at the head of the class. Their O and D lines are solid. Sam Bradford, who I'll admit I'm not very high on, seems more than capable of running Bob Stoops' system in the tradition of Jason White and Josh Heupel. I like them as a national title contender. Only a somewhat porous secondary could sink them, but depending on the matchup, that might not even matter. Texas will be strong again despite the loss of Jamaal Charles. I predict yet another 10-win season is in the cards for Mack Brown. Look for them to improve on their Holiday Bowl berth last year. Texas Tech will once again win 8 or 9 games. They get Texas at home this year, so if there's a season where they might finally beat them, this is it. I could see them in a New Year's Day bowl. Oklahoma State would be a great darkhorse pick if they could just find a defense. Their schedule is a bit rough, though (Missouri, Texas, Texas Tech all on the road). But they are men, and their coach is 40. They will squeak into the Independence Bowl (which should really be sponsored by Depend's one of these year's. Depends' Independence Bowl... just rolls off the tongue). Baylor made a smart hire in getting Art Briles, who resurrected Houston's program. He'll need some time but will turn the Bears into a bowl-eligible team within 4 years. Texas A&M was sort of run into the ground by Dennis Franchione. New coach Mike Sherman has his work ahead of him. In the North---

We interrupt this preview to comment on things recently said on tonight's College Football Live season preview on ESPN:

Jesse Palmer said he "buys into the Kool-Aid" of Georgia. Did he mean "drink" the Kool-Aid? Or is he going to buy stock in Kool-Aid? I'm pretty confused.

Craig James followed that up by calling Auburn's football team "eye candy." Uh...what? Did he mean the cheerleaders? Because yeah, I'd buy into that Kool-Aid. But the actual football team? Dude, that's just gay.

Back to the preview: In the North, Chase Daniel returned to Missouri in an attempt to win a national title. And to graduate, I would guess. The Tigers are easy to root for, having been bad for so long and also having a mascot that, despite being a tiger, is somehow more comical than scary. So I'll be rooting for this, but I don't think it's going to happen. Their defense will let them down somewhere, or they'll run into bad luck somewhere. I say this because they seemed to have such good fortune last year, and I think these things just have a way of evening out. That said, I think they'll win the North, because they're still that much better than the rest of the teams. Nebraska will improve immediately under new coach Bo Pelini. He should've been the hire instead of Bill Callahan. The Huskguys got it right and he'll right that ship. Kansas looks to improve on their success of last year, but suddenly face a very difficult schedule, including Texas, Oklahoma, and Texas Tech. Three or four losses seems almost certain. Colorado, who plays Divison 1 football, will continue their 15-year rebuilding program by improving to 7-6 this year, after being 6-7 last year. Kansas State should be ok this year. A traditionally soft non-conference schedule gives them a great chance at making a bowl. Iowa State is still awaiting the return of Troy Davis.
The pick: Oklahoma over Mizzouri in the Big XII title game presented by Dr. Pepper

Big East

Rutgers lost star RB Ray Rice to the NFL, but HC Greg Schiano has been getting good recruits up there and knows how to get the most out of them. They'll be good enough on offense and defense, and the schedule is favorable, which is to say, it's a Big East schedule (hey-ohhhhhhh!). I think this is the year Rutgers makes their first ever New Year's Day bowl game. Read that over and over maybe 50 times so you're less shocked when it actually happens. South Florida, who I foolishly ranked #1 in my Top 25 at one point last season, is nevertheless a good team, and seems to have vultched a few quality recruits from Florida State and Miami. I wouldn't be surprised to see them improve on their success from last season. Groethe is a good QB also, and only a sophomore. Despite the loss of Coach Dickrod, West Virginia still has really good talent. I do wonder though how well interim-turned-permanent coach Bill Stuart will be able to maximize his players' abilities. And when I say I wonder about it, I mean that I think he won't, at least not completely. That said, they're still too good to not make a bowl this season. But within 2 or 3 years, I think this program will be back to the state of mediocrity that you'd expect from that infertile recruiting area of the country (nothing personal Mountaineer State, just stating fact). I just found out today that Pittsburgh is ranked in the preseason top 25. And naturally, the first question that comes to my mind is, why? They suck. Some dude I sort of know once told me that Dave Wannstache is a good coach and that Pitt is good because they always get top 25 recruiting classes. To which I respond, no, he's not, and who cares how well you recruit if you keep going 4-7 every year? All of this said, the Big East is seriously down this year, and they aren't even a strong conference to begin with. If this Pitt team can't at least go 6-6 and make a bowl, Wannstache MUST be fired. How he's even still there is a subject worthy of this program's greatest hits. The rest of the Big East teams, I'll be honest: I have no desire to talk about them. Cincinnati... I still don't know what a bearcat is. Decent shot at getting to a bowl. Connecticut... whatever. Co-champion of the conference and made a bowl last year. Great. You're still, really, not that good. Louisville... they should improve on their disappointing season last year, because really they have more talent than they usually showed. Syracuse... you're just awful. Where have you gone, Kirby Dar Dar?
The pick: SUNJ

ACC
I'm looking forward to see how Georgia Tech will fare with the triple option under new coach Paul Johnson. The ACC has gotten weak enough that the option just might work. They won't face very much pressure in the Coastal division. Virginia Tech ~~needs to~~ update: will remove the redshirt from QB Tyrod Taylor. That may or may not be enough to win. Despite their making the Orange Bowl last year, I don't see a repeat conference championship. Miami coach Randy Shannon is doing a good job getting south Florida recruits again. They will improve on their disappointing showing last season. North Carolina is a team getting some preseason buzz. Common thought is that head coach Butch Davis can win this weak division. I could see this, or I could see a more modest finish. But a 6-win season and a bowl is certainly within reach. Virginia is not very impressive, despite technically making a New Year's Day bowl last season. Duke is...well...Duke. I think this story tells us all we need to know. In the equally arbitrarily-named Atlantic division, there's equal mediocrity. The top 3 teams are pretty decent, while the lower 3 are fairly awful. Wake Forest is probably the favorite, even over bigger name programs like Clemson and Florida State. They are actually getting pretty good recruits up in Winston-Salem, and I like QB Riley Skinner and the rest of the Deacons to win the division. Clemson, as per usual, is long on talent and short on coaching. Tommy Bowden is basically the ACC's version of Ron Zook. The Tigers will probably make a New Year's Day bowl game, but talks of national title contention are misguided. Florida State still gets a lot of talent and still plays in the ACC, which is to say, they have an easy schedule. They'll also go bowling, and could even edge out Clemson to take 2nd place. It's hard to separate the next three teams. Boston College probably has the most talent, but will certainly take their lumps with an inexperienced freshman QB. Maryland is not very good but does have a very good head coach in Ralph Freidgen, so even a bowl appearance from them shouldn't really be a surprise. It would be a surprise, though, for North Carolina State. This wolfpack has been tamed.
The pick: Wake Forest

Carson Palmer is my new favorite quarterback

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 03:39:00 +0000

Just the other day I was musing with the happy ninja about how weak the Big Ten is. And now Carson Palmer gives us this nugget (from a recent radio interview on 570 KLAC in Los Angeles):

I don’t watch what I say. I cannot stand the Buckeyes and having to live in Ohio and hear those people talk about their team, it drives me absolutely nuts. We got Keith Rivers out there and we got Frostee Rucker, we finally got a couple other ‘SC guys. It’s amazing to hear what those guys think about that university and what they think about that football program and Tressel and all the crap I got to put up with being back there. I just can’t wait for two years from now when ‘SC comes to the ‘Shoe and I get to, hopefully have a home game that weekend and I can go out there and watch us pound on them on their own turf and kind of put all the talk to rest, because I’m really getting sick of it. I just can’t wait for this game to get here so they can come to the Coliseum and experience L.A. and get an old fashioned, Pac 10 butt-whooping and go back to the Big Ten.

I'm waiting for an NFL star to come from Appalachian State so we can get a quote like this for Michigan. But for now this will do fine, just fine.

the last time the N.L. won the All-Star game, this look was still considered fashionable

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 23:39:00 +0000

Let's get this done, National League. Tonight. The last time we won was 1996. Think about this for a second. The starting lineup included Matt Williams, Barry Larkin, and Dante Bichette. Ozzie Smith was also on the team. OZZIE SMITH!!! The Prodigy were still a popular band. THE PRODIGY!!!!!!! This is just ridiculous. This was like two lifetimes ago. WE MUST WIN!!!!! HAHM-DI-NAHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!

Happy Birthday America

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 07:32:00 +0000

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

- United States Declaration of Independence, July 4 1776

Kobe responds to Shaq's freestyle rap with freestyle scat

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 00:32:00 +0000

Reigning NBA MVP Kobe Bryant has responded to criticism from former teammate Shaquille O'Neal. As first reported by TMZ.com, Shaq was recently seen rapping in a New York city nightclub. His rap included, among other lyrics, "Kobe, you can't do without me." Last night in a swanky New Jersey bar, Bryant responded with some freestyle of his own:

Wellllllll, be bop be doo dop
bim bam bold
Shaquilllllle..... why you so
cold cold cold?
Rizz razzzz-a-ma-tazz
shim shammy shine...
that MVP trophy,
well it is mine.
Bim bam, the flim flam
diddly-bop-m-bop,
Well, next yearrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr....
I'm gonna beeeee onnnnn TOOOOOOOOOOOOOP!

According to several witnesses, Kobe brought the house down with his interesting style. "Like a young Al Jolson, I tell ya," said one patron. "I heard the great Louis Armstrong," said one old-timer, "and this young Kobe has the gift." Shaq was also secretly in the audience, and was later overheard to say, "it's the dopest rhyme I ever heard."

Separated at Birth: Dari Nowkhah and Shia Labeouf

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 03:02:00 +0000

On a recent episode of the "Budweiser Hot Seat," SportsCenter anchor Dari Nowkhah interviewed actor Shia Labeouf to promote his upcoming film, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Dari, who was not familiar with his interviewee, was given a card with three questions to ask Shia, after which he was to put on a brown cowboy hat and tell the audience at home to go see the new movie. What follows below is a transcript from this as-yet-unaired episode of the "Hot Seat."

Dari: We welcome now into the studio, a very talented actor, Shia Labeouf, of the Transformers and most recently the new Indiana Jones movie. Shia, you are now on... The Budweiser Hot Seat. Are you ready?

Shia: Uh, yes, I'm ready.

Dari: (Turns to face Shia) Ok, now Shia... Hey, what the? A mirror match??? IS THIS WHAT WE GOT????

Shia: I'm sorry, I don't understand. Mirror--

Dari: HAHM-DI-NAHHHHHHHH!!!!!!

Shia: I.. I just... I was told you'd ask me about the Red Sox or something.

Dari: RAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! OOOOooooOOOoooOOOOO!!!!!! (Bites head off nearby chicken)

Shia: Oh no...

At this point, ESPN turned off the cameras, while Dari ripped off his shirt and began running around the set like a madman. He was shot with a horse tranquilizer gun and later woke up mumbling Linda Cohn's name. The moral of the story: Do not confuse Dari Nowkhah.

Please hit the mute button. Now.

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 05:11:00 +0000

ESPN begins their "Take Me Out To The Ballgame" battle of the bands this week. Nine bands, including REO Speedwagon, will be ~~butchering~~ performing an American classic much to ~~no one's~~ possibly six people's delight.

One question that I just have to ask: How much variation on this theme can you possibly do? The song is, at most, a minute long. As a baseball fan, I don't really want to see this anyway, but instead would prefer ESPN simply let this song be what it is. While I'm not sure if there is any actual prize money involved in this, probably just a few more minutes in the limelight and/or ham sandwiches is all the motivation some of these guys need.

Why is ESPN doing this? The better question is why do they do anything that they do? Like Titletown, or 50 states in 50 days, or the ESPY's, or Who's Now? This is just another in a long list of ridiculous things that are barely sports-related enough that ESPN can still try to justify doing it. I'm sure this probably appeals more to the 12-17 year-old boy crowd, as well as possibly the female audience. I'm still hoping for the day that a rival sports network gets its poo together and makes a serious run at these clowns.

Extra YouTube clip, just because I think it's funny:

Movie Preview: The Happening

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 07:01:00 +0000

The writer-director of The Sixth Sense and Signs brings you his first R-rated film.

That's the tagline for the new "thriller" The Happening. And really, that's all you need to know.

M. Night Shayamalan is trying once again to fool the public into thinking he actually makes good movies. And to be honest, he once did. I really liked both Unbreakable and The Sixth Sense. But after those, his movies have slowly gone from intriguing to boring to just plain dumb. Signs was o.k. I guess, but I wouldn't see it again. The Village was an outright joke. If you've not seen it, I won't spoil the "twist," but just be prepared to be extremely disappointed when you see it. To be fair, I've not seen Lady In The Water, but I don't know a single person that has seen it that liked it.

The public has slowly grown to groan at the mention of an M. Night Shamalamadingdong movie. Undoubtedly, Mr. Shipoopi was aware of this, and needed some kind of gimmick to get people to watch his movies again. "Wait, what if I put in more gore, and a few F-bombs? That's sure to get those 14-to-18 year-olds that, 1) will watch anything, and 2) aren't yet completely soured on my utter lack of ingenuity." And there you go, his new flick is rated R, and, I have no doubt, will suck royally.

Prediction: 3/10

NBA Finals Preview: Lakers-Celtics XI

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 23:18:00 +0000

Thus begin the endless references to all the classic Celtics/Lakers Finals matchups in history, particularly in the 80's. I know the media has to do this. I mean, they can't easily ignore it. Nor do I expect them to. So I understand that. But frankly, some of it is a little silly. Yes, it's the Lakers and Celtics. And yes, it's the game of basketball. And that's where the similarities end. So please, media, no more comparisons of the Boston Three Party to the true Big Three. And let's not compare Kobe to Magic or anything of the sort. Let this matchup be what it is. Also, I've heard some say this matchup is "saving the league." This is fully absurd. Saving the league? From what? The NBA is financially very healthy. So healthy, in fact, that it continues to subsidize the hemorrhaging, untenable farce known as the WNBA. Television revenues are at all time highs, and attendance levels remain high. I agree that this Finals matchup will probably get ratings as good as any of the Bulls Finals series. But it's not "saving the league," so no more saying this.

As for the matchup itself, this is pretty tough to call. Celtics won both regular season matchups, but that was before the Lakers got Pau Gasol, so as far as I'm concerned, those games have no bearing. This will be the Lakers first real test of the post-season. No team has yet been able to play the level of defense necessary to beat them four out of seven. I do think the Celtics have that defense, but they've been inconsistent this postseason, particularly on the road. When I look at these two teams, I see that the Lakers have the best starting five, the best bench, the best individual player, and the best coach. I guess this is easier than I thought.

Prediction: Lakers in 5

separated at birth

noreply@blogger.com (creasy bear) — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 03:29:00 +0000

Few people know that the late actor Alan Hale and sports broadcaster Jon Miller were good friends growing up. The younger Jon aspired to become a Hollywood star one day. He hoped to land a leading role in some sort of situational comedy about seven people that, after a transportation mishap, became stranded on an island (when you think about those circumstances, it makes you wonder how that was ever pitched as a comedy). The older Alan dreamt in his boyhood of one day becoming a famous baseball announcer alongside one of the greatest second-basemen to ever play the game. As it turned out, these friends ended up living out each other's dreams, though it worked well for each. Said Alan one day in 1989, "Jonny told me that he and Joe Morgan are going to start a new weekly baseball thing next year on Sunday nights. I told him good luck with it and to check out this blog so he knows exactly what to expect from the little buddy." Miller responded, "I'm privileged with the chance ESPN has given me. I hope to carry on Alan's legacy by getting Peter Gammons hopelessly stranded in Yankee Stadium one day."