Are people really this stupid?

February 26, 2010 by 1 Comment

First, let me introduce you to my favorite player in this year’s NFL Draft:  Myron Rolle, a safety from Florida State.  Myron (yes, we’re on a first name basis) graduated from Florida State in 2 1/2 years with a degree in Excercise Science, and passed all the preliminary pre-med courses, as he is an aspiring neurosurgeon.  In 2008, he was a Rhodes Scholar nominee, meaning he’d have the ability to attend the extremely prestigious Oxford University in England to advance his studies.  Myron was eventually selected for a scholarship, and is currently finishing up his M.A. in Medical Anthropology.  Myron was no slouch on the football field, either, garnering 1st Team Freshman All American in 2006, and was 2nd Team All ACC and 3rd Team All American as a junior in 2008.

Rolle actually skipped his senior season at Florida State and has spent the last year in Oxford, England furthering himself in the world of academia.  He also started the Myron L. Rolle Foundation, which aims at helping families in need all over the world.

The reason I’m writing this post is not to simply praise Myron (but I really, really want the Seahawks to draft him), but it is to respond to some claims made by NFL talent evaluators and NFL executives:

According to this story and corroborated by ESPN, Yahoo, and others, some people think that Myron Rolle is in fact too smart to be a high pick in this April’s draft.  Apparently, since his outside interests include studying stem cell research, reading papers on neurosurgery and attempting to help advance medicine, he is seen as someone who doesn’t focus enough on football.

Wait wait wait…what?  In a league that embraces guys who cheat on their wives, go to jail for possession of marijuana, kill people in drunk driving accidents (Leonard Little, Donte Stallworth), and so on and so forth, we are shying away from one of the greatest human beings in recent memory because he has other interests outside of football?

This is a sad, sad day for the human race.  Apparently coaches want players who are unintelligent and have nothing to fall back on if football fails, so they’ll work harder than a kid who says he wants to play 10 years and then go become a doctor.  Are you fucking kidding me?  I seriously don’t even begin to understand the logic behind this.  First of all, if he’s that smart, don’t you think he’ll destroy that playbook in half the time it takes some dumb kid who never went to class?  Secondly, he has always been a really good player.  It’s not as if I’m saying draft him on his philanthropy alone.  This guy will instantly become a fan favorite and the community will embrace him 110%.  It’s an absolute mystery as to why anyone would think otherwise.

Sometimes in life, you have to wonder aloud if you’re the only person on this planet who isn’t a complete fucking moron.  Stories like this make me lose faith in the intelligence of people in this country.  Myron Rolle is an outstanding athlete, but more importantly — yes, more importantly — he is an outstanding human being.  With all the talk of drafting ‘high character guys’, why would you not want this guy on your team?

Filed under Random., Sports.

Seahawks Franchise a kicker?

February 25, 2010 by 1 Comment

Yuck.  The fact that we are placing the Franchise Tag on a fucking kicker makes me sick.  What makes me even sicker is the fact that they’re justified in doing so.  I had every intention of ripping them for using it on a kicker, but then I looked at the roster and the only other person even in the realm of deserving it would be Nate Burleson, and there’s no way I’m paying him upwards of $10 million for next year.  He probably won’t even get half of that in free agency.

For those of you not in the know, or for females attempting to further your sports knowledge as to impress your boyfriends/husbands/dudes you sleep with, let me explain what the “Franchise Tag” is and what it does:

Each year, teams have Restricted Free Agents (RFA) and Unrestricted Free Agents (UFA).  A RFA can sign an offer sheet with any team in the league, however, because he is “restricted”, his original team has the right to match that offer if they so choose.  So, lets say for the sake of this conversation that Matt Hasselbeck was a RFA (he isn’t).  Perhaps some team like Oakland searching for a veteran QB signs him to a 2 year, $20 million dollar offer sheet.  The ‘Hawks would then have the ability to match that offer because he was a RFA.  He would then be a Seahawk at 2 years, $20 million.  An UFA is just that, no restrictions.  He is free to sign for however much the market will pay him and he owes nothing to his old team.

Teams use the Franchise Tag when they are attempting to keep big name players from walking away in free agency (the team Franchised Walter Jones like 5 years in a row until they hammered out a long-term deal).  There are two types of Franchise tag; exclusive and non-exclusive.  An “exclusive” franchise player must be offered a one-year contract for the average of the top five salaries at the player’s position (or 120% of the player’s previous year’s salary, whichever is greater).  So basically, we have to pay Mare the average of the top 5 highest paid kickers in the NFL.  That sum comes out to about $2.4 million for one year, which isn’t that bad.  It’s not exactly cheap, but it’s pretty good considering his production and ability to be less of a douche than Josh Brown.  Also, exclusive franchise players cannot negotiate with other teams.

A “non-exclusive” franchise player must be offered a one-year contract for the average of the top five salaries at the player’s position (or 120% of the player’s previous year’s salary, whichever is greater).  So, same thing, but the difference is a non-exclusive franchise player may negotiate with other NFL teams.  However, if he signs an offer sheet from another team, the original team has a right to match the terms of that offer, or if it does not match the offer and thus loses the player, is entitled to receive two first-round draft picks as compensation.  So if we made Mare a “non-exclusive” franchise player, and say, the 49ers signed him (they wouldn’t), we’d get 2 first round picks from them as compensation.  Even Tim Ruskell isn’t stupid enough to give up 2 first round picks for a kicker.

Now if you’re wondering what happened to Steve Hutchinson, Ruskell in his infinite wisdom did not Franchise him, instead opting to put the Transition Tag on him.  All this meant was that when he signed an offer sheet with Minnesota for a then ridiculous 7 years, $49 million (seems sorta like a bargain now, huh?) and we didn’t match it, the Vikings didn’t have to give us two draft picks as compensation.  Good job, Ruskell.  Have fun being unemployed you fucktard.

Basically, the Seahawks fucking suck.  Their two best players this past season were a kicker and a punter (Jon Ryan).  That’s so depressing that I want to hang myself.  Or go luging in Canada.   (eeesh, too soon?)

Filed under Sports.

Am I the only person who doesn’t care about the Olympics?

February 25, 2010 by Leave a Comment

I really want to care.  I just don’t.  Even the Summer Olympics were boring.  Sure, Michael Phelps was owning the stupid French, but at the end of the day, he was swimming.  Apollo Ohno is owning bitches in speed skating, but I couldn’t care less about ice skating.

I haven’t had an actual reason — a rooting interest, if you will — for watching the Olympics, other than watching someone from another country.  The only person I’m interested in seeing in both Olympics is Usain Bolt.  He’s amazingly fast, he’s extremely cocky, and he’s from my 2nd favorite country in the world.  I mean, the dude was wearing gold fucking shoes.  That’s so far beyond awesome that I don’t know what to even say in response to that.

But this post is not about Usain Bolt.  This post is about my apathy towards anything Olympics related.  When I first heard Vancouver was getting the Olympics, I was pretty excited.  The focus of the world’s attention was going to be in our neck of the woods, and if nothing else, should help stimulate the economy of towns along I-5.

Last night I found myself watching a documentary on how Hitler was actually killed on the History Channel rather than the Olympics.  Anytime SportsCenter attempts to recap the Olympics, I change it or go take a leak.  I don’t hate the Olympics.  I don’t have anything against the Olympics.  I simply don’t fucking care.  I want to care, I just don’t.  It’s kind of like the Sounders; everyone here is ridiculously in love with them, and I want to be, but for the life of me, I can’t get into soccer.  I’d be open to an NHL team in Seattle, because I could definitely get into hockey, but fuck, I don’t care about the Olympics.

Now, if the US makes the finals and plays Canada in hockey, you bet your ass I’m watching.  Not because it’s the Olympics, because I very badly want to see Canada fail.  Currently, the US, Canada, Slovakia, and Finland are the final four teams in contention.  I mean, having Canada lose out on a medal altogether would be funny as hell, but I think giving them Silver would make them even more pissed since hockey is their sport.  Fucking Canadians.  The best thing Canada has ever produced is Robin Scherbatsky.

I just realized this post has been all over the place.  I wanted to talk about my inability to care for the Olympics, and wound up talking about a Jamaican sprinter, Canada sucking, futebol, hockey, and a news reporter that says “But, um…” a  lot.  I need to fucking focus.

If anyone can help me understand my apathetic views on the Olympics, please, feel free to enlighten me.  Or perhaps you agree with me, and like to bash Canada as well.  Whatever the case, someone, anyone, help me.  I’m like a guy shopping for his girlfriend at Victoria’s Secret; lost, alone, confused, a little scared, and possibly aroused.

Filed under Random., Sports.

Non-Mikey QOTW.

February 24, 2010 by 1 Comment

Ok, so I know I just did one of these, but considering I didn’t do one last week, this one will have to suffice.  Plus, it was too good to pass up.  And I gotta spread it out, it can’t all just be mocking Mikey (even though that never really gets old).

Let me set the scene for you:

I’m sitting there minding my own business when Kelly comes over and starts rubbing her head on me “lovingly”.

What the hell are you doing?

Loving on you.

You’re not a cat.  Stop.

Well since you won’t let me get a cat, I have to be a cat.

(blank stare)

Meow.

Oh…my…God.

 

Kelly can get a little weird after a long day at the office and 7 cups of coffee.


(the blank stare looked like this, followed by ridiculously loud laughter from Kelly, also just like in this picture)

Filed under Random.

Night @ the Movies.

February 24, 2010 by 3 Comments

Let me preface all of this with the fact that I will always be in favor of anything involving Robert Downey, Jr.  The man is certifiably insane, but in a good way.  He is a witty motherfucker, and as I’ve been told by Emelie, he’s easy on the eyes, to boot.  So basically, I’ll love anything he’s attached to.

Having said all of that, Sherlock Holmes was pretty good.  In no way was it a perfect movie, but it was still quite entertaining, and Downey’s depiction of the infamous British sleuth was superb.  Holmes is a brilliant, albeit extremely flawed, Private Detective in late 19th century London.  Aided by his trusty sidekick, Dr. John Watson (Jude Law), Holmes solves crimes that the Scotland Yard fail to solve.  His powers of observation, deductive reasoning, advanced forensic knowledge, and overall intellectual prowess far surpasses anything Scotland Yard has to offer.

He remembers every intricate detail about things that are seemingly insignificant, and is great at putting the puzzle together, so to speak. 

The storyline in the movie is somewhat bland, but not boring.  Guy Ritchie did a good job at making this movie for people that had no idea about Holmes’ background, or the goings ons of London during the late 1800s.  If another actor had been cast instead of Downey, this movie would have been very run-of-the-mill, save for the fantastic editing, transitioning, and overall camera work.  But the fact of the matter is that Downey is in this movie, and he completely carries it.

The slow-motion fight scenes are amazing, and the way they have him describe what is going to happen first — and then actually do it — was awesome.  Probably my favorite part of the movie, actually.

Although, during the previews, it showed Rachel McAdams — who plays Holmes’ love interest, Irene Adler — walking away in a corset, fish net stockings, and high heels, and it never shows that in the movie.  Sigh.  Oh well.

Overall I really enjoyed the movie, but could find flaws if I decided to be more critical.  But for the love of Robert Downey, I chose to overlook any shortcomings the movie may or may not have.

8.5 out of 10.

Filed under Talking Pictures.

Quote of the Week.

February 24, 2010 by Leave a Comment

I feel like I’m agile enough to jump on top of a car’s hood if it came close to running me over.  I mean, I haven’t died yet.  Think about it.  Proof.

Mikey, on why he believes he is invincible.  Yes, I said invincible.  His argument for being invincible is that he is currently not dead.  You can’t make this stuff up, people.

In Mikey We Trust.

[Side note: that jug in his hand? Coffee flavored beer. It was his birthday present to me.
"But Mikey, I don't like beer."
But it tastes like coffee, not beer.
"But Mikey, I don't like coffee."
But its beer.
"But Mikey, I don't like coffee or beer."
Oh...
Can I have it then?]

Filed under Random.

Niente non è Vero. Tutto è Permesso.

February 23, 2010 by 6 Comments

I just finished Assassin’s Creed 2 and it was awesome.  Just awesome.  It accomplished everything a sequel needs to accomplish, and did a good job, at that.

A good sequel should do the following:

  • be an improvement over the first (or at least as good)
  • help further the story in a meaningful way
  • correct the mistakes of the original
  • add some new, awesome twist to give the sequel its own flair
  • stay true to the general outline of the original

Now, in no way is that list perfect, but I think you understand what I’m getting at.  Where AC1 fails (and fails pretty miserably) is its repetition and lack of depth.  AC2 takes all the good from the first and mixes it with an open-world-map in the mold of Grand Theft Auto.  It allows you the freedom to roam throughout not just different boroughs in a large city, but several different cities throughout a large country.

AC2 takes place immediately after the first, but this time, our protagonist (Desmond Miles) finds himself syncing up with an ancestor’s memory who lived in Italy during the 15th century.  Ezio Auditore (Et-zee-oh Audi-toray) is our new hero (or anti-hero, as it were), and we follow him from the murder of his father and two brothers until he learns to become an assassin.

Instead of simply returning to an Assassin’s Bureau and receiving instructions on who to kill, this plays out more like a movie or a book, with one event ultimately leading to another.  The first game clearly lacked any direction in that sense, but was still mind-numbingly entertaining for the most part.  This game allows you to do so much more that it makes my head spin.

There are a million side missions that you can do, and each will allow you to earn more money in order to upgrade armor, weapons, and your countryside villa.  You can also enlist the services of mercenaries (to fight the guards with you), thieves (to lure guards away from a certain area), and courtesans (to distract the guards).  If you’re wondering, a “courtesan” is a 15th century prostitute.  And there are tons of brothels and bordellos during the Renaissance, so you’ll have a plentiful amount of whores to enjoy, as well.

This game is so sick it has swine flu.  Yes, I just said that.  But seriously, instead of one hidden blade on your left arm, now you have one on each.  You often use them simultaneously to carry-out double assassinations (or double air assassinations, which might be the coolest thing I’ve ever seen), and a third, smaller blade is hollowed out and filled with poison, giving you an even stealthier way to kill bad guys.

Oh, and who is the inventor helping you with all of these new gadgets?  Oh, no one important.  Just a family friend.  Leonardo something.  DaVinci?  Yeah, I think that’s his last name.  Seriously, Leonardo DaVinci is your BFF?  This game is so money.

Basically, this game takes all the good things from the first one, amplifies them, and adds in more awesomeness and sex, and bam, finished product.  The Renaissance was one of the coolest times in history, and 15th century Italy was beautiful.  You explore Florence, Venice, and even Rome.  It makes me want to go to Italy and kill someone Templars with a blade hidden in my armband.

They completely mind fuck you with the ending, and its pretty obvious that Assassin’s Creed III is going to be the greatest thing since they began slicing bread.  And since Kelly won’t allow me to name our kids Altaïr or Ezio, I’ll have to compromise and name the cats (that I eventually allow her to have) that instead.

I hope she doesn’t get pissed when I’m attempting to fixate a metal blade to the inside of a wristband and attach that to Ezio-kitty’s arm.

9.5 out of 10.

Filed under Random.

Countdown to Jamaica:

February 19, 2010 by Leave a Comment

71 days…

Filed under Random.

Nothing is True. Everything is Permitted.

February 19, 2010 by Leave a Comment

The Assassin’s Creed:

  1. Stay your blade from the flesh of an innocent.
  2. Hide in plain sight.
  3. Do not compromise The Brotherhood.

 

So I finally beat Assassin’s Creed.  I loved parts of this game, hated others, and can say with 100% confidence that it was the most frustrating game I have ever played.  By far.

You are two characters in two different time periods.  The first, Desmond Miles, lives in 2012.  The second, Altaïr (all-tie-ear) lives in 1191 in the Holy Lands during the Cruisades.  Desmond is the supposed descendant of Altaïr, who is an assassin and a member of The Brotherhood (also known as the Assassin Order or Order of Assassins).

Some company, basically Massive Dynamic in video game form (geez, what’s with all the Fringe references lately?) has kidnapped Desmond and is trying to access memories that he doesn’t realize are his.  They develop a machine called the Animus.  What it does, basically, is allow one person to view — and even participate in – an ancestor’s memories.  So, since Desmond is the descendant of Altaïr, he then can become Altaïr and gain knowledge from memories that weren’t his to begin with.

A really cool-but-confusing story line, nothing gets clarified during gameplay.  You wind up with more questions than answers, and I’m sure Assassin’s Creed 2 will help answer some of them.  But man, there is a lot of confusion.  I don’t know if the guys you are assassinating are telling the truth or their version of the truth.  Nevertheless, people still need to die.  And this game is awesome in the way it allows you to go about doing just that.

While, yes, going back to the same three cities (Damascus, Jerusalem, and Acre) three different times gets a little old and repetitive, the fighting and way you kill people is so awesome that it actually cancels out.  Also, this game is really hard.  You wind up killing like 500 guards, so that gets a little old, but when you’re surrounded by literally 20+ guards and you have to fight and kill all of them, it gets hard as shit.

I got this game for Christmas and just started playing it earlier this week.  I became pretty obsessed with it, as Kelly and people on my Xbox Live friends list can attest, that’s all I’ve been playing for the past week (and playing it a lot, at that).

I really want to play AC2, and I hear it’s amazing, but I’m glad I went through and got all the back story, however confusing and complicated, so I wasn’t even more confused and complicated while playing the 2nd game in this apparent trilogy.

Play this game, and you’ll enjoy it.  You’ll also break at least one controller out of frustration.

8 out of 10.

Filed under Random.

I give up.

February 18, 2010 by Leave a Comment

I was going to write this nice little satire about how great 24 is this year and how the writers are geniuses, etc etc.  But I lost interest about 2 paragraphs in and deleted it all.

I’ve been attempting to figure out why 24 is so bad this season.  Is it the writing?  Is it the acting?  Is it the mediocre-at-best storyline?  Is it the fact that they’re in CTU New York instead of LA?  Is it the fact that apparently CTU NY is 100 times more technologically advanced than the cement walls of CTU Los Angeles?  Perhaps it’s all of these, perhaps it’s none.

First, let me address the latest episode of 24.  It was the best of the season, but it still wasn’t very entertaining.  What does that say about the show’s writers?  The best episode still isn’t very good.  That’s like being the smartest Palin child.

Sure, Jack did what Jack does.  He didn’t talk during torture and found a way to kill his captor whilst his hand and feet were still bound.  Yay.  Because we’ve never seen that before.  Sigh.  And apparently Tony Almeida’s younger, dumber cousin, Cole Ortiz, if finally figuring out that Dana Walsh is up to something.  I hope she dies already.  And apparently the middle eastern President of some made up country is a stereotypical hot head that acts out of irrationality and paranoia.  Then you have Cherry Jones playing President Allison Taylor, who won a freaking Emmy last year.  But apparently after being only the 4th awesome female in the history of 24, they put her on the back burner, and she’s been reduced to a role usually reserved for Mike Novak.

You see, I realized that in now the 8th season of 24, there have only been 4 female characters who weren’t complete fucktards and emotionally unstable.  Well, better make that 3 now that they’ve turned Renee into a television version of all of my ex girlfriends whose names were some variation of Katie.

Do they just not know how to develop a strong female character?  Do they simply choose not to?  Do they think that all women really are this emotionally inferior?  I’m no feminist (far from it, actually), but when you think about it, having 4 female characters in 8 years that the audience didn’t want to shoot in the face isn’t right.

Michelle Dessler is obviously the gold standard for females on 24.  And she was linked to Tony, who has at times been more awesome than Jack, so that definitely helped her.  Then there was Karen Hayes, who started out as a fucking bitch, but then coincidentally turned awesome when she started listening to Jack and got married to Bill, who was also fucking awesome.  Last season featured 2 females who were awesome, and they were the aforementioned President Allison Taylor and FBI Agent Renee Walker.

Michelle is dead, Karen has been written out of the series, President Taylor can’t get anything done, and Renee has now gone all Walter Bishop on everyone and even attempted suicide.  But, um, Renee, remember…down the river, not across.

Anyways.  I just feel like this needed to be said.  24 will not survive without a strong female character.  Think about it.  The best seasons?  3 & 4.  Michelle was kicking ass in those seasons.  Then season 5 she died, Karen picked up the slack.  Season 6 started out awesome, then Karen became less important and the season started sliding like Disney’s stock.  Season 7 came back with a vengeance because two women characters made it sweet.  Hell, even if you look at Seasons 1, Nina is awesome and then turns into an awesome villain.  Season 2 is the exception, I guess, because Kate Warner wasn’t able to do anything on her own.

Oh, and if you think Chloe counts as a strong female character, then I guess we’ve been watching two different series.  She’s always subservient and follows Jack (sometimes blindly) in whatever he says.  While I realize that Jack is right 99% of the time, that doesn’t make her a strong female character, and they’ve even given her a personality disorder (kind of) so we don’t have to take her seriously.

I’m not saying females who watch 24 should be pissed off, because they aren’t the target audience and it’s just a television show for fuck’s sake, but if 24 wants to have any shot at not sucking anymore, then they must develop a strong female for the remainder of this season.  Clearly, Renee is about 2 minutes away from being sent to St. Claire’s, Dana Walsh is really ugly, and Chloe is, well, Chloe (but apparently a less smart, effective Chloe).

24 is coming extremely close to reaching the same fate as Heroes did:  being removed from our DVR completely.

UPDATED LIST OF TOP 10 SHOWS:

  1. Dexter
  2. Californication
  3. How I Met Your Mother
  4. Fringe
  5. Diners, Drive-Ins, and Dives
  6. Family Guy
  7. Castle
  8. Bones
  9. United States of Tara
  10.  24

Filed under Random.

← Older posts

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 417 other followers