Wednesday, January 28, 2015

Not Brady's Fault; Why You Should Root for Him

First thing first, I think Tom Brady had something to do with the deflated footballs, and that he instructed someone in the organization to deflate them to the lowest legal pressure possible. Because for him to say anything other than that would be stupid. He's not stupid.

Now lets say you're the person responsible for handling Brady's footballs, and Brady consistently likes the work you're doing. As that person, you've been deflating them below the legal requirement every time, towing the line, and your relationship with Brady is good. You do good work. The only guy on the Patriots who needs to like you is Tom Brady, and he does.

Then out of the blue an opponent intercepts a Brady pass, and decides to make a stink about the whole thing. It finally catches up with the person responsible for handling the balls, and now it's a big thing.

Now don't get me wrong, I think Brady was well aware that the balls were slightly under-inflated, or at the very least towing the line. He handles footballs constantly, so he knows the difference. I play soccer a decent amount, and I know immediately if a ball is not inflated to the proper pressure.

He knew.

That doesn't mean he ever instructed anyone to cheat. Doesn't mean he thought the balls he was handling were below the legal limit. Not his job.

After the balls are deflated it ends up in the hands of an official, correct? Just like in a soccer match, I hand 3 balls to the officials after I've dealt with them. The officials then decide whether or not the ball is suitable. After the game begins the officials do not touch the ball(s) again until halftime, at which time they can reassess the air pressure, if they so choose. On many occasions balls have been swapped out at the officials request, and this is recreational soccer.

In the NFL, the officials touch a football after EVERY SINGLE PLAY. So after the balls leave the possession of the Patriots (or any other team), the officials in charge of instituting the rules are then in charge. And yet not one of these officials noticed the balls were slightly deflated. Not just that day, but EVER. Add to that fact, throughout the game they have the other team's balls to compare/contrast, so they certainly are aware there's a difference. Still, none of the officials did anything about it. Why is that? Does it not fall on their shoulders, before the game and before EVERY GAME, to make sure the balls are fit for play? Does not a NBA referee handle about 5-10 balls before a game to decide which one is best?

Again, don't get me wrong, Brady likes the ball less inflated than say Aaron Rodgers, but it's not his job to decide whether the ball is suitable for the field of play. Even if he did tell someone to deflate them, at what point would an official step in and say, "No, that's clearly too soft."? When it's completely deflated?

So again, I think he instructed someone to make it softer, which is within his right, but I'm not sure he would ever instruct someone to cheat. I also believe the ball he played with against the Colts is the same as the ball he plays with EVERY SINGLE GAME. Except no one ever decided to challenge the Patriots on it. When someone finally did, they recognized it was soft (why they did is a whole other issue we'll never know about). I'm willing to bet there are MANY teams doing the same thing, and that if someone grabbed a ball coming off Drew Brees's hand (small hands, not accusing) you might find it a bit soft. Just so happens no one decided to do that.

If this was the regular season this would be a non-story.

Yes, it's "cheating", and it may even make Brady a better thrower. I'm just not so sure it's his fault. That's why they pay officials - like 10 of them per game.


Normally I would never root for the Patriots. Primarily because I think Bill Belichick is a huge douchebag. I've heard stories; there's a reason he never has a lot to say. Someone with a lot to hide probably doesn't want to say very much. Lets just leave it at that.

Yet this time I am rooting for them to win.

Why? Because even though I once yelled "Fuck Michigan!" to Brady's face on the corner of Bleecker and 7th (when he was on crutches, no less), I think he truly is a legendary Quarterback and that the Patriots franchise has been nothing short of remarkable.

I cannot imagine listening to people for the next 20 years saying things like, "Yeah, but they cheated!...BRADY WASN'T THAT GOOD!"

He is that good. They are that good. They've been that good. We've all witnessed it. Everyone cheats. I don't condone it. But that doesn't take much away from what this franchise has done, and I can't imagine a world where we have to hear idiots doubting their entire existence until the end of time.

The Black Sox they are not.

In order to end any debate about Brady's greatness I want to see him win this Superbowl.

Then maybe get hit by a bus...


The Seahawks have this "Us against the world!" thing going on.

Hate to break it to you, but you're the reigning Superbowl champs. That's no longer a thing.

I appreciate the stance a number of their players have taken toward the NFL. Someone has to do it. Doesn't mean these guys are not super annoying.

Add to it, they shouldn't even be in this game, as far as I'm concerned. In fact, both teams shouldn't be. We should be watching Rodgers vs Flacco. But alas, we're not.

This is the first time I can ever recall neither team in a final of any major sport being what I consider 'championship caliber', and yet they both made it. Feels like we're watching the consolation game, but for all the marbles.


Oh, and lastly, I'm not so concerned with Brady throwing a deflated ball. But if I'm the Ravens I'm definitely concerned with Julian Edelman throwing a deflated ball!

His touchdown pass basically won the game for the Patriots, and I'm figuring his hands aren't very large. Maybe a ball fully deflated makes that pass tougher to throw? We'll never know.


Final score:

Patriots 27 Seattle 20

On the back of Legarrette Blount.

Soft interior Seattle defense, injured Earl Thomas, 250 pound tailback? Patriots for the win.

Tuesday, January 27, 2015

Comcast Blows

UPDATED: 1/29/15

Not even sure where to begin.

In late December we cancelled/transferred service from one location to another.

My old account # is this: 8155XXXXXXXXXXXX

My new account # is this: 8155XXXXXXXXXXXX

We cancelled the old account when we moved from 5XX XXXXXXXXX Ave, 2101 - 94610 to our new location 3XX XXXXXXX Ave -94610

I called Comcast today because my service at the new location, 3 XXXXXXX has been terrible since arriving. Our internet connection has died on us every single day, and I work from home. I finally had to call.

When I called, the Technician, "Mark", told me it was because I was using an old modem. I told him I bought a new docsis 3.0 modem, and in fact installed it, as Comcast asked me to do OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER... Sending me letters, calling me every single day, until I did it. So I did it. Team player.

Mark tells me they're not aware that I did this, and that I'm still using the older modem. But then he informs me that my account is at the old address, which was currently still operating. It was never cancelled.

I told him that's problematic, but that does not explain why my current service disconnects every single day...that I'll get to that problem, but want to focus on the service while I have him. He told me it was because I had two accounts. Really?

How in the world does this make any sense? What does one thing have to do with the other?

Also, when I moved the old modem to the new location, the problem still happened every day. This is a problem that did not happen at the old address, regardless of the modem I was using.

Sooo...Mark registered my new modem, but he did so to the OLD ACCOUNT.

Then when he told me I had to cancel the old account, he transferred me to a different department. After talking to a new woman, she told me I'm "past due" on my account. Of course, I did not know this because when I signed into, it showed my Bill was due on Feb. 2, 2015, which is in a few days. She tells me "that's your other account. Your current account was due on Jan 25th..."

This is an account I have not been able to access online, even though it's the only account I should have access to. She also tells me that I have late fees now because of it.


Then she transfers me back to a new technician, who knows NOTHING of what I went through with Mark because he intelligently registered all of the previous information I had given him (about the new modem, codes, etc) to the OLD account, and the previous woman just CANCELLED that account.

Which means I have to start the entire process over again. We're almost an hour in.

This new technician makes me go over all that I discussed with Mark, like she was reading it from a sheet. "I see here you have two accounts...oh, wait...hold on please..."

Upon returning she says she's going to send a signal to my new modem at my new account.

I said, "You mean, my account, period."

"Uhhmm, okay, uhhh, yes, your account."

She then sends a signal to my modem, and tells me it should all be working fine now.

Maybe it is? Maybe it isn't? We'll soon find out. But it does not explain why for the past month since getting Comcast at my new address that my service has been so absolutely terrible.

And of course, Comcast not only wants me to pay my bill in full, they also want me to pay for the late fee on my current account. They kindly waives the bill from my old account, as if to suggest they just did me a favor.

I've heard Comcast stories, but now I can say I have my own.

UPDATED: 1/29/15

My service is still not working. I called Comcast yesterday, and after another 30+ minutes, I was told "we will send someone out to you...I will call you back within an hour and a half...but sir, it will cost you $70..."

I went through the roof after hearing this.

No one ever called.

Service still doesn't work.

Friday, January 9, 2015

Chris Christie's Bullshit Stance on Everything

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is a huge douche. And this whole "I've always been a Cowboys fan...I'm not going to be a fake" doesn't make him more real. It makes him more of a douche, and less real. Here's why:

When you're the governor of a state, any state, you shelve certain things you believe in, or might love. The types of things that are solely about morale. For example, you wouldn't say, "I know he's from Jersey, but I don't like Frank Sinatra." Why? Because you are supposed to represent your state; your people. That's the job. Raising peoples hopes, morale, faith, and feelings about their own state.

When the NY Giants won the Superbowl Governor Christie had no problem pretending to be a fan of the team. If he had wanted to be 'real' THEN was the time he should have said, "Well, I'm happy for the people of New Jersey, but the truth is...I'm a Cowboys fan." THAT WAS THE TIME TO DO IT. He would have been booed, but it would have been real. THEN. Not now.

Fast forward, when the Giants and Jets aren't great, and you are using this moment to promote yourself on a national stage, it's completely disingenuous. In no way does it say "I'm real." No. What it says is "I'm an opportunist who is pretending to be real."

And quite honestly, that's who he has always been. He has played the tough guy who insults female teachers, he has played the Springsteen fan, he has played the Obama fan, the Bush fan, he has played it all. None of it because he's in any way "real." All of it because he's in every way a phony.

Yes, we get you're a Cowboys fan. Good for you. It's just sports. But there's no reason in the world you should try to bother the people living in your own home state because it's all too obvious you've ceased caring about their opinion.

The truth of truths? Most people became Cowboys fans when they were younger because they were winning. No other reason. And right now Chris Christie has a better chance of winning a political race in Texas than he does in New Jersey. So once again, he's publicly choosing what he perceives as the winning horse today. Not when the Cowboys were losing, and the Giants were winning.

It's not honesty. It's the opposite. It's self preservation, expediency, obvious, and quite frankly, expected.

Friday, January 2, 2015

State of College Football

Look, I'm a huge Ohio State fan as well as a fan of the B1G (Big Ten). Last night's game was great, and before it happened I knew we were going to win. I told my boy T-Rhein to bet it, and he did. Congrats.

That said, the SEC and the south in general, is still the home of college football. It just so happens they're having a down year, and may have had a down two years. Now is the SEC, and in particular, the SEC West so much more dominant than everyone else as has been shouted for years? Not at all.

One of the issues ignored by all the "geniuses in the media", is how many times these bowl games are actually home games for the SEC and ACC. Their game is speed, and after a month's rest and on a fast track close to their campuses, they have a major advantage. It's why Bowl games are so often not an indication of things, especially when teams lose by a point, but it is referred to as "another loss."

It's why I advocate for a 8 team playoff, first game at home. Is it noticed that Michigan St beat Baylor in DALLAS? That Wisconsin was in Florida versus Auburn? That Ohio State played 'Bama in the Sugar Bowl, about 90 miles from the 'Bama border, or that they lost to LSU a few years ago in New Orleans?

This doesn't get mentioned. Only that the B1G Ten teams lost, when they do.

For the most part, the SEC will dominate they NFL Draft. They will continue to do so because the talent lives in the south. Ohio State has stars from Ohio, but they have some superstars from the South. There are some Ohio players elsewhere ('Bama and Oregon), but truth is, it's really JUST Ohio. The B!G Ten region is losing population and players. The bulk of stars will continue to come from the South, and southern football will continue to be a bit better than the rest. PAC-12 is closing the gap, without question, but the blind dedication to football in the South trumps that of the West Coast mentality.

I'm a realist about all of this. I expect Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State and a couple others to be major players in the future of college football, but the SEC is going nowhere.

It would just be nice if a lot of those moronic fans could recognize the reality of the situation. Winning football games does not change the result of the Civil War.

* * *

The Ducks have 21 players from Oregon and 49 from California.

In other words, Nike owns a college team...and it's weird.

No college team has out-of-state numbers anywhere close to that. In fact, I'd bet no team in the Top 25 other than Oregon (and Notre Dame - less than 10) doesn't have at least half their players from their home state.

Wisconsin has about 5 Million people in their state, and Oregon 4 Million. Yet Wisconsin probably has 50 kids from in-state. Yet they aren't owned by a corporation. In essence, Oregon is basically a private school from an athletics standpoint.

* * *

The California dominance of the Oregon roster is what gives their fanbase a special douchey quality. The fans FROM Oregon, who live in OREGON, are generally very nice, humble, welcoming folks. The fans from Southern California, as admitted by many Oregon fans, are tremendously douchey.

Never have a I experienced bigger dicks than at the Rose Bowl in 2009.

There are dicks across very fanbase, especially online. But when you attend a game with Buckeyes fans they are generally nice. Maybe that's the case at Oregon, but again, never in my life have I experienced bigger dicks than attending a game versus Oregon.

Miami was close. But that's expected. It's their identity. Now it's Oregon's.

* * *

The media got one thing right: Florida State wasn't a Top 4 team, BUT...they couldn't keep them out. They wanted to, but they couldn't.

I thought the rankings should have been 1) Oregon 2) Alabama 3) Florida State 4) Ohio State, and OSU should have met Oregon in the Rose Bowl. Woulda been nice. And as bad as FSU played I think they could have beaten Alabama.

The two best teams remain.

* * *

Early prediction? Ohio State wins. Yeah, I'm a homer, but as I see it I think Ohio State is better at nearly every position (as the draft will prove) except Quarterback. And Marcus Mariota could be the reason Oregon wins this game. I just don't think his ability to affect the game is that much greater than Cardale Jones's. Factor in the other parts, I think Ohio State wins the game.

If Oregon thinks beating Florida State badly is the reason they'll beat Ohio State, they are mistaken. Ohio State was a few plays away from doing the same thing to Alabama, and the Buckeyes were on the road. Essentially, Oregon was playing a home game.

The game comes down to the Ohio State defensive line vs the Oregon offensive line. Ohio State has 4-5 NFL players on that line, and 2 first rounders. The winner of the trench will decide the game...or if Mariota plays out of his head, which is possible. He is college.

* * *

Oregon vs Florida St was just weird. FSU quit. Jameis Winston quit. They aren't used to losing, and didn't handle it well. Plus, they really are a shell of what they were last year. They lost leadership, Devonta Freeman, Kelvin Benjamin, and had a lot of average-playing players in their place.

Don't let that game give you a false sense of reality. Michigan St was outplaying them in Eugene for a LONG time.

* * *

Coach Meyer for the win.

* * *

Alabama DC Kirby Smart is not as impressive as people suggest. Check the NFL rosters to understand his success.

* * *

Was told last night Alabama OC Lane Kiffin being groomed to take over for Nick Saban. That will be such a great day.

* * *

Jim Harbaugh is starting to recognize what he's dealing with...