Hear the Hurd

God Only Knows

Gosh, this is hard. To feel so strongly about a man that I never met. Brian Wilson of the Beach Boys died yesterday at the age of 82. A funny struggle in my life - funny haha, I suppose, rather than ironic. It's just that it took me more than a second to truly appreciate his artistry and craft and then once I did, I never changed my thought on his efforts. I'm pretty sure I don't have to tell you (those of you old enough to know) that he and The Beatles had a bit of a rivalry. That I was a Beatle man, I took their side as one does when young and dumb. But it wasn't a harsh rivalry. Paul McCartney himself has said that they pushed each other along during that time. Revolver to Pet Sounds to Sgt Peppers. It kept going. And thank God that it did. It wasn't a rivalry (anymore than The Beatles had with The Rolling Stones.) It was - what are we going to do with this new thing? Not so much, "How can we top it?" but rather, "What can we do with this new idea?"

That is artistry and that is what Brian Wilson accomplished in his life. His very difficult life. Some of it foisted upon him by his father (and I might add cousin Mike Love...not my favorite character) but so too by himself. You may go through the reams of research on him as there is much of it, but he did himself few favors by his life choices. So too could you say the same about many of rock icons (music icons, truly - look at Mozart) but his was a life that was created and lived through his prism. Much of it complicated. As was his music.

So some backstory. Me and my friend Keith, way back in the day when we were not but 13 or 14, starting really listening to the old stuff. For us, at least. Both born in 1973, there was a lot of old stuff! Buddy Holly was a favorite. So too quickly became The Beatles. We scoured the bins at Turtles looking for the vinyl records, especially the 45s. They were, to us at the time, the end all be all of music. I dare say that they still are to me. Yet we soon found other material, but the Beach Boys were "off limits" because they just weren't "cool." Oldies music. Surf music that didn't mean much to us in Georgia. And Mike Love was such a prick (by that point, we did know the members.) Well, Mike Love remains a prick. But I did eventually wish to branch out and one day, after hearing too many recounts in Rolling Stone magazine (when it was still relevant) about the album Pet Sounds after another of their so many Greatest Albums of all Time lists, I had to check it out.

Younger writers...beware this trope. It is lazy. There is too much in this day readily available to your fingertips to NOT know what went before. However...

I remember driving up Roswell Road with Keith. There was a record shop on the right and we wanted to find something to do anyway. Likely 1989 or 1990. We went in and I was determined once we found it, "I want this album. I want to listen to it!"

Keith was almost as adamant, "No! The Beach Boys suck!"

Fair enough, I thought. It was my money and I bought it and we went back to his place and listened to it. Though Keith never liked the Beach Boys any more than before that day, he could not deny - THIS was a great album! He could be a foolish man, and so can I. It was so good that now, these days, it is my second favorite album of all time (only bested by Joni Mitchell's Blue album.) Not The Beatles. Not the Stones. Not anything by The Who (whom I love) or any other artist. No, sir! This album was beautiful. And remains as such to this day.

It was Brian Wilson's fevered dream, I suppose. Perhaps a voice in his head (as he often referred to it.) It really doesn't matter how it came about, but the writing between himself and Van Dyke Parks, the music by The Wrecking Crew and the beautiful harmonies by those same Beach Boys...I was hooked. Of all of the albums (and I am an album man) that I have listened to the most over these last many years since that time, Pet Sounds remains in heavy rotation. "Caroline No" is exquisite. "Wouldn't It Be Nice" sublime. "Don't Talk" and especially "I Know There's An Answer" which began life as another name "Hang On To Your Ego" - "You Still Believe In Me" - I could list every track on the album. It is prime music. 

And that is sort of the thing. When I listen to The Beatles, I get a feeling. My feet can't stop bouncing. Early work, at least. And their later music still brings me joy. But outside of some few songs (and great ones), none of them pull me to a place like this work. I did not grow up in California, nor did I even have a teenage year like the Beach Boys sang about. I was a teenager that heard his words and sounds and was forever transformed. I suppose I can assume others were as well. "In My Room" was a big one for me as well and perhaps others. "Heroes and Villains" later in life. "Surf's Up" which really pulled it away from their early days. Just everything...I loved it!

It changed my life when I was a senior in High School and though not terribly different than The Beatles...it WAS different. It was a different feeling without ever having stepped foot into the surf. It was musical mana. That is when I learned that they were not a beach band despite their name. That is when I learned that Brian Wilson was not a beach musician. He was...a genius. Despite his years hanging out in sand within his own house, all the bullshit with his psychiatrist (be careful) and all that he already had to deal with from his family (his father, as I read it), Wilson was a master. And despite all of THAT, he finally got his Smile album out. Not as great as he might have wanted in the 70s, but damn good anyway!

I do not think that I am the only person that might say that "God Only Knows" is a perfect song (I might not either since Mike Love tries to ruin it midsong) and it is that song that I will always remember even with all of the rest. Brian Wilson was a genius. It is too poor that he had so many things trying to tug at him all of his life (again, many caused by himself) but with all of that, he gave us all brilliance. It took me time to figure that out. I guess he did too. I imagine it does to all of us. Rest in Peace, Brian. And thank you for hours and hours that you have given to me and so many others. My ears and mind are better for it. That is all.

Max

One month ago today, I lost my most cherished possession if one can call another mammal such a thing. To possess suggests ownership, and while yes...I owned a dog...Max in so very many ways owned me. He owned my time. He owned my wallet. He certainly owned by bed and this house (I just pay for it.) And he most definitely owned my heart.

It seems like for ten plus years running, Max is the most popular boy name for a dog. It is a good one. It allowed me myriad fantasies of all the adventures he might have gone on prior to his arrival in this abode. Much like Charlie Brown's Snoopy, he very well could have been involved in WWI flying or perhaps (and to his deepest regrets, surely) could have been an antisemitic canine. His paw would flash a Nazi salute when I extended his arm while he slept. And yet...he was kind to all of the bunnies and squirrels and birds in the yard. Is there such a thing as a kind Nazi? The only thing he hated was a house fly. Yet I digress.

Baron Maximilian von Wrigglebottom of Bavaria was in every way unique. His coloring alone was fantastic. The white markings all over from his paws (his socks that he helped me put on every day because he wore them all the time) to his belly. The white streak that topped his head (and was fun to play with) all the way to the tip of his tail. He was gorgeous. And cute. And my God...he was so very loving! I've met some kissy dogs before, but Max was the champion! Apologies to Angel the Bulldog (who is a master at it), but Max loved to give kisses! He loved to cuddle and he was a leaner when he was a younger pup. He wanted to be right next to you and in bed, the back to backs were wonderful. He liked them and so did I.

I suppose I should back up and tell you what I know of his history prior to his arrival in my world. If the shelter records are correct, he was born on September 6th of 2008. I do not know if he was born into the shelter or if they merely backdated when they got him (supposedly they can tell from the body frame, teeth, etc.) No matter, he was adopted as a puppy and then...somehow...was returned because someone could not take care of him. I do not know the particulars other than that, but I would like to slap that person across the face for giving up on the sweetest little boy that may well have ever existed. And I never got to see him as a puppy!

Cut to March of 2010. A very good friend of mine adopted him and he found a wonderful home. As I have said to you privately, Sherry...you gave me the greatest gift anyone has ever shared. She had two other adopted dogs that were Katrina victims. Bonnie and Clyde. Great names! Yet for all of his wonderfulness, Max was never one for the fellas. Or maybe it was Clyde. I do not know, but I can imagine. Max was scared of thunder and lightening and when such occurred, all he wanted was to shelter behind you. He would shake and shiver and I can only believe that when a harsh clap came from outside, he jumped up and disturbed the other male dog. It was such that Sherry knew she could not have these two together. Yet she could not separate the siblings.

I had just purchased this house in December of 2010. A mutual friend suggested that maybe Max might find a place here as she knew I wanted a dog. Enter the dog here. Max found his forever home. He was roughly two and a half and though no puppy anymore, he had so much energy and excitement. Playful and after some time, indeed affectionate. In April of 2011, he bought this house with his love. And we slept that night, and every night save for one after, together. My yard, my bed, my office, my couch, my chair...my everything...in an instant, it all became his. It became ours.

Now Max was not perfect. Who among us is? He was a nervous nelly. A hater of loud noises and storms. Was not a great fan of the veterinarian (the concept, not his first doc Joanne Belian Shaw who was wonderful!) Not a great eater because he was picky (though he would steal a ham sandwich in a heartbeat) and it took me years to find his preferred food (raw...always raw...or what Daddy was eating.) And he hated to be man-handled. DO NOT pick him up! He would do it himself. Until he could not. And even then, I believe he did not like it but allowed it. And boy, was he a whiner!! People always thought he was upset, but he wasn't. That's just how he responded when he was excited. Car drives were a favorite almost until the end, but he made his noises.

What he did not like was being away from this house and me. On the few occasions that I left him with someone else, he would not eat. Would even get sick to his stomach. His anxiety was severe. And the older he got, the worse that became. He grew steady in his habits and did not like it when things changed. Oddly (or perhaps perfectly) he became much like me. They say sometimes that pets are like their owners. Well...we two suited each other. In almost every way.

And he was there in every thing that occurred in my life from that time he got here in 2011 to now. He was there to witness my grief when awful things happened and at every step, did what he knew from his doggy brain to help me. The deaths of some of my closest friends (too many!) and he could feel my sadness. Especially when it was someone he knew. He did not understand that particular separation, but he knew how much it disturbed me. Keith loved him! Andy too. Rebekah only saw him the one time, but she was a big one and he could feel it. John and Laura...the list is too damn long. And at every step, there he was to comfort. To hug and hold tightly. Even when I had Covid the first time, he found every toy in the house and brought it to me to try and make me feel better. Maybe. You can find the picture somewhere on Facebook.

With the big excitements, he was there too. A World Series win and not one but two National Championships for the Dawgs! He was not the greatest fan of all of my loud noises, but he could tell that Daddy was happy and allowed me to fit him out in gear and got with me on the couch to watch and then celebrate. He even danced with me when I got excited about music. Not necessarily happy about it, but if that was what Daddy was doing...he would allow. He really wasn't sure what I was doing when I sang loudly around the house (and I do) but he listened. He accepted. And he never judged (well maybe, but I think it sounded good.)

He would watch me in the shower sometimes and always wanted to be on the couch next to me. He would warm up the bed every night and even knew the word "bed." That's all I ever needed to say and he was off and jumped up there in great expectation and excitement. Even my back yard, as over grown as it gets, offered him adventure. His greatest happiness possibly was patrolling the fence perimeter. He held no ill will towards the creatures out there. He just wanted to know that everything was where he left it. It was HIS yard after all.

It was HIS life and for nearly fourteen years, it was the greatest that he had ever known. Perhaps that is why he never really wanted to leave this house. It was comfort that he had not known prior. Which is not to say he did not have adventure. He wasn't much of a swimmer (not at all) but he did finally and voluntarily get into the ocean when we went to the beach. He wanted to play with Buffy. He loved the ladies. He loved Sadie when she came to stay and he loved Maggie (and even tried to hump her until she said "No More!") He loved when Angel came over in his later years and even though his flesh was weak, his desire kept him trying. She intrigued him and he would so cutely kiss on her ears. I think she liked it. Pretty sure she did.

In short, he was perfect to me. Not in spite of his flaws, but because of them. Would that we humans could show the same understanding and consideration. He was precious and cute and sweet and kissy and loving and...my everything. Frankly, better than any relationship I have ever had with another human being. Maybe that says more about me than other people, but...Max was my Prince.

He's been gone now for a month. It has been difficult to see and feel his absence. The little white tufts of his hair that fell out from time to time. A nail I found in his closet (he was never crate trained, so he chose my closet as his crate as he slept under my pants.) The backyard so overgrown that is going unsupervised by the foreman. The trash, when I take it out, also not supervised (I don't know why, but he was always very interested when that occurred. The smell, I suppose.) His knowledge of time knowing exactly when he was ready for dinner at the same point every day (he did not like it when I extended it.) His butt pillow as we slept together. Always on the right (and I now have an actual pillow that I pretend is Max...I'm not crazy!) And most of all, his sweet and trusting eyes. His thankful eyes. His happy eyes.

Max's last years were not kind to him as it is for older dogs. He started losing his eyesight and hearing. His back end got worse and worse, even with the supplements I was giving him. He could not jump on the bed anymore and had to deal with the indignity (to him) of having me lift him and let him down. But he allowed it. It extended our time together. It extended our life together. I am almost certain that he might have given up (if one can choose that) had it not been for me. He just did not want to leave me. And I never wanted to leave him. He was my guy. My only one.

Even in his final days, he was a trooper. He went on a last vacation and had a little doggy birthday party as he turned 16. All the pets and family were there. He sniffed strange new worlds and was happy to do so. He even decided that "hey...I think I can make that jump" even if he could not. He slept all the way home. One last adventure for the man that didn't really like adventure, but could make the most out of it. The beach, Texas, pushy bitches (his girlfriends, all of them) and/or a strange new world after trying to find a home again and again.

And then...the end. His last days were sad and pitiful and I had to do the one thing I did not want to do. I am a firm believer that it is God's choice to take us from this world as it is to place us within it. Yet we, as humans, must do for them what they cannot. Make a difficult choice on our own. It is to his betterment for he no longer suffers as I believe he did in those last days. But damn! Just damn!

It was a life full of adventure for him, and some of it maybe not so wonderful. But in his last days and as I held him in my arms as the dose was administered, I was comforted only slightly that I knew he would be away from pain and ready to run in full again. They say across the rainbow bridge, whatever that is, but he does not suffer now as he did. The last and final thing that I could do for him because I loved him so very much. Hurt or pain for me is not the right word. I might say relief, but that doesn't work either. It is simply a void...an absence of that thing that I cherished so much, and will never again know. That special bond that he and I both had with one another. It can never be replaced.

Which is not to say that I will not try as those that know me have seen. I have another beautiful little boy who is learning by the day. And day by day, we are learning each other. It is wholly different. Not better or worse. Just another adventure. And I'd like to think that somewhere out there, wherever he is, Max is looking at us and barking, "Go for it! He gives good treats!"

Ringo will find out in time, as will I. A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives. I believe that. I impacted Max's life and he sure as hell impacted mine. To the future we go. Rest in peace, sweet boy. My sweet, beautiful Prince. I hope all of your training of me helps in this new endeavor. Thank YOU for all of the lessons. I will never forget them or you.

That is all.

A Teachable Moment

The title of this post is a bit trite, as we often hear this when big things happen in life. However, it fits to my mind as it truly could be...should be...a moment in time that perhaps we step back from the brink and look to the forest instead of the trees (yes, another overused phrase.) I have not posted to this blog in quite some time because, I suppose, it is easier to leave pithy comments to other social platforms and frankly, I'm not all that interested in discussing politics on the internets as keyboard warriors are all too common and I have better things to do in life. Like work. Live. Find whatever joy in life can be found and not mire in the minutia of the day by day "worries" of the 24 hour news cycle.

With all of that said, the events of yesterday cause me to step forward and offer my own words to what I consider a toxic environment that led to such an event. Before I continue I should probably give you a timeline of my own political leanings (those of you who know me likely know this already.) I am what is known as a Conservative. Not necessarily a Republican, though I do tend to vote as such when I offer my political voice. I prefer to call myself a Classical Liberal in that I value the ideas and ideals of the founders of this great nation who reached back into time and tried to once more pull from the examples of ancient Greece and Rome (when it was a Republic.)

Our country is an experiment some 248 years in the making. Young, no doubt. Republics, historically, do not last. Often brought down by faction and yes indeed...attempted dictatorships by the wealthy and powerful. However, what we have attempted for these long years is detailed in both the United States Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

"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."

Note the words, "among these" in the prose carefully drafted by Thomas Jefferson. A chameleon in many ways such that most people can find something to like about him but always difficult to pin down. I believe he did that on purpose. Love him or leave him, but he was never more clear than the moment when he wrote those words. And our Bill of Rights ends with the Tenth Amendment...

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Or to the people!

That is you. That is me. That is all of us desiring a federal government that works. Not against us, but for us. Our experience and this experiment has ever to endeavor to uphold those ideals. And yet...here we are.

I am working through my thoughts so bear with me. Serious thoughts that are not Democrat or Republican, but American. Yesterday a person running for the President of the United States was a victim of an assassination attempt. A former President at that. Like him or hate him, no thing like that should occur in this country. It is not unprecedented which does not excuse it but proves that we have been there before. That does not make it right. In fact, it makes it very wrong every single time that it has happened (in this or any other country.)

It is immaterial my own thoughts on the man but I will offer them nonetheless. Donald Trump is a narcissist that values loyalty above all else. I did not vote for him in 2016 (the only time in my life that I did not vote) because I did not believe him sufficiently conservative due to his previous public opinions. However, after four years of governance as President I did vote for him in 2020 believing him to be far superior to the alternative - a man that has run for President at least three times and has been in government for pretty much all of my 51 years of life. None other than the Secretary of Defense Robert Gates (serving under both Presidents Bush and Obama) suggested that Joe Biden has been wrong on every single foreign policy decision for the last 30 years.

Too often, we tend to vote not for who we want but rather against the alternative. How many of you voted FOR Hillary Clinton despite the fact that no one likes her? That is why she lost. There was no great groundswell for her even if she might be the first female President. How many of you voted for Biden despite the fact that it was clear four years ago that he was well past his sell by date? I imagine it was to your mind the better of two bad choices. So it is for me now. I do not love Donald Trump. I'm not sure that I even like him even though I do appreciate the fact that he has a humor and as proved by his actions yesterday, he is a fighter. Resilient. And given an inch of the bullet, may well have become a martyr.

Donald Trump brings out the worst in people and I believe that says more about them than it does about him. The heated rhetoric and hyperbolic pronouncements of what may happen should he become President once more...again...ONCE MORE...are over the top and led to what occurred yesterday. This election seems simple to me. No...not the most important in our lifetime. Just an election. A choice. What do you want for the future? If your bete noir is abortion, very well. For or against. If you like or dislike illegal immigration, have issue or not with our Federal debt and deficit, have a desire for high or lower taxes and indeed if you believe or not that bureaucrats should run our country rather than Congress and the Executive branch as laid out in the Constitution. These are all things that can and SHOULD be discussed.

Not that "our democracy dies!!" if so and so gets elected. THAT is hyperbolic and leads us to this moment. I should not have to tell you that we do not live under a democracy but rather a constitutional republic. That is on purpose. I will add this as well by Dr. Richard Beeman of the University of Pennsylvania:

"If there is a lesson in all of this it is that our Constitution is neither a self-actuating nor a self-correcting document. It requires the constant attention and devotion of all citizens. There is a story, often told, that upon exiting the Constitutional Convention Benjamin Franklin was approached by a group of citizens asking what sort of government the delegates had created. His answer was: "A republic, if you can keep it." The brevity of that response should not cause us to under-value its essential meaning: democratic republics are not merely founded upon the consent of the people, they are also absolutely dependent upon the active and informed involvement of the people for their continued good health."

As he suggests, it is an often told story and perhaps apocryphal. Yet it is the truth. It is OUR government and we get the leaders that we deserve such that we choose them. There are over 330 million people in this country and I imagine you, like myself, are astounded that these two - Biden and Trump - are the best we have to offer. Yet they are. That is your choice. That is our choice. And we should be able ("should" is a loaded word that can get you in trouble, so pay mind) to argue these points on their merits.

The point is that far too often we make arguments based on feelings and not facts. I've a good many friends that I have lost because I do not see Donald Trump as an existential threat to our Republic. I have lost others because I am willing to give the Democrat party their chance to discuss in good faith. It is all too heated and based on anger or fear when all I wish to do is talk about it. Conversation. Imagine it? Isn't that better than an assassin's bullet? Yet again...here we are.

I have no desire to tell you how to vote or express why I think one person is preferable to the other even though I have my own ideas. That is MY choice. You must make yours and hopefully choose to do so with respect and a desire to see this country better off despite who is elected. We get the elected officials that we choose and we should not (again..."should") allow emotion to cloud a reasonable discussion. That emotion...hatred...fear...what have you...is what leads to what happened yesterday.

That is not the country I wish to live in nor the manner in which to account for our current situation. People sometimes say, "Do better." Can we?

Listen to each other. Care. Hear instead of trying to tell. Your argument may well be important but you must try to understand what someone else may be trying to tell you. Stop demonizing and believe in good faith. Please. Our life, liberty and pursuit of happiness rather depend upon it.

That is all.

100 Bands Better than Green Day Update (2022 version)

In 2015, Green Day was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Till this time, I'm still not sure why when so many other deserving acts had better resumes. Don't get me wrong. I don't hate the band. Perfectly serviceable in the post grunge era and had a fine pseudo-punk sound (though I will never agree with any idea of "pop punk" - those two things do not go together.) They are a good band and maybe they were inducted because the HoF wanted to get better views, but they did not deserve it when compared to so many others over the years.

I spent more than a few hours over many weeks with some friends in 2015 compiling a list of 100 bands (artists) that deserved it far more than Green Day and had yet to see their induction. Today I revisit that list after the latest class was announced. Here is where we stand:

[Note this list is in no particular order and those since inducted show the year after 2015]

Jethro Tull

Yes (inducted in 2017)

Soundgarden

Eurythmics (inducted in 2022)

The Cure (inducted in 2019)

The Smiths

The Zombies (inducted in 2019)

Mott the Hoople

Adrien Belew

The Cars (inducted in 2018)

Blue Oyster Cult

UFO

Deep Purple (inducted in 2016)

Iron Maiden

Iggy Pop

Willie Nelson

Warren Zevon

Phil Collins

Graham Parker

Townes Van Zandt

Steve Earle

Emmie Lou Harris

Herbie Hancock

Judas Priest (inducted in 2022)

The Misfits

Dead Kennedys

Motorhead

Ozzy Osborne

Duane Allman

Bjork

Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds

Joy Division

MC5

King Crimson

David Crosby

Stephen Stills

Dire Straights (inducted in 2018)

The Replacements

Indigo Girls

Huey Lewis and the News

Janes Addiction

Journey (inducted in 2017)

Meatloaf

Sinead O'Connor

Harry Nilsson

New York Dolls

Tears for Fears

XTC

Jeff Buckley

The Pogues

Ted Nudgent

Henry Rollins

Peter Frampton

Ministry

Steppenwolf

NWA (inducted in 2016)

Joe Cocker

Chicago (inducted in 2016)

The Doobie Brothers (inducted 2020)

Black Flag

Roxy Music (inducted in 2019)

New Order

Steve Miller Band (inducted in 2016)

The Moody Blues (inducted in 2018)

Cheap Trick (inducted in 2016)

Def Leppard (inducted in 2019)

X

John Lydon

Sonic Youth

Pat Benatar (inducted in 2022)

LL Cool J (inducted in 2021)

Pavement

Rage Against the Machine

Thin Lizzy

The Commodores

ELO (inducted in 2017)

Jeff Lynne

Devo

Squeeze

Slayer

Anthrax

Roky Erickson

B-52s

Tina Turner (inducted in 2021)

Blind Faith

Steve Winwood

Annie Lennox

Robert Palmer

Nine Inch Nails (inducted in 2020)

Procul Harem

The Germs

The Go Gos (inducted in 2021)

Tommy James and the Shondells

Danzig

Graham Parsons

Sting

Rick James

Husker Du

Tori Amos

This year of 2022 marks somewhat of a personal vindication as Eurythmics FINALLY gain entry (and I still think Annie Lennox deserves it on her own as well as Dave Stewart). Too long in coming, if you ask me. We did not even have Duran Duran on the list, but I have no issue at all with that selection. I am honestly surprised that Carly Simon was not already in there and if Dolly Parton gets in (despite her public pronouncement that she is not worthy of such an honor) then why not Willie Nelson? Interesting to me that Lionel Ritchie gets in without his group The Commodores having been inducted. Wrong! Whose songs do you remember more? And Eminem gets in before Chris Cornell and Soundgarden (much good it would do for Chris at this late date.)

It's a good class all things considered, righting some wrongs. But so many more remain. The aforementioned Soundgarden to be sure. Jethro Tull. Iggy Pop. Warren Zevon. Motorhead. King Crimson. Indigo Girls. Harry Nilsson. Procul Harem. Rick James. Tommy James and the Shondells. These are but a few of the bands/artists that should already be there and certainly before Green Day ever lightened their doors. Now that Eurythmics is in, my new favorite champion is Iron Maiden surprisingly enough. Not much of a metal guy, but this seems egregious after the acts already inducted. Also would like to finally see Roky Erickson and/or 13th Floor Elevators in there. And hope upon hope, someone realizes how great Thin Lizzy was. Also we never had Boston on the list, but they likely deserve it too.

In 7 years, 23 of these bands/artists have been finally given their due. AFTER Green Day. I am keeping a running tally and will continue to do so until these folks finally get their deserved day. I'm sure that there are many others that I and my friends forgot or failed to mention. Please feel free to offer your own suggestions in the comments. You need not complain about the Hall itself because that is a given. Since its inception in Cleveland, they have become worse and worse about who gets in and especially why. A Hall of Fame is itself a subjective thing these days and the music industry is one of the worst offenders. But I love music and would like to see those I love honored. I'm keeping tabs and will continue to do so. Billie Joe Armstrong has his when so many others are so much more deserving. I am never going to let that go. That is all.

Oscarblogging - Slapshot

Now before you assume I'm writing this post in reference to the great 1977 film starring the impeccable and 12 times better than you or me Paul Newman, make note that it is not. Yet we should touch on that briefly as the reference allows me chance to mention that awesome film. Just in terms of the Oscars, Slapshot never had a chance as good as it was. That years Oscar for Best Picture was won by Annie Hall with Richard Dreyfuss taking home Best Actor for The Goodbye Girl. Lest we forget, this was also the year of Star Wars as well as Close Encounters of the Third Kind and Saturday Night Fever all of which gained major nominations. But the film also shares some semblance of connection to what occurred last night on live television. Apparently violence may be celebrated.

I should mention that my interest in the Academy Awards has waned considerably from what it once was. The fact that I have a subsection of this blog devoted entirely to this institution suggests that at one time in my life it meant a great deal to me. I watched every single ceremony each year from the time I understood that I loved film and movies. But after years of mind-bending choices by the members or some other, it meant less and less and less. In truth, that is much the point of these Oscarblogging posts...to single out the idiotic wins and losses often handed out by this group of people. In response to last night's slap shot, I could only post to social media that "And somehow Peter O'Toole, Deborah Kerr, Richard Burton and Alfred Hitchcock never won an Oscar. ::shrug::" By that I meant that undeserving wins happen all the time and more deserving performances are often overlooked. Sometimes with impunity.

I told some that I would not watch this years ceremony because I was over these egregious mistakes both in what is honored or not but also how the ceremony itself is planned and run. Much like baseball, the complaint was always "it's too long" and in attempts to shorten the time things are lost. Not just playing deserving winners off the stage because they rambled on too long, but cutting out important and welcomed (at least by myself) honorary Oscar wins - the Thalberg, Lifetime Achievement, etc. In the face of short attention spans, the Oscars always make the wrong choice and frankly never saves time anyway. You cut out a slew of deserved moments when Best Film Editor or Sound (which used to be two categories) are shortened at the least and then include a musical number that lasts five minutes when it was not even nominated? I don't have the factual numbers on this, but the ceremony last night lasted nearly as long as any other I have ever seen. Whatever time they save by cutting important stuff like...oh, I don't know...awarding deserving films which appears to be the goal on the masthead...is instead taken up by what I assume they think the audience would rather watch. No matter that Sam Jackson received an honorary Oscar given to him by Denzel Washington the other night at the Governor's Ball. Why would we want to see a thing like that?

Yet I did watch and here is where we get down to the most bizarre thing I have ever witnessed on an Oscars telecast. I remember Sacheen Littlefeather. I recall the streaker behind David Niven. I witnessed when Marisa Tomei won for My Cousin Vinny. I still feel sorry for Beatty and Dunaway when the wrong Best Picture was announced in 2017. These are all Oscars lore. Hell, I've studied it so much that I know well the incident from the 1963 contest in which Joan Crawford basically stole Anne Bancroft's statue when the latter won for The Miracle Worker (look it up.) But I do not recall ever seeing an actual assault.

What was witnessed last night was a petulant child and more, a crime. I don't care how famous is Will Smith. And I generally like him. Yet when a very famous person approaches a comic and moves to violence, they have gone too far. ANYONE that does such a thing has gone too far. Spare me the excuses that Jada has alopecia. A joke is a joke and frankly she has laughed at such before. And even if in bad taste, that does not excuse the action. My God, Don Rickles made a brilliant career out of such. If you cannot laugh (sorry Sean Penn) then much more is going on. And it holds no place in front of a live television audience. I won't go into what I think was the motivation, but I will speak to the repercussions. That is...there will be none.

Will Smith won his Oscar (however well deserved) and pleaded apology but not to the man he assaulted. He was given a standing ovation and allowed his tears and thankfully Chris Rock was somewhere backstage surely pissed but not willing to press charges. Actions indeed have consequences but it seems to me that the level of consequence is woefully inadequate in this case. Smith was feted and given reward (and award which really has nothing to do with it) and Rock is left to wonder what the hell just happened. In a proper environment, Smith should have been escorted from the premises as should (and is) done in every comedy club in this country. Yet in this case, I suppose because of infamy and the moment, the Oscars and the Academy just wanted to move past it as quickly as possible. No matter that it was the most interesting and/or impactful thing that had occurred on their broadcast for many, many years. And also a crime.

Where was the virtue signal? Oh...the Academy tweeted after that they "do not condone violence in any way." And then the bulk of the tweet was a lot of congratulations. Yet precedence has now been set. Apparently the next time Ricky Gervais or Dave Chapelle host an awards and say the joke that we all enjoy (you know you do) it is now fair game for the subject of said joke to go up and bitch slap them. You know what? That is why they won't host such. Is that what we want? And who the hell gives Will Smith the privilege to get away with such a thing? I could not. You could not. I suppose we are not famous enough.

I will end on something that has been ruminating in my mind this morning - anyone reading this that purposely showed your support of Ukraine when that war began and now supports Will Smith "standing up for his wife" need to have your thought processes thoroughly examined. Is the bully the one that spoke the words? Or the one that took action and committed an assault? Last I checked, we held free speech no matter how offensive (and that one is getting dicey) but it is still against the law to physically assault another individual. How far down the hole do want to get? And Christ...this is just Hollywood. Rules for thee but not for me? We've seen a lot of that these last two years and more. I say check yourself before you...give too hot a take without considering the outcomes of such. Last night was an embarrassment on many levels and is of a piece. Weird does not even describe it. Privilege, wealth and fame can obviously go a long way. Or...

The Church of Scientology Strikes Back!

I joke (there we go again) but last night was a major disappointment in both broadcast and action. Among all else, Denzel did not win his third which itself is a crime. I was only rooting for that. Instead I (and we) got this bullshit. And then the response. God help us because we clearly need it! That is all.

AL's 2021 College Football Top 10 Rankings, Week 15 - Final Rankings

Well THAT didn't go as planned. The less said about that GA game the better, but I suppose at least I should say a few words. While I would have preferred to see Kirby Smart make a change at QB in the second half, I'm not certain that Stetson Bennett cost us the game. The loss was entirely on what had been the best defense in the country suddenly not showing up. When you give an all world QB like Young what seemed minutes in the pocket, he's going to find his receivers and make a play. It is disappointing, to say the least, but the good part is that everything remains in front of the Dawgs. A loss in the SEC championship game was not going to keep them out of the playoffs. However, we are likely to face Alabama again. Maybe. First, let's look at my final oh so very scientific and accurate rankings:

1. Alabama (12-1)
2. Michigan (12-1)
3. Georgia (12-1)
4. Cincinnati (13-0)
5. Notre Dame (11-1)
6. Baylor (11-2)
7. Ole Miss (10-2)
8. Ohio State (10-2)
9. Utah (10-3)
10. Oklahoma State (11-2)

Bama beating the number one team automatically puts them now at #1. An argument could be made that Georgia shouldn't fall any further than 2 but I'll give Michigan credit for winning their conference. As I'm sure you've read or consider it, #2 and #3 don't really matter at this stage. I do not think Georgia can fall any further than 3 which leaves unbeaten Cincinnati in the 4th position. There is your playoff field.

The rest of the rankings are just window dressing. I'll give Notre Dame credit for their schedule and certainly Baylor credit for winning the Big 12. Of the rest, I'll merely say that this is how I see it. You could include BYU (10-2) or ACC winner Pittsburgh (11-2) in there if you wanted. It doesn't really matter because now we are focused on those top four. Shoot, I imagine some might place Ohio State higher. It may possibly still be one of the top four teams in the country. But they won't be there when the official rankings come out.

So now it will be:

#1 Alabama vs. #4 Cincinnati

#2 Michigan vs. #3 Georgia

I see no scenario in which Cincy is bumped up to #2. Especially not after Michigan was already ranked 2 and then just won their conference against a good Iowa team (even if they did not look it last night.) It is possible that Cincy could jump to #3, but I don't see how. First of all (and while the committee is not supposed to do such) that would set up an immediate rematch between Bama and Georgia. Second, just look at the schedules. All props to Cincinnati going undefeated, but their schedule outside of Notre Dame and Houston at the end was not what was played by the others. On the losses, Georgia actually has the best record. Bama lost to a good Texas A&M team and Michigan lost to a good Michigan State team. Georgia just lost to one of the top four teams in the country.

On the wins, Alabama has the best record (regardless of how close some might have been.) They have five wins against then ranked teams. Georgia has four. And while Michigan only has two, they came at just the right time leading to their Big 10 conference title. They also beat Washington, Wisconsin and Penn State who were all considered good at the time. Cincy still just has only the two wins against Notre Dame and Houston. That is not to knock them in any way, it is just a fact.

So what happens now?

Since my predictions have been so very accurate thus far (thank you Ohio State and Oklahoma State for keeping me perfect...Oy!), I will venture out there once again. Bama beats Cincy and Georgia beats Michigan setting up the rematch that no one outside of the state of Alabama wants. And on that score, the Bama luck (or whatever one wants to call it) has to run out at some point. Kirby's Dawgs have faced Alabama four times and lost each and every time. Most notably in the National Championship game in 2018 for the 2017 season. I thought for sure that would have ended yesterday, but instead we'll have to wait a month. It ends in January. Until then...that is all.

Peter Jackson's The Beatles: Get Back

For anyone that knows me, it should come as no surprise that I was highly intrigued by this project. To those uninitiated, there was an attempt to record both an album and a live TV show/film in 1969 which ended up breaking down to much acrimony by the end due to mainly business between the various members and the songs set on the shelf for some time before Phil Spector produced what we know as the album Let It Be. Between what was later called the Get Back sessions and what eventually became the album, the film by the latter name was released and was not terribly well received. The Beatles themselves did not care for it. It has colored many peoples attitude towards their break up ever since. Also, while I'll admit I've never seen the original film in its totality, it has been roundly panned over the years and more - most consider it a document of the greatest band ever breaking up. Part the reason I'd like to see it, but it's not so easy to find.

Now I will be honest with you, dear reader. I hold only one song The Beatles ever released as poor. Revolution #9. That belonged on Two Virgins (the album John and Yoko did together in 1968...and was assisted by none other than Sir Paul McCartney.) Other than that, I believe them all to be genius. They are my favorite band of all time and so I have no issue watching hours upon hours of them working, or not working such as it appears. And there can be no doubt that this documentary just as the film that preceded it shows very much both. It is bittersweet, to be sure. These four men had created something not yet seen. Not Elvis. Not Buddy Holly. Not Chuck Berry. Not Little Richard. Not yet The Rolling Stones (though they did give the Stones their first hit with I Want to be Your Man.) Not quite 8 short years of recording (and some years before honing their craft) they broke up. Went their own way. Who does that? The Beatles. That's who.

By 1969 their path together was spent, it seems to me. Both films show this. The first by Lindsey-Hogg and now this by Jackson really don't show too much difference. The biggest that can be seen is that the original showed a break up (so it has been said) and this one shows a group unsure of the next steps. George Harrison is surely looking to break out and use his talents gained over these many years. Ringo is happy (and hungover a lot) and seemingly pleased to remain (which is weird since he was the one that often left because of internal rancor.) John seems quite happy, especially I suppose because Yoko is there, but he may or may not be in the midst of drugs (weed or heroin - take your pick) and Paul? He's just desperately trying to keep it together. There is a moment when he speaks with Lennon and makes a point of saying that John was and is the leader. John doesn't want it. He's already on the way out. So Paul tries to pick it up and pisses off George (which I think he'd been doing for years.)

The largest difference between the two films and the one I find most welcoming is the little moments between each member. Yes, the infamous moment between Paul and George is mostly included ("I'll play or not play...just tell me what will please you.") And there is plenty of uncertainty with all of them as to what they want to do ultimately. Yet what I found most happily was how they got on when times were not stressed. Just playing. Together. Ringo has an idea for a song and George moves over to help him (Octopuses Garden from Abbey Road.) Much as been said about the origination of Get Back and rightly so. Paul has a noodle of song and then one by one they all join in. Lennon comes in late after they've figure out a structure and just joins in with the rest. Early bits where no one really has a song, because they wanted to do all new material, John is working with Don't Let Me Down and then later with I've Got a Feeling. The brilliance of that working relationship between John and Paul can be seen here.

More? That relationship, to me, is the greatest thing I witnessed while watching this documentary. I'm a fly on the wall watching these two master song writers create more of their long history. Their amazing songbook. There's no doubt I feel poorly for George Harrison (who would create great songs and had done so already) but there was a difference at that time. Lennon/McCartney had been a thing since 1958 or so. George himself has said that he had to catch up. I love much of his music, but there are few things I love more than watching those brief moments between John and Paul...when they know what the other is saying without having to say it. They just want to impress the other. Always did (and led to some bitter songs by John later, sadly.)

More than anything else? I always love hearing John, Paul and George harmonize. Don't get me wrong. I love the Beach Boys (more than I ever thought I would) and CSNY but nothing brings me greater joy than hearing those three voices together. John and George backing Paul on Let It Be (and I think John plays bass on that.) Trading vocals on I've Got a Feeling and then sharing them on Two of Us. Both of them backing George on I Me Mine (at least on the track.) And as always, Ringo's amazing timing. His drums always fill it out. These four always knew what they needed to do to make perfection. Not a one of them held back, no matter what else was going on. Irritating filming? They still played. Bullshit business? They still played. Marriages and what else taking away? Drugs? They still played.

In short, I loved the documentary. Of course, I am the MOST amenable to it. I want hours and hours of it. I want to see the Sgt Peppers sessions. I want to see the Decca Records session! I want every hour or minute I can get from them. I love them that much. Part the reason I love One After 909. Early days. Early songs. And Paul and John remember it and well.

I will say that it is not their best album. If you want to ask, I will tell you. But it is messy, no doubt. The Spector cut is what came out first and then McCartney did his own with Let It Be...Naked. I'm told there is a Glyn Johns version. They all have differences. The worst of the Spector version is leaving Don't Let Me Down off the album...why???, but the others don't have Lennon doing his asides. I'd also say that McCartney's version starts and stops with his songs. It really doesn't matter at this late date. If you are a fan, you've heard these permutations and like or dislike them. In the end, it is no more than what the documentary suggests. They could play these songs a million times and be different each time. Each one different and just as special.

They are The Beatles! Of course they can. And they broke up and this is what we have left. Lennon is dead. Harrison too. Paul and Ringo are octogenarians (well Paul almost.) We're never going to get anything more from this Fab Four. This is the closest we're going to get. Every bit to me is a window into the greatest four men to ever play rock and roll together. Sorry kids. You missed out, but you have this. That is all.

AL's 2021 College Football Top 10 Rankings, Week 14 - Championship Week

Well here we are. The end of the regular season with only the championship games left to be decided. And then...and then...we'll have our top four and the playoffs. Before I get to my ever so accurate predictions about that, let's look at my current very scientific and correct rankings:

1. Georgia (12-0)
2. Michigan (11-1)
3. Oklahoma State (11-1)
4. Alabama (11-1)
5. Cincinnati (12-0)
6. Notre Dame (11-1)
7. Ole Miss (10-2)
8. Baylor (10-2)
9. Iowa (10-2)
10. Oregon (10-2)

After the full regular season, my Dawgs came out of it unscathed leaving only the SEC championship to be played. Of course, it has to be against Bama. The road always goes through Tuscaloosa in the SEC so why not? If you want to be the best, you have the beat the best. The history of these games looks bad for Georgia (see 2008, 2012, 2015, 2017, 2018 and 2020.) Yet this year may be different. The Dawgs have allowed the least points to opposing teams by a long shot with only 83 allowed. The second closest is...what? Clemson (9-3) with 180 allowed. Yes, that team Georgia bested in the very first game of the season. Sure, Bama has an awesome offense, but they don't have the same caliber defense (see Bama/FLA, Bama/A&M, Bama/Arkansas and this past weekend's Iron Bowl at Auburn.) I'm not saying it's a done thing already. Nothing ever is against a Nick Saban coached team. But our odds are better than they have been in a long time.

Then we move to #2. I was tempted to place Oklahoma State here, but Michigan finally got over that hump and beat Ohio State (now 10-2) and since I had them ranked so high (and Ohio State remains a great team) I have to put Michigan here. Followed closely by Oklahoma State. These two are really 2a and 2b. All either team needs to do now is finish the drill. Michigan is set to face Iowa in the Big 10 championship and Oklahoma State will face a rematch with Baylor in the Big 12 championship. If both win those games, they are in the playoffs. I have more faith in Michigan, but OK State is every bit as good.

For #4, Cincy gets bumped again. Say what you will about the close games Bama has played, but I believe they are better than Cincinnati. And if Bama wins the SEC championship game, they are going to the playoffs. And so is Georgia. Cincinnati's path needs Bama, and one of Michigan and OK State to lose. Yet Cincy remains undefeated and if they beat Houston (11-1) in the AAC championship they will have a very good case. I'll keep them at #5. Notre Dame does remain in this, but as usual this year, they need Cincy to lose that game (as well as the same losses as above) for their shot to get in.

For the rest of the top 10, we're just looking at the best of the two loss teams. I have them ordered this way, but you could make a perfectly fine case for a different order. I still think certain things must be considered - Oregon has to be above Ohio State - Baylor has to above Oklahoma - Iowa has 3 wins over then ranked teams - and Ole Miss only has losses against ranked Bama and then ranked Auburn while they beat ranked A&M and better than their records Mississippi State and Tennessee. I suppose one could include Houston in this mix, but the schedule is still the schedule. I'm not interested in including either of the ACC teams here though Pittsburgh (10-2) vs. Wake Forest (10-2) will be an interesting championship game for that conference. And Utah (9-3) is looking good here and has a chance to beat Oregon twice in two weeks in the Pac 12 championship.

These are all also-rans, however. Going by history, no two loss team has ever made the four team playoff. That is always subject to change (especially given the Bama rule of "because it's Alabama") but for our sake here I'll stick to that first rule. A 2 loss Big 12 champ Baylor is not going to the playoffs if Cincy remains undefeated. A 2 loss Big 10 champ Iowa will not either under the same circumstance. Especially with Notre Dame sitting there with only 1 loss. And frankly, I do not see both Michigan and Oklahoma State losing their games. So it comes down to this for my prognostications (which have been so perfect...thanks for the loss to Michigan, Ohio State):

#1 Georgia vs. #4 Cincinnati

#2 Michigan vs. #3 Oklahoma State

You can flip 2 and 3 if you wish, but that seems the most likely match up at this point. Now, if you want to consider if Bama wins the SEC championship, then it would look like this:

#1 Alabama vs. #4 Oklahoma State

#2 Georgia vs. #3 Michigan

Either way, I am now predicting that the National Championship game will be between Georgia and Oklahoma State. If it turns out to be a rematch between GA/Bama, I may just give up entirely in this endeavor. No one wants that again outside of Tuscaloosa. I'd be perfectly fine with a GA/Michigan game for it all on the line, but I can state right now that Cincy is not ever getting into THAT game. And if somehow Notre Dame crashes this party, they will just lose again like they always do these days when it is all presented to them.

It is interesting to me that all of the oh so smart prognosticators at the start of the season just assumed (and then lamented as they picked them) that the top 4 would be the usual suspects of Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State and Oklahoma. Only one of them still has a shot and I'd call Bama's chance at 50/50. To me, this is Georgia's year and has been since the beginning. I hate to tempt fate (especially after already getting one championship from the Braves) but this team is just that good. That complete. I see it in front of me and believe I can have that. More than that, they see it in front of them and believe they can have it. But first, we must continue to play the game on the field. I'm ready. That is all.

2022 Baseball Hall of Fame Ballot

Since I am back to blogging, I might as well resurrect my annual Baseball Hall of Fame ballot. Of course I don't have a vote, but if I did it might look a little something like this. For reference, here is the list of players eligible per Baseball Reference. Looking at it, and trying to weed it down to 10 (per the actual voting rules) it appears this year we are back to a backlog and bloated list. Below you can see how bloated and backlogged. Most of that is due to the voters for this august group trying to retro fit their own writing from the time, but we get ahead of ourselves. The first three names, and my votes, would go to:

Curt Schilling

Barry Bonds

Roger Clemens

I list them in that order because that is how they found votes last year. To me, it ought to go Bonds, Clemens and then Schilling. They have each been on the ballot for ten years (and now their last year due to the rules these days) and each have their detractors. Bonds and Clemens remain with the taint of PED (regardless of the fact that none of it was proven even if we all know better) and now, apparently, Schilling has to answer for his off the field persona and AFTER his playing career. To me, Bonds was the greatest offensive player I saw in my lifetime. And before he started juicing! I suppose it is a shame that he has that mark on his character, but I maintain till this day that if he had retired before the start of that phase of his career...he was already a Hall of Famer. Already close to an inner circle one as well. Clemens as well. Now I don't want to get into the ins and outs of how much I dislike the man. Yet it has nothing to do with his PED use (again...not proved.) It has to do with a certain circle in hell for someone that played for the Red Sox and then won with the Yankees (see too Hall of Famer Wade Boggs.) These two players were the best of their generation (though I always like to point out that Greg Maddux has one more career win over Clemens - 355 to 354) and that they are not yet in the Hall of Fame makes it a joke.

Of course neither is Pete Rose.

On the Schilling front, I don't give a whit about his politics. That should not enter into the argument for his Hall of Fame playing career. The writers (voters) want to virtue signal, but how do you leave this man out? He was part of 3 different teams that pushed into the World Series. Phillies in 1993, Arizona in 2001 and Boston in 2004. He has the WS co-MVP from Arizona's win and the bloody sock from the Red Sox 2004 historic win to show for it. You talk about a big game pitcher? Jack Morris got into the Hall of Fame for one game, frankly. Schilling has multiple and is a half a run less in ERA for his career. Get off your high horse, voters, and let these men in!

And on the topic of PEDs, I have to now list my fourth vote -

Manny Ramirez

This one was proved. Twice! And yet I still thinks he belongs. A slash line for his career of .312/.411/.585 with over 500 HR and over 1800 RBI. From above, you can see where I'm going with this. I don't care if he juiced. Bud Selig (Hall of Fame Commissioner, by the way) didn't seem to care at the time. So why should we? He was a young stand out star for Cleveland in the 90s and a real star for the Red Sox in the aughts. Not the best defensive player, but he made up for it with his bat. He's never getting in, but I think it's a crime. Shades of Rafael Palmiero who also belongs, but Manny was the better player.

Going further on this subject, two of the first time eligible players also have this taint. Let's list them here:

Alex Rodriguez

David Ortiz

Rodriguez also tested positive for PEDs but Ortiz never did. Yet both belong. I'm no fan of AROD, but much like Clemens I cannot deny his numbers. I do love Ortiz and he was as impactful as Schilling for that 2004 Boston run. Once again, I do not care about the steroid issue. It was what it was and if everyone was doing it (assumption) then it's an equal footing. Just get over it, writers, and stop trying to let everyone know how virtuous you are.

I'll add two more here for this conversation that have some taint of the PEDs which I think is ridiculous. My next two votes would go to:

Jeff Kent

Gary Sheffield

Kent was one of the best 2nd basemen in the league at the time, and certainly an historic one offensively. As for Sheffield, and despite his attitude and many teams, he was an offensive power for every one. Despite him going from the Braves to the Yankees, the man was a 9 time All Star in a 22 year career with MVP votes in 7 of them. I will continue to champion them as long as they are on the ballot.

So now we've reached 8 votes and I only have 2 more. Despite many deserving candidates, and again...backlog once more, I have to give my last 2 votes to:

Andruw Jones

Billy Wagner

It was difficult for me to winnow this down for these last two. We have a plethora of players to reward here. Todd Helton deserves the nod. Another that slashed a 300/400/500 for his career (and despite the Coors field effect.) First year eligible Jimmy Rollins definitely has a case. In another year, he'd get my vote. Ryan Howard had a shot, but then he petered out. So did Tim Lincecum. Frankly, Jake Peavy might have been better. Holdovers Scott Rolen, Andy Pettitte and even Sammy Sosa have a case. But I go with these two.

Jones was possibly the greatest defensive center fielders of all time. My grandfather saw DiMaggio play. He still thought Andruw was better even if he didn't like him "stepping in the bucket" at the plate. Maybe that's why he was 66 HR from the magical 500 number in his career. And Wagner? Hoffman is in, as are other closers by now, and Billy Wagner was a stud! One of the best. When he retired at age 38, he recorded the lowest ERA of his entire career. He went out on top. And taught a whole new generation how to do the job (hello, Craig Kimbrel.) These two are my last two votes since I'm limited to 10.

Vizquel, Teixeira and Hudson also deserve a look, to be sure. Possibly even Morneau. But when I'm limited to 10 votes, I have to choose these 10. At least...hand count...6 players that are accused or assumed that used PEDS. We're still living with it. And the writers (again...the voters who wrote wonderful platitudes about them at the time) would love them to leave the ballot and not have to answer for it anymore. Well, they probably won't have to. Schilling, Bonds, Clemens and Sosa all fall off the ballot after this year. And then they can start worrying about Rodriguez. If he gets more votes than any of those four...well, it just shows how idiotic and absurd they are. Hypocrisy ain't just a river in Egypt.

So what are your votes?

That is all.

AL's 2021 College Football Top 10 Rankings, Week 13

Well that's how you shake things up. Finally Oregon loses a second time and we can do away with the head to head against Ohio State. A great win, to be sure, but now there is only the one. Also, I was completely wrong last week putting Wake Forest (now 9-2) so high. Hey, don't get too cocky...I can be wrong from time to time. Rarely, but I admit it when I am. I thought they had more to them and perhaps underestimated Clemson (now 8-3) after their early season. So we now have some movement in my ever so accurate and scientific top 10:

1. Georgia (11-0)
2. Ohio State (10-1)
3. Alabama (10-1)
4. Cincinnati (11-0)
5. Oklahoma State (10-1)
6. Michigan (10-1)
7. Notre Dame (10-1)
8. Oklahoma (10-1)
9. Ole Miss (9-2)
10. Baylor (9-2)

Of course, the highlight of the day for me was hearing (since it was not televised) big defensive tackle Jordan Davis scoring an offensive touchdown but it was against Charleston Southern. Basically this was a scrimmage against the B squad, but all four QBs got into it and that's no bad thing. As one may imagine, my Dawgs stay #1. And now that we can move Oregon out of the equation, Ohio State can take their rightful place as #2. I'm certain that the CFP committee will try and keep Bama ahead of Ohio State, but I think that's wrong. Especially after yesterday when Alabama struggled to get past a good Arkansas team and Ohio State obliterated a good Michigan State team. That 1, 2, 3 pecking order cannot be more clear.

After a week of dropping Cincy, I put them back to #4 after a solid besting (finally) of SMU (now 8-3) but they should not rest too comfortable because Oklahoma State is a very near competitor and if they beat Oklahoma in Bedlam next week, they will jump them. And Michigan gets this high for now, but they meet Ohio State this coming weekend. As I've mentioned all season, this Big 10 round robin will clear up all things. Notre Dame rounds out this grouping, both because they look stronger week by week and they still only have the one loss to Cincy. Without a Bearcats loss, they cannot get higher than 5.

I'll include Oklahoma for now but they are at the tail end of the one loss teams (sorry Houston...you have a shot in the AAC championship game.) And now for the first time, we see 2 loss teams here. Of those, I like these two more than the others. Sure, Oregon is still out there as is Iowa, Pitt and BYU. But an argument can be made that some 3 loss teams (Wisconsin and Utah among others) might be better. In truth, Mississippi State has a slightly better argument over Ole Miss but they are 7-4. And we'll see that play out this coming weekend in the Egg Bowl. As for Baylor, they have the win over Oklahoma but they also have two losses (one of them to Oklahoma State.)

At this point, the ACC and Pac 12 are out of the playoff picture. Fans of Cincinnati could not be happier after losses by Oregon and Wake Forest. But they still have to look over their shoulder at the Big 12. If Oklahoma State beats Oklahoma this weekend, then it's a championship game between State and Baylor (assuming Baylor beats Texas Tech this weekend.) If Oklahoma beats State this weekend, then it's a rematch in the championship game. Either way, a one loss Big 12 champ will get the playoff nod over an unbeaten Cincy. That's just a fact. And whether you like it or not, it's fair. Blame the schedule. At this point, Cincinnati has to be the biggest Dawg fan and hope that Bama is bested roundly in the SEC championship game. If it's close, Bama could still get in even with 2 losses. And if they win, Bama and Georgia both go. Cincy also needs Oklahoma to win in Bedlam and then lose in the Big 12 championship game.

All that said, let's see how I do this week predicting the playoffs. As mentioned, I was totally wrong last week. So now I will predict:

#1 Georgia vs. #4 Cincinnati

#2 Ohio State vs. #3 Oklahoma State

Again, things get shaky if Bama beats Georgia in the SEC championship game. At that point, I believe Bama would rocket to #1 and Georgia doesn't fall further than #3. For my Dawgs, that is the worst case scenario because I don't want to face Ohio State in the semi-final. And for Cincy, they are out of it. Oklahoma State would face Alabama in the other semi-final. In either scenario, I still see the National Championship game being Georgia vs. Ohio State. They are clearly the two best teams in the country. Georgia has not lost a game yet (and have not allowed more than 17 points to an opponent.) Ohio State has the early loss to Oregon, but has looked stronger and stronger every week since. Alabama has the blemish of the loss to Texas A&M, but they also had close games against Florida and now Arkansas. And honestly, if I'm picking, what I want to see regardless of what happens between Georgia/Bama would be this:

#1 Georgia vs. #4 Oklahoma State and #2 Ohio State vs. #3 Alabama

To me, those are the four best teams in the country. But there remains that pesky SEC championship game. It's going to be a good one. First we need to go through rivalry weekend and let's see where we are next week. Until then...that is all.

AL's 2021 College Football Top 10 Rankings, Week 12

So my Dawgs keep rolling and got by Tennessee pretty easily after a rough 1st quarter. I'm a little worried about the injuries piling up, but barring a complete collapse of the entire team, we can look forward to a date with Bama on Dec. 4th. Texas A&M still had a shot until they lost to Ole Miss yesterday and I just don't see Alabama losing to both Arkansas and Auburn. Georgia is done with its SEC slate and went undefeated at 8-0 (first time since 1982 I've been told all morning.) As to the rest of my very scientific and in all ways correct top 10:

1. Georgia (10-0)
2. Oregon (9-1)
3. Ohio State (9-1)
4. Alabama (9-1)
5. Cincinnati (10-0)
6. Michigan State (9-1)
7. Michigan (9-1)
8. Notre Dame (9-1)
9. Oklahoma State (9-1)
10. Oklahoma (9-1)

So far my top 10 and that of the Playoff Committee have been the same but in different order. That may change this week. They must have been on to something with Oklahoma and with their loss to Baylor this weekend it is now more in line. I'll be somewhat shocked if Oklahoma falls out of their top 10, but I could see Wake Forest (9-1) or possibly even Baylor (8-2) jumping into that tenth spot. For my part, it caused a little shake up in my top 4. Sitting down this morning, I'm caused to truly consider who might beat who just as much as who has beat who. It has a ripple effect because of what has already happened and what is still on the table.

Given yesterday's results, I'd like to put Ohio State at #2 but I can't because of that ever present game earlier in the season when Oregon beat the Buckeyes in Columbus. Head to head matters regardless of how things might have changed over the season. So this order must be the way it is. Then to the fourth spot, I have finally dropped Cincy down a slot because just considering it I do not think they would beat Alabama. I'm not ready to pop them in the #2 spot even after they destroyed New Mexico State yesterday. I think the committee wants them there so they can keep them in the playoff picture even if they lose the SEC championship.

We then move to the Michigan State/Michigan argument. They got flipped by the CFP rankings but once again - head to head. As stated, all of this will be sorted by the end of the season as we'll see Michigan State at Ohio State this coming weekend and Ohio State/Michigan is still out there to be played. From there we move to ever present Notre Dame. They are helped by their schedule of wins and that their only loss comes to the higher ranked Cincinnati. Finally, we deal with the Big 12 situation. The true ranking comes easily enough - Oklahoma State beat Baylor who beat Oklahoma. But Baylor has that second loss. And more, Bedlam remains out there so we'll see the head to head between these last two rankings (as well as the Big 12 championship which will be a rematch of some form.)

So we are left with a lot of IFs here. If we consider the thus far standing rule that the CFP will not put a 2 loss team in there (always subject to change) then we look at the Big 10 first. One of Ohio State and Michigan State is guaranteed a second loss, as is one of Ohio State and Michigan. The way these teams look right now (and the history between Ohio State and Michigan) I see the Buckeyes back in the playoff. Oregon still has Utah (7-3) and Oregon State (6-4) in front of them, as well as the Pac 12 championship if they win out. If they do all of that, they must be the #2 seed (even if we think the Pac 12 is not as strong as the Big 10 - again...head to head!) More to that, we would see another rematch between Oregon and Ohio State so they can fight it out all over again.

That leaves us with the fourth spot in the playoff. Cincinnati still needs help to get there beyond just winning out. That's just a fact. If either Oklahoma or Oklahoma State wins out the rest of the way, including the Big 12 championship, it will be very hard to leave a 12-1 Power 5 champion out of the playoff. The same goes for Wake Forest should it run the rest of the ACC schedule. Because of the top ranked teams and the competing schedules, I think the pecking order is Big 12 then ACC then Cincy if they remain undefeated (not a sure thing as they are likely to face 9-1 Houston for the AAC championship.) Fair or not (and I think it is fair) that is the order. Notre Dame might beat on the door, but they are not getting in (AND they need Cincy to keep winning.)

One last IF must be considered here. If Alabama beats Georgia in the SEC championship, both go to the playoff. Cincy is out. If it is a close game and Georgia just barely wins, the committee will strongly consider a 2 loss Bama. That's just their history of loving the Tide. Either way, Cincy remains in IF land. So to continue on from last week and make my new prognostications, I now think it will come down to:

#1 Georgia vs #4 Wake Forest

#2 Oregon vs #3 Ohio State

I think this because rematches are very difficult to win a second time and assuming Oklahoma and Oklahoma State play twice, both will have 2 losses. In this scenario, Oklahoma has to beat Oklahoma State in Bedlam and then lose in the Big 12 championship game. If State wins Bedlam, they would play Baylor a second time in the championship and even if Baylor wins that, that 2nd loss hurts them. As to Wake Forest, they play Clemson (7-3) this coming weekend. They are looking better, but Wake Forest looks great right now even after their loss to North Carolina. The win against NC State (7-3) is a good win even if close and a win against likely Pitt (8-2) in the ACC championship will look even better. Who thought the ACC still had a shot here? I certainly did not. That said, I've suggested for some time the National Championship will come down to Georgia and Ohio State. I think that still stands. But of course, we still have to play the games. We'll see. Until next week, that is all.

AL's 2021 College Football Top 10 Rankings, Week 11

It is tempting fate to look too far ahead and certainly to make assumptions, especially when I already have one Championship banked for 2021 (congrats once again Atlanta Braves!) but I'm not the only one that sees one team as national championship quality and several others that week to week look entirely beatable (and some have been.) There will be more shake-up in the top ten this week, but number 1 does not change. Herewith are my ever so scientific and totally correct rankings of the top 10:

1. Georgia (9-0)
2. Oklahoma (9-0)
3. Oregon (8-1)
4. Cincinnati (9-0)
5. Alabama (8-1)
6. Michigan State (8-1)
7. Ohio State (8-1)
8. Michigan (8-1)
9. Notre Dame (8-1)
10. Oklahoma State (8-1)

Once again, Georgia saw little trouble putting away Mizzou and continues to roll. There will be one more true test next weekend at Tennessee (5-4) but they've already clinched the SEC East and await their opponent for Dec. 4th. Oklahoma had a BYE week and were surely shocked to be ranked 8th in the first CFP ranking, but they remain only one of two Power 5 teams undefeated and that counts for something in my book. If they continue to go undefeated they will absolutely be one of the top 4 (likely seeded at 2) and join in the playoffs.

For Oregon, I won't deny that the CFP ranking had some influence in my jumping them to #3, but they also likely have the best win of any team in the country when they beat Ohio State in Columbus. And Cincinnati remains undefeated even after a third struggling win in a row. But a win is a win is a win. They don't have but the one good win at Notre Dame but it certainly counts. It is hard to say if they will eventually break through as a group of 5 school, but they are close and I'll keep them at #4 for now.

After debuting at #2 in the CFP ranking, I was tempted to jump Bama but they needed everything to get past an LSU (now 4-5) playing out the string so I could not move them off this spot in my poll. And playing New Mexico State (1-8) next weekend isn't going to do much for them in my book. However, I won't drop them down either. I did not want to punish Michigan State too much, though it was tempting. 6 through 8 remains part of the Big 10 round robin and it will sort itself out as we move forward. Neither Michigan or State has played Ohio State yet and I could have easily put Ohio State ahead of both. But for now, this is the order to me.

Notre Dame jumps one spot to #9 and is helped by Cincy being ranked high. And finally Oklahoma State gets back into it and has three good wins against ranked at the time teams (Kansas State, Baylor and Texas.) They are still in this if they can get probably not one but two wins against Oklahoma and a one loss Big 12 champ would be difficult to leave out of the playoff. Some few other teams could argue for this 10th place spot - UTSA could complain as they remain undefeated but that schedule, man, it just doesn't hold up - Wake Forest (8-1) fell out after losing to North Carolina (5-4) this weekend but they are still in the running for the ACC title  - Texas A&M (7-2) would seem to be the best of the two loss teams having the win over Bama and pretty much destroying Auburn (6-3) this weekend - Iowa (7-2) also has three strong wins over ranked teams and still has a shot at the Big 10 title. All four look interesting but not as good as Oklahoma State.

Now that we have the first CFP ranking, I'm going to start prognosticating what the playoff might look like when all is said and done. Georgia is in it barring an inexplicable loss prior to the SEC championship game. Bama has to get by Auburn AND win the SEC Championship to go. Georgia can lose it and still be ranked the 4th seed. I believe that Ohio State will get by both Michigan State and Michigan and win the Big 10. It would help them for Oregon to lose one more game (which I think they will do.) And I think Oklahoma runs the table. They seem to have everything clicking all at once and look good for the #2 seed. Notice who is left out? Yep. Cincy. They need a lot of things to go in their favor the rest of the way such is the bias against the Group of 5 conferences (for right or wrong.) They need to go undefeated first and foremost and Notre Dame must keep winning as well. A loss by Oklahoma would help them but I believe they really need another loss by both Oregon AND Ohio State (if they beat both Michigan and State, they are jumping Cincy as they already have in the CFP ranking.) And they need Georgia to run the table because if Bama runs the rest of their table including the SEC championship, the committee is going to include Bama. No doubt about it. Hell, even if they lost to Georgia there is a good possibility they could still get in as a two loss team depending on what happens elsewhere. The committee just loves Bama that much.

All that said, and if things remain chalk, I see the following:

(1) Georgia vs. (4) Ohio State and (2) Oklahoma vs. (3) Oregon.

I think the only team above that Cincy has a shot to beat is Oregon but you have to have Oregon above Ohio State because of the head to head. So even though I have them as my #4, I just don't see them cracking the CFP top 4 without a lot of luck. Check back next week because this IS college football and things are always bound to change. It's why I love it. That is all.

The Atlanta Braves - 2021 World Champions

I'm not sure if you heard, but late last night (or early this morning depending on which way you look at it) the Atlanta Braves...my Atlanta Braves...somehow, someway managed to actually win the World Series! We have to flash back here...go way back. All the way to the 80's when I first watched/saw a Braves baseball game. The years of Bob Horner, Bruce Benedict, Phil Niekro and Dale Murphy. I wasn't much of a fan and they did not give me/us many reasons to be so. But then...BUT THEN...1991 happened. I was a freshman in college and this team went worst to first and I watched my first World Series in earnest.

Many people call that 1991 World Series the very best ever and I've no reason to dispute it. Outside of the result, every pitch...every at bat...every everything including that game 7...was thrilling. It hooked me line and sinker on baseball and these Braves. 1992 was the first year I watched the Braves all year only to be disappointed at the end at the hands of the Blue Jays. 1993 was the first year I followed all of MLB when the Braves won 104 games to the Giants 103 only to lose to the Phillies in the NLCS. Then The Strike in '94. And then the magical 1995! A strike-shortened season that still pit us against one of the greatest line-ups of all time in the '95 Cleveland Indians (yes, that was still their name.) Maddux won the Cy Young that year and gave us a great game 2. But it was Tom Glavine that pitched 8 innings of 1 hit ball and that 1 home run by David Justice brought it all home!

I was 22 years old at the time. Still in college. I celebrated with my friends at a bar in Athens and none of us could believe it. Atlanta finally had a championship. For the Braves, it was just their 3rd. One each in every town they have played - 1914 in Boston, 1957 in Milwaukee and now 1995 in Atlanta. It seemed like we were finally going to roll and it would last. But then 1996 and the Yankees. The evil, foul Yankees! Leyritz in '96 and then the sweep in 1999. Plenty more division titles (14 years in total and a record) but we would never again reach that peak...that mountaintop.

Glavine would move on to the Mets before coming back for one last ride. Maddux would go back to the Cubs. Smoltz would go to Boston. Chipper Jones would eventually retire as the baby Braves were coming up. Great teams and winning teams, but never enough to achieve the ultimate goal. Francouer would fail out and McCann would even move on to the hated Yankees! But then...but THEN...in 2007 the Braves drafted a young 17 year old named Frederick Charles Freeman. He would debut with the major league team three years later in 2010 while still managed by the great Bobby Cox. That year we would win 91 games but lose to the Giants in the NLDS. That would be Bobby's last season, but we had what seemed a core and returned to the playoffs in 2012 as the Wild Card. Lost. 2013 we won the division but lost again in the NLDS to the Dodgers.

We went from a 96 game winning season to four years of losing records. The Great Rebuild. Fredi Gonzalez would be fired and in came long timer Brian Snitker. GMs would trade players, sign new players and get fired (or banned.) All the while, young Freddie Freeman continued to play and well. Early on, he and Jason Heyward were offered long time contracts. Heyward said no but Freddie said yes. And when the rebuild started, they came to him and asked his opinion. He said he was willing to wait, willing to watch, and willing to grow with the team.

In 2018, the wait was finally over. We vaulted from a 72-90 record to a 90-72 record and shocked all of baseball. Once again we would lose in the NLDS to the Dodgers but it seemed as if we'd arrived. In 2019 we won 7 more games and the division again until losing to the Cardinals in that year's NLDS. 2020 was...2020. But even under COVID, we would win the division a 3rd time in a row and take the Dodgers to a 7th game. But again, we lost. Yet that year began with Freddie himself getting the virus before going on to win the shortened season's MVP. So we, all of us, began this year of 2021 thinking it was finally our time. This would be our year.

And then the Braves went four months without a winning record. The division lead would switch over throughout the season with the Mets (the stinking Mets) leading much of that time. Then the Phillies (the filthy Phils) tried to take over. But then on August 8th, after a win over the Washington Nationals, we broke through and got over .500 ball. It was win and then loss, win and another loss. Back and forth. We'd already lost Mike Soroka early in the season when we depended on him as the supposed ace of the pitching staff. Our all world player (and arguably the best player in the game) Ronald Acuna, Jr. went down for the rest of the season a month earlier. GM Alex Anthopolous had a great decision to make. Buy or sell. We might lose Freddie in the offseason as a free agent and he would certainly bring back a huge haul. So would many others. But instead, he rolled up his sleeves and pulled off some huge trades. First Joc Pederson. Then Duvall (which he should have already signed after the last season and had beat us once or twice already by himself), Rosario and Soler. He gave up nothing in doing so. And we started winning.

He was in it to win it (a cliched phrase but true nonetheless) and while some Braves fans were skeptical, many others saw potential. Down the stretch of the season it was a near run thing. The Phillies put up a fight (and may end up with this year's MVP in Bryce Harper) but failed in the end. We won the division with only 88 wins. Every single media outlet suggested we were lucky to be there and would not go far. The Milwaukee pitching staff would be too much for us (especially with potential Cy Young winner Corbin Burnes) but a home run by Freddie off of all world closer Josh Hader in game 4 put paid to that. Then everyday Eddie Rosario took over in the NLCS against the hated Dodgers. Once again we got up 3 games to 1 and everyone thought...here we go again. Atlanta teams just lose the big games. 28-3 with the Falcons. How many series with the Braves. Bulldogs up on Bama twice in the last five years only to lose it at the end (most especially in 2017.) We weren't going to do it.

Game 6 saw Rosario definitely earn his NLCS MVP honors with a 3 run shot and the true MVPs were the bullpen. Jackson (who had seen some trouble), Minter, Matzek and Smith (who every Braves fan hated near the end of the year for giving up too many homers.) Somehow we had bested the hated Dodgers! No one gave us a shot, but here we were...in the World Series!!! Against the cheating Astros who had just put a beating on the Boston Red Sox. Surely we would fail against that vaunted line-up!

None of us knew it at the time, but the first at bat told the tale of the series. Jorge Soler (mid-season trade pick up, recall) took game 1 started Framber Valdez deep in Houston. We would go on to win that game but lose starter Charlie Morton after a shot off the leg by Gurriel. He still got batters out on a broken leg but he'd be gone for the rest of the Series. Our advantage was gone. And then we would lose game 2 behind our best starter Max Fried. His second poor game in a row after a lights out two months. So back to Atlanta with the Series tied.

We needed to win 2 out of 3 and somehow did so. Ian Anderson pitched the game of his life with 5 no hit innings in the middle of what seemed a snow storm and then the first of two bullpen games. We split those. But after game 4, we were once again at the 3-1 advantage. And once again Atlanta fans freaked out. We've seen this movie before. We know to expect the worst because it always happens. And especially after game 5, that narrative maintained. A handy victory by Houston (and after an Atlanta grand slam by Duvall in the 1st.) 3-2 and back to Houston. We had to wait a day to live with our guts and anxieties. Our worries and assumptions.

Enter once more one Max Fried. He of two poor starts of late. His stuff still wasn't sharp but he got through the first with little damage. And then nearly exited the game after getting his foot stomped on a weird play at 1st base. Yet he would trudge back to the mound for six full innings. Gutting it out and giving up nothing, these were six innings without a run scoring. Meanwhile, we got hits. None more than a mammoth home run shot by Soler once again. I'm still not sure that ball has landed. It was his third of the Series. Swanson (who'd seen some odd defensive errors in the Series) added on. So did none other than Frederick Charles Freeman. Again.

I must admit that I am a superstitious man when it comes to sports. My dog Max has been forced to endure much during this season and certainly during the playoffs. For this game, he was dressed in a Ronald Acuna, Jr. jersey the entire time and found his spot on the couch next to me once again. Hey...it worked before! But even in the 6th...the 7th...the 8th and 9th inning...we were up by 6 and then 7...but still I would not let him change. I would not let him get down. Don't change what works. And then Will Smith came in to close out a game that was not a save situation normally, but was for an entire season on the line.

I barely recall anything about that last inning. I remember thinking it could still all be lost. It's happened before (again...Leyritz or 28-3.) I remember thinking that Max could finally go to bed after days of very late nights. I remember thinking it might be the last time we see Freddie Freeman in a Braves uniform, though I don't think so because he pretty much said it himself - he doesn't want to play anywhere else. I remember that I considered that it had been 26 years since the last time I saw something like this. A championship. For one of my teams! And most of all, I remember thinking of my best friend Keith Konior who passed away in January and saw none of this season. He would have loved it...I think...and sadly missed it.

We won!!! We fucking won!!! Braves win!!! Braves fucking win!!!

A long journey. For myself. For Atlanta fans. For Brian Snitker. For Freddie Freeman. Even for Keith even if he was not around to see it. I'm honestly still numb. It really hasn't hit. A team I root for won a championship. That just doesn't happen. But it did. Last night. And I could not be happier. Braves win! And that is all!

AL's 2021 College Football Top 10 Rankings, Week 10

Big sports weekend here in Georgia and for the two I follow, it was a great weekend (outside of Game 5 of the World Series.) For my Dawgs, they did not seem to miss a beat against Florida and nearly shut them out. Once again, they scored over 30 points and allowed 13 or less. For that reason, clearly they remain tops in my ever so scientific and heavily researched top 10:

1. Georgia (8-0)
2. Michigan State (8-0)
3. Oklahoma (9-0)
4. Cincinnati (8-0)
5. Alabama (7-1)
6. Oregon (7-1)
7. Ohio State (7-1)
8. Wake Forest (8-0)
9. Michigan (7-1)
10. Notre Dame (7-1)

After Georgia, I had to go with Michigan State. I had Michigan high this past week and State beat them pretty clearly (the final score looks closer than the actual  game.) The Big 10 is finally getting into the thick of their schedule so things are going to quickly change. I left Oklahoma and Cincy where they were (for now.) I was tempted to jump Bama over Cincy but they had a BYE week and the polls still have the Bearcats high. I suspect that will not be the case when the Playoff rankings come out on Tuesday.

Following the Tide there remains the Oregon/Ohio state conundrum. While I (and many others) think Ohio State is the better team, the fact is still there...Oregon beat Ohio State on the road. That game still happened and must be counted. Until or unless Oregon loses another game, they have to be ranked ahead of Ohio State. SMU went down this weekend so they fell out, but Wake Forest keeps winning and has a real shot of making the playoffs as it stands right now. I was ahead of the major polls by placing them in the top 10 last week and they have now caught up with me. The ACC may still have a shot this year.

I didn't want to drop Michigan down too far because it was not a blow out to State (and I have them at 2 now) so they remain in the top 10. Let's see if that stays that way after they play Ohio State in a few weeks. And finally, I had to put Notre Dame in as 10. I wanted to put Baylor (7-1) there but they have the same issue as Oregon/Ohio State. As long as Baylor holds the same record as Oklahoma State (7-1), Baylor has to come in second because they lost to Oklahoma State. Sure, UTSA is still out there at 8-0 but they don't belong here. And while Texas A&M (6-2) and Auburn (6-2) are building strong resumes and still have an outside shot at the playoffs, it is a stretch with their two losses. Thus I had to go with Notre Dame loathe as I am to include them (yes, it's personal.)

The slate of games for this coming weekend is a bit of a fall off after the sportgasm we just saw, but there is Bama vs. LSU (4-4), Wake Forest at North Carolina (4-4), and Baylor at TCU (3-5) as well as a showdown between the aforementioned Texas A&M vs. Auburn. My Dawgs get Missouri (4-4) at home and wait for their final test of the regular season against Tennessee (4-4) in a couple of weeks. And as mentioned, we'll get that first Playoff ranking this week so we'll really see what the true pecking order is and what each team needs to do to be one of those 4 teams. And while I wait, I get Game 6 (and hopefully final game) of the World Series also on Tuesday. So let's Go Braves! That is all.

The Worst No Hitter I Ever Saw

Reflections of a night on the morning after. The rain was neither a deluge nor a drizzle. Yet it was steady and constant nearly the entire evening and the chill in the air was evident with every breath seen by the players. To be sure, both teams had to deal with the environmental conditions and most certainly both starting pitchers were able to withstand what might have buckled another. As it did for nearly every position player at the plate. On one side, you had young Ian Anderson (our very own Jethro Tull who somehow proved that he was Thick As a Brick.) He's had a nearly flawless postseason record in his brief career and this team needed it after losing the tested ace in Charlie Morton to a broken fibula in game one (and pitching on it even after the fracture) and seeing the 1A ace in Max Fried see another game get away from him early (even though he battled it out.) On the other side was baby rocking Luis Garcia who was equally as tender footed as a major league pitcher and had seen one good game and one poor for the previous round of the playoffs. Who would best the other on this nasty, nasty night?

I don't know about you, but I get very superstitious about the first pitch of any game in MLB. Anderson's first pitch was called a ball down and away and for one of the few times this evening, the umpire was correct. And so it would go for a good portion of the five innings that followed. But we'll get to that below. For first, we must look at the opposing pitcher. For 3 and 2/3 innings, Garcia threw 72 pitches, only 41 called strikes. 16 of those were swinging strikes and many of those were outside of the actual strike zone. No thanks to umpire Tom Hallion for his inconsistent strike zone that might have caused Braves hitters to swing at things they might not otherwise, but this is and has been an aggressive team (sometimes too aggressive) and so we were in need of a great performance by our starter. One run would score in the 3rd inning which would chase Garcia, but not before 2 pitches and 2 outs in the 4th.

So Ian Anderson would trot out to the mound for five innings and throw no hit ball...somehow. 76 pitches offered. Only 39 of those were called strikes. In no way could one call this a dominating performance. It was smoke and mirrors and rain (perhaps) to create what Houston Manager Dusty Baker called "effectively wild." Your major sports writers were astounded (and not too many fans) when Anderson was pulled after the fifth, but the tale of the tape says why. The number of full counts, the number of first (and second) pitch balls to batters. The traffic on the base paths even without the benefit of a hit. There would be key pitches, to be sure. These would extend the no hitter. But it was not pretty. As a fan and viewer, every pitch seemed as if that would be the one to break out and yet...it did not happen. Our young Jethro Tull would sneak through (and get the all important win) in a game that was a must win.

No small part of that was the bullpen performance that followed. Minter, Jackson, Matzek and Smith would follow with 2 hit ball for the final 4 innings and the Braves would tack on another score in the 8th with a Travis D'Arnaud home run. In the end, the shutout was preserved and the win gained to bring the Braves 2 games up to 1 for Houston. So it really wasn't a no hitter. Nor should it have been. Yet what it was? A gutsy and nail-biting performance most needed at this moment in the Series. On a night that was ugly in weather, when Braves hitters would swing wildly and at unnecessary moments, when the umpiring crew (most especially behind the plate) would give no quarter to our staff and when so many in the national media wanted to make a story out of nothing (once again) as the games moved to Atlanta, we got the performance required no matter how unlikely it was. It was not a no hitter but it was for 5 innings and it was the worst (best?) no hitter I ever saw. Now bring on game 4!

That is all.

AL's 2021 College Football Top 10 Rankings, Week 9

I'm a bit late with my latest oh so scientific and accurate top 10 rankings due to the elation of the Braves going to the World Series. Saturday was a special day and had nothing whatsoever to do with college football. To quote the great Skip Carey, "Braves win! Braves win! Braves win!" Further to that, this coming Saturday looks to also be a special day, especially amongst Atlanta sports fans. If I'm getting this correctly, all four professional sports teams will be playing as well as Georgia and Georgia Tech. We (here at least) can hope for wins! Yet we are still in the midst of the college football season (about the halfway point right about now) and so let us get to it. These are my latest rankings:

1. Georgia (7-0)
2. Michigan (7-0)
3. Oklahoma (8-0)
4. Cincinnati (7-0)
5. Michigan State (7-0)
6. Alabama (7-1)
7. Oregon (6-1)
8. Ohio State (6-1)
9. SMU (7-0)
10. Wake Forest (7-0)

There are a number of one loss teams that I want to include here (and we'll look at them below) but for now I'm still giving credence to unbeaten teams. The top of which remains my Dawgs. Hope upon hope, they will remain so after facing Florida this coming weekend. I allowed Michigan to jump Oklahoma this week because I was not impressed with the Sooners first half against Iowa State. That said, their second half put the pedal to the medal. Michigan will get their own test this coming weekend against Michigan State, here ranked 5th. One of them will remain unbeaten. And I'm still being kind to Cincinnati. But they remain high in the actual polls (and who knows where they will be ranked when the playoff committee gives us their view in a week.)

For 6 through 8, it has to be this order. Bama remains Bama even with their one loss. Most polls have them in the top 5. And you still cannot rank Ohio State ahead of Oregon due to their head to head match-up. Oregon beat Ohio State...on the road! I do believe that Ohio State is the better team, but they were not on that day. As for SMU and Wake Forest...I am again being kind but they remain undefeated and 7-0 is 7-0. I think SMU beats Wake Forest should they meet up, so I put them first, but who knows? They both finally meet the beef of their schedule coming up so we shall see.

As for those I wanted to rank, they are all 6-1. Baylor, Ole Miss, Kentucky, Pitt, Iowa, Notre Dame and Oklahoma State (even after their loss this weekend.) Of these, I think Notre Dame and Baylor have the best chance to crack the top 10 given what they do going down the pike. Pittsburgh still has a shot to knock off Wake Forest and Ole Miss still has enough in front of them to make a statement. It is also possible (somehow) for Kentucky to make a statement but it will take some help.

All in all, this weekend looks like a corker. You've got Georgia/Florida, Michigan/Michigan State, Ohio State/Penn State, Baylor/Texas and Ole Miss/Auburn. Not to mention game 4 of the World Series on Saturday! I'm already thinking of my sportsgasm menu. What is yours? That is all.

Oscarblogging - Paul Newman

It has been some time since I posted about the Oscars for reasons best left unsaid. Suffice to say they do not really mean as much to me now as they once did. I used to pay attention every year but not as much anymore. However, the history of them remains interesting to me and having gone down a rabbit hole thanks to The Ringer doing a podcast on The Color of Money, I happily dug in. Especially on my favorite actor Paul Newman. Infamously he would win this Oscar in 1986 for that film after 6 times not winning for (arguably) better roles/performances.

I must backtrack slightly and say that one of the things that fascinate me about the Oscars are the wins/losses, so many or lack thereof and how they went down year in and year out when looking back at them. It astounds me that Peter O'Toole never won an Oscar (and I've blogged on this in the past.) So too Richard Burton. Not one win in seven tries. Alfred Hitchcock never won an Oscar with five nominations. Arguably one of the greatest directors of the 20th Century. Glenn Close has never won an Oscar after eight nominations (pushing O'Toole.) To me, the one that kills is Al Pacino. He'd been nominated 6 times without a win and then got both 7 and 8 in 1993. He would finally win, but for the wrong film. (Note, he now has a ninth nomination but still just the one acting Oscar.)

But this post is dedicated to Newman (so it will surely be 12 times better than any other post.) In total, Paul Newman was nominated nine times between 1959 and 2003 before his death in 2008. And perhaps outside of his role in Sweet Bird of Youth in 1962, he was almost always given a nod when deserved (well, more on that below.) As before, what I want to do here is look back at each of these "contests" and see if the outcome was deserved or not. If nothing else, it gives me a chance to look back at some amazing films and at the worst, allows me to judge both the Oscar voters and the times in which these votes were made. So, we begin at the beginning:

1959

• David Niven – Separate Tables as Major David Angus Pollock
  • Tony Curtis – The Defiant Ones as John "Joker" Jackson
  • Paul Newman – Cat on a Hot Tin Roof as Brick Pollitt
  • Sidney Poitier – The Defiant Ones as Noah Cullen
  • Spencer Tracy – The Old Man and the Sea as The Old Man

Firstly, I must say here that I have sadly never seen The Defiant Ones. To my shame. That said, I have to think that Curtis and Poitier cut into each other's votes here. Poitier would go on to win an Oscar (which we will cover below.) This was Tony Curtis' only nomination. Spencer Tracy was nearing the end of his terribly successful career and had already won twice (and never would win again...shades of Bette Davis.) And Niven? I have seen Separate Tables and while I love the actor, the work itself does not hold up terribly well. Prestige picture, sure. Maybe ahead of its time given the subject matter. But to compete with one of the great Tennessee Williams plays? This is a year in which Gigi won Best Picture and Elizabeth Taylor did not even win Best Actress for her role in Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. I have to say, right off the bat, this was a miss. Maybe it should not have been Newman compared to Curtis or Poitier, but the eventual winner seems weak.

I'll call this a +1 in his favor.

1962

• Maximilian Schell – Judgment at Nuremberg as Hans Rolfe
  • Charles Boyer – Fanny as César
  • Paul Newman – The Hustler as Eddie Felson
  • Spencer Tracy – Judgment at Nuremberg as Dan Haywood
  • Stuart Whitman – The Mark as Jim Fuller

We're still early on in my film watching career so I've never seen César or The Mark. Boyer is a great actor and also never won an Oscar but this was his fourth nomination (most notably to me for Gaslight in 1944.) Whitman is most definitely a "that guy" and this would be his only nomination. So this contest comes down to the two films. As always, one must look at two actors nominated from the same film so it is impressive that Schell pulled out the win. But again, Tracy is nominated and having already won 2, maybe did not get the votes he might otherwise deserve. To me, this is one of Newman's iconic roles (which would later give him his actual Oscar) but I have to admit if I am looking at this objectively, I would probably give my vote to Tracy. So another fail. I think Schell is great, but Tracy is better. And so is Newman.

I'll call this a +0 because it would not have necessarily gone to Newman if Schell doesn't win.

1964

• Sidney Poitier – Lilies of the Field as Homer Smith
  • Albert Finney – Tom Jones as Tom Jones
  • Richard Harris – This Sporting Life as Frank Machin
  • Rex Harrison – Cleopatra as Julius Caesar
  • Paul Newman – Hud as Hud Bannon

I really cannot fault this year. Five great actors in five great films. While some might push for Finney here, I think this was a two man contest and the best man/performance won. Don't get me wrong, Newman is amazing in Hud (as is the great Patricia Neal who would win Best Actress for her performance) but Poitier cements himself as a power in both race and talent and I would not change this result in any way.

Call it another +0 because the right man won.

1968

• Rod Steiger – In the Heat of the Night as Police Chief Bill Gillespie
  • Warren Beatty – Bonnie and Clyde as Clyde Barrow
  • Dustin Hoffman – The Graduate as Benjamin Braddock
  • Paul Newman – Cool Hand Luke as Lucas "Cool Hand Luke" Jackson
  • Spencer Tracy (posthumous nomination) – Guess Who's Coming to Dinner as Matt Drayton

To me, this year is the oddest contest. I love Hoffman and he deserves his nomination, but he is the least deserving of these five great actors. And Beatty is amazing even if he is not one of my overall favorites. The oddest thing is that Poitier was NOT nominated and Steiger was (much less won the thing.) It was, obviously, a year in which race relations were widely considered and rightly so. Thus, Tracy certainly deserved his rightly given nomination even if he had died by this time. If both Steiger and Poitier had been nominated, I can see a split vote. But that only Steiger got the nod, I guess he eeks out the win.

All of this is backdrop to me to one of the greatest Newman performances of all time! It is his greatest performance and his most iconic role in a career of many. It's my 2nd favorite performance of his career (again, more below) and that it was even a contest is shocking to me. I suppose we can assume "timeliness" and all of that, but it doesn't make it right. This should have been Paul's all day long.

I give this a +4 in Newman's favor because he was better than any of the others to my mind.

1982

• Henry Fonda – On Golden Pond as Norman Thayer Jr.
  • Warren Beatty – Reds as John Silas "Jack" Reed
  • Burt Lancaster – Atlantic City as Lou Pascal
  • Dudley Moore – Arthur as Arthur Bach
  • Paul Newman – Absence of Malice as Michael Gallagher

I can't argue with these results in any way. It says something that Newman went over a decade without a nomination (and again...more below) but these are some amazing performances and Fonda absolutely deserved this nod and win! Here's another that had a long career without the recognition he likely deserved. I'm not a huge fan of Reds but Beatty deserved this and Lancaster is great in his film. More than anything, I love Arthur and Moore. It is one of my favorite films of all time and I'm just happy he got the nod for his performance. Newman too deserves his nod this year, but the right man won. Easy and hands down.

Definitely a +0 for Newman here.

1983

• Ben Kingsley – Gandhi as Mahatma Gandhi
  • Dustin Hoffman – Tootsie as Michael Dorsey/Dorothy Michaels
  • Jack Lemmon – Missing as Edmund Horman
  • Paul Newman – The Verdict as Frank Galvin
  • Peter O'Toole – My Favorite Year as Alan Swann

Just damn! One of the toughest contests of Newman's career. These are five iconic performances from five amazing actors. I'm sad to say, as much as I love these actors, Lemmon and O'Toole are also rans here. They are great, but the real winner should have been Hoffman for Tootsie. Newman is awesome in The Verdict, but Hoffman goes all out. Did they cancel each other out? Hard to say. And Kingsley? I cannot fault his win here because it is an amazing performance in an amazing film.

Honestly I would rank them Hoffman, Kingsley, Newman, O'Toole and then Lemmon. And I'll watch any film of theirs at any time. All five I consider my favorite actors!

Got to call this a +0 for Newman. He wasn't going to win.

1987

• Paul Newman – The Color of Money as "Fast Eddie" Felson
  • Dexter Gordon – Round Midnight as Dale Turner
  • Bob Hoskins – Mona Lisa as George
  • William Hurt – Children of a Lesser God as James Leeds
  • James Woods – Salvador as Richard Boyle

It has been suggested over the years that this was a gimme Oscar. I think that is wrong. Paul finally gets his recognition by the Academy. Rightfully so. These are all great performances (most especially to me by Dexter Gordon, but he was an enlightened choice by the nominating committee...he wasn't going to win.) The interesting thing this year was William Hurt. At the time, he was in the midst if a five year run of amazing performances with all accolades given and deservedly so. He'd just won the Oscar the previous year for Kiss of the Spider Woman and would be nominated again the next year for Broadcast News. That, to me, is the only thing that suggests it might be a gimme Oscar for Newman. Marlee Matlin would win for Best Actress (which I might have given to Sissy Spacek for Crimes of the Heart or Sigourney Weaver for Aliens...but so be it) and it was clear this was a well considered film. But Newman had never won.

Like John Wayne for True Grit or Pacino in Scent of a Woman, it is understandable that Newman would get this ultimate nod finally. In my mind, he deserved it more than either of those two for their winning roles. And he joins a small group of people nominated twice for the same role (again, Pacino in The Godfather.) It is an amazing film (and the reason I'm blogging about it today) but as I look back at his career, it does look a bit as a gimme. By my count, he should have already won once, if not twice (and he did not even compete in some other instances...once more...see below.) I'll take the win.

No need to give a plus or minus here because he won.

1995

• Tom Hanks – Forrest Gump as Forrest Gump
  • Morgan Freeman – The Shawshank Redemption as Ellis Boyd "Red" Redding
  • Nigel Hawthorne – The Madness of King George as King George III of the United Kingdom
  • Paul Newman – Nobody's Fool as Donald "Sully" Sullivan
  • John Travolta – Pulp Fiction as Vincent Vega

OK. This is one of the most egregious years ever. Look, I love Tom Hanks and I enjoy Forrest Gump, but please! Hawthorne was amazing, no question about it. And Travolta? He was lucky to get this nod as much as I enjoy that film. This is a two man race and neither man won. We are talking about two of my favorite films and two of my favorite performances. It's hard for me to say which I might have voted for at the time should I have a vote, but I nudge towards Newman. Freeman should have won, in my mind, but I would have been happy (and rooted for) Newman to pick up a 2nd. I guess they felt he already had one now and Freeman would have to wait (as he would eventually win for Million Dollar Baby.)

What to give this one? Hmm. I guess a +1 because he should have had a shot.

2003

• Chris Cooper – Adaptation as John Laroche
  • Ed Harris – The Hours as Richard "Richie" Brown
  • Paul Newman – Road to Perdition as John Rooney
  • John C. Reilly – Chicago as Amos Hart
  • Christopher Walken – Catch Me If You Can as Frank Abagnale Sr.

I've no problem with this, especially because this was a Supporting Actor nomination. Prior to this, Newman was always nominated for Best Actor. This last was just the Academy being the Academy. Long time famous actor that does something interesting? Sure...why not. Look at Meryl Streep (and don't get me wrong, I love her!) I think the only competition here was between Cooper and Walken. The right man won.

Call it another +0.

So...what to make of all of this?

Nothing really since Paul finally got his Oscar. But I keep saying more later and here's where we get into that. Two years after Newman was nominated for Cool Hand Luke, he was NOT nominated for Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. It's only my favorite film of his and not only was he not nominated, neither was Redford. Instead, here was that year's roster:

• John Wayne – True Grit as Rooster Cogburn
  • Richard Burton – Anne of the Thousand Days as King Henry VIII of England
  • Dustin Hoffman – Midnight Cowboy as Enrico "Ratso" Rizzo
  • Peter O'Toole – Goodbye, Mr. Chips as Arthur Chipping
  • Jon Voight – Midnight Cowboy as Joe Buck

Do you see the miss here? Burton, Hoffman, and Voight definitely deserved their nominations. I love O'Toole, so...OK. Wayne! And he won. How is Newman not nominated here??

+2 here because Hoffman and Voight likely deserved this and Burton was still on his losing streak.

Now how about 1973...

That year the Best Actor race was:

• Jack Lemmon – Save the Tiger as Harry Stoner
  • Marlon Brando – Last Tango in Paris as Paul
  • Jack Nicholson – The Last Detail as Billy "Badass" Buddusky
  • Al Pacino – Serpico as Frank Serpico
  • Robert Redford – The Sting as Johnny Hooker

I've no problem with the winner here or any of these nominations except that Newman is better than Redford in The Sting (AND the film itself won Best Picture.) As much as I love Brando, Newman should have had that slot and we'd still see the same winner. After all, Lemmon is one of the greats and this is one of his greats (and his second Oscar after Mr. Roberts.) Brando already had 2 after On the Waterfront and The Godfather, Nicholson had 1 from One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest (on his way to 3 with Terms of Endearment and As Good As it Gets) and Pacino was still on his losing streak. Redford has never won an acting Oscar (this was his only nomination) so he would wait to win for Ordinary People in 1980 as Director (and even there...Raging Bull anyone?)

So the way I see it, Paul Newman should have 3 competitive Oscars (and at least 2 more nominations.) I'll take the win for The Color of Money and add a win for Cool Hand Luke and Nobody's Fool (and possibly a 4th for Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.) Honestly, he should have been nominated and then won for Butch Cassidy. He certainly deserved them and this is, of course, an exercise in what if. It wasn't. After all, and again, Hitchcock never won an Oscar. Burton never won an Oscar. O'Toole never won one. At least Paul got his the one time.

Feel free to offer your own opinions about such as I welcome them and if there is another you are interested in me looking at (as if you couldn't) please let know. But I went down a rabbit hole this morning and this is what I came up with. A whole slew of Hollywood history, films, actors and actresses and I find all of that interesting even if the Oscars mean nothing. So there is that. And...that is all.

AL's 2021 College Football Top 10 Rankings, Week 8

Yesterday was a good day, all told. Both of my local teams won and it's not too often that happens here. The Braves win was awesome, but for these purposes we're talking the Dawgs and yes...another resounding victory for what is clearly the best team in the country. I could do without some penalties and I'm still not sold on Stetson Bennett, but he played a great game and indeed he can use his legs.

For the rest of college football, things did not go so well. We'll get to that below so let's go ahead and list my latest scientific and oh so accurate top 10 list:

1. Georgia (7-0)
2. Oklahoma (7-0)
3. Michigan (6-0)
4. Cincinnati (6-0)
5. Oklahoma State (6-0)
6. Michigan State (7-0)
7. Alabama (6-1)
8. Penn State (5-1)
9. Oregon (5-1)
10. Ohio State (5-1)

I've already said my words on the Georgia victory and no team can really lay claim to the top spot right now other than them. Oklahoma is looking better week by week and may have found the QB to keep their offense going (still a question, but the talent is there) and Michigan didn't play. Loathe as I am to give Harbaugh any love, the Wolverines remain undefeated (for now) and so why shouldn't they be here? I'm not letting Cincy get any higher than 4th here because of their conference and schedule, so keep winning and enjoy a shot at my hypothetical playoff.

As for the rest, I allowed OK State to jump Michigan State because a comeback victory over Texas (now 4-2) means more than a near run thing against what was supposed to be a good Indiana team (now 2-4). This should be a byline, but Bama remains Bama (except for that loss to A&M.) That said, and on that score...what to make of the Florida loss to LSU? Are the Gators just talented enough to lose a close game, or does Bama have enough flaws that a just talented enough team can take them to the wire? Again...see the A&M game.

After that, we get into the other one loss teams. Once more apologies to your other unbeatens. Wake Forest (6-0) gets at shot at Army (4-2) this next week. SMU (6-0) is playing Tulane (1-5). And sure, Coastal Carolina (6-0) is at App State (4-2). But I don't see any of these teams being competitive with those I am placing in this top 10 list. So we begin ranking the one loss programs and I still say Penn State has some legs. They were off this week and still don't get a real test until later in the season but I'll keep them here. And while I think Ohio State is the better team, they still lost to Oregon. This ranking has to be this way.

I am still (and always) looking at who might crack this list and that includes Baylor (6-1) that took BYU (5-2) down another notch. It includes Ole Miss (5-1) that snuck out (and nearly got clobbered by golf balls and who knows what else) a win at Tennessee (4-3)...a team I think that is much improved even if their fans may not be. It still includes Kentucky (now 6-1) because they were not embarrassed and should not be dinged too much for losing to the top team in the country. I'm looking at a 5-1 Pitt all the sudden that plays Clemson (4-2) this next week. And Iowa (now 6-1)...wow! OK. My eyes are still there, and Purdue (4-2) can upset every now and then, but you just went from almost ran to why were we talking about you? Plus...Notre Dame is still sneaking around at 5-1. Their schedule doesn't look as good as it might at the start of the season, but their only loss is the highly ranked Cincy and they beat a ranked Wisconsin, a Purdue that just beat #2 Iowa and still have USC, UNC and Stanford on their list. Never underestimate the Playoff Committee's love for the Fighting Irish.

Overall, I think this is a solid top 10 given what we have seen thus far this year. Your networks are trying to tell you that Cincinnati is #2. They are wrong. They are also trying to say that your usual suspects will be back when Oklahoma, Ohio State and Bama get back into the picture. They are not so wrong there. One thing is clear...we won't be seeing Clemson in the playoffs but I'm not so sure these other usual suspects will be either. The Big 10 still has their late date round robin tourney and OK/OK State is still out there. For the SEC, Georgia pretty much punched their ticket to the championship game this week barring a complete collapse and as I see it, the only team able to topple Alabama in the West is Auburn (now 5-2) if they could win the Iron Bowl.

There is a lot more football to be played and I'll be there for it all (should you care whatsoever about my opinion my awesome two and a half readers!) Stay tuned and as always...that is all.

AL's 2021 College Football Top 10 Rankings, Week 7

So THAT was an eventful Saturday, wasn't it? 3 of my top 10 went down, not least of which was #1 Bama to Texas A&M. Dammit! I did not want my Dawgs ranked 1st, but now I have no choice. I don't mind saying, I had my doubts about Georgia early on against Auburn, but it turned out fine after a 34-10 victory. I will say that I continue to have little trust in Stetson Bennett as QB for a potential National Championship team, but I'll give him credit. He can run and I was more impressed with his arm after this last game. Here is some food for thought...in many of the years in which Bama ran the table and won or played for championships, the QB didn't really matter because there were so many other talents on the team. Just plug and play because everything around will elevate. I suppose that could be the case here, but I don't like taking that chance. Anyway, we've had some shake up and so here is my latest top 10:

1. Georgia (6-0)
2. Iowa (6-0)
3. Oklahoma (6-0)
4. Cincinnati (5-0)
5. Michigan (6-0)
6. Michigan State (6-0)
7. Oklahoma State (5-0)
8. Kentucky (6-0)
9. Alabama (5-1)
10. Penn State (5-1)

There can be little doubt that Georgia should be ranked number 1 at this moment. No team this year has looked as total as this Dawgs team and while the offense remains a little doubtful at moments, the defense remains all world. More to that, only Bama and Iowa have as many victories against ranked opponents with three for each. The Clemson victory looks less now, but they were highly ranked when we played and there is a chance for a fourth when Georgia plays Kentucky this next weekend.

As for Iowa, and while it was close, a victory against a top 10 team counts every time and so they naturally get the second spot. I must say that I am skeptical of this #3 ranking for Oklahoma, but that come back against Texas was rather epic and so I'll leave them high. And for Cincy...let's just say that I am being kind. For Michigan, this is likely too high given that they nearly lost to Nebraska, but for now I'll place them here knowing there are later dates with Ohio State, Michigan State and Penn State. With the Spartans ranked next, the sorting will work itself out as the season progresses.

OK State did not play this Saturday and so missed out on upset watch. They can breath easy for now until they visit Texas (4-2) this next Saturday and Kentucky is flying high after their victory at LSU (3-3). As I understand, this is the first time they have been 6-0 since the 1940's. Good for them but I think this ends on the 16th. As for the last two spots? Well, here's my thinking...

You are going to see Alabama still in the top 5 in most polls, most especially the AP and Coaches that come out today. Is that fair? Has their #1 ranking been due to their many long years of dominance or what they have done thus far this year? That said, if Bama played Iowa, Oklahoma or Cincinnati tomorrow who do you think would win? My ranking of 9 is probably too low for them because they remain with a plethora of talent and are still likely the second best team in the country. But they did lose yesterday. To a Texas A&M (4-2) team that lost pretty decisively against Arkansas (4-2)...that just lost to Ole Miss (4-1) in a shoot out...after the Rebels were destroyed by Bama the previous week. Welcome to the SEC where we eat our own week in and week out. It is a grind and other conferences should be so lucky to have so much talent.

The only other one that can lay claim to a top spot is the Big 10. Thus I will not ding Penn State too much for losing, and closely, to the aforementioned Iowa on Saturday. As stated, their round robin will start a bit later because there are still only four or five teams that could challenge and they are nearly all in the East side of that conference. Look, Ohio State (4-1) looked awesome yesterday. They likely deserve to be in this ranking. But they lost to Oregon (4-1) already and if I'm going to rank them, I have to rank Oregon before THE Ohio State (is there some question about which Ohio State team is which, by the way?) Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan and Michigan State will all face each other before everything is said and done. That will be telling and given that all are (or should be) highly ranked, it bodes well for the Big 10 getting into the playoffs.

As for your other unbeaten teams, there are five. Here I will list them...SMU (6-0) in the AAC, Wake Forest (6-0) in the ACC, UTSA (6-0) in Conference USA, San Diego State (5-0) in the Mountain West and Coastal Carolina (6-0) in the Sun Belt. I'll just ask this question...Arkansas has now lost to both Georgia and Ole Miss. and if they were to play any of these unbeaten teams, who do you think would win? OK, you say, maybe Arkansas wasn't as billed. How about Tennessee, now 4-2 as well? Florida (4-2)? Mississippi State (3-2)? SMU still has to play Cincinnati and Wake Forest has not even played either North Carolina schools much less Clemson. Sorry, but those unbeaten records will not last. As for the others...look, if you're a fan then I'm happy for you. As they say in the South, bless your heart.

So another week down and more separation between the contenders and the pretenders. This next weekend will see more. GA/Kentucky, OK State/Texas and one I think should be looked at BYU/Baylor. Both are 5-1 now. Outside of Michigan State at Indiana (2-3), it appears the rest of the big boys in the Big 10 are taking the week off. We're about halfway through for most teams and this season continues to provide what we all love about college football. I have no doubt that we'll see some more of that excitement and I will try to rank accordingly. That is all.

The Many Saints of Newark

Those two and a half readers of mine may recall that I was a huge fan of the HBO show The Sopranos. To me, it is the greatest show ever put to television (and yes, Breaking Bad is 1b.) You can drill back and find my reviews of the last seasons and certainly my most read and commented upon post here was my reaction to the series finale. Now, here we are many years after that finale and have a prequel film written by David Chase. What follows is a (sort-of) cross post from the place I spent most of time during those years - the great Sopranos forum The Chase Lounge (where I remain a moderator and admin.) If some of it sounds too familiar to the reader, that is why.

[Note - At the end of this post, I will add some spoilery so beware when you get to that point!]

So now, the review...

Short answer, I enjoyed it. Longer answer below.

I will state that I am of mixed emotions about it, to be sure. You will note that I did not say that I loved it above. I did not. Nor did I hate it. I think it was true to the spirit of the original show yet any one episode (outside of the few we might all agree were subpar) would have been (and was) more enjoyable, deeper in themes and ideas and simply better acted all the way round. All that said, it was nice to have (some of) the gang back. And do not get me wrong. There are some stand out performances in this movie. I think the main one would be Vera Farmigna as Livia Soprano. She does an excellent job trying to match the tone of Nancy Marchand without moving into parody. Body language and intent are all there and even allows some pathos seeing how Livia would become what we would see as the show began. Alessandro Nivolo is also a stand out as Dickie Moltisanti. There are some differences in what we see of him in this film from what we were told about him on the show, but it was highly interesting to follow his footsteps and entertaining (despite some of his actions) to actually see a character we never saw on the show itself. Finally, one must single out Michael Gandolfini as the younger teenage Tony. Obviously he resembles his father in both looks and actions so he fits perfectly in as the younger Tony. As well, I cannot imagine any one of us does not have somewhat of a bittersweet emotion seeing him inhabit this role.

The other younger versions of themselves were less successful, by and large. All of the actors did their best to find the motions and even in some cases the voice of the characters we grew to know and (sometimes) love on the show but at moments they do verge on parody or perhaps a well done SNL skit. The actor that plays the younger Silvio has his mannerisms and vocal tics down to the smallest thing (and it was humorous to show when and how he began wearing a wig) but at moments it takes you out of the piece. So too the younger Paulie and possibly even the younger Pussy. I could say the same thing about Corey Stoll as the younger Junior but at times he really does offer some excellent moments. You do get a brief shot of the young Carmela, the young Artie Bucco and even a blink and you'll miss it bit of Jackie Aprile. There is no sign of Ralphie Cifaretto or Tony B. And speaking of that, I did not think that Joanne Blundetto Moltisanti would have been old enough to be a peer to Livia but they do portray it that way here so a little bit of continuity blown there but not enough to kill anything.

I should also single out Ray Liotta playing a duel role here as the twin elder Moltisanti brothers. Firstly it is about time he enjoyed the entire rest of the cast of Goodfellas in finally joining the Sopranos universe and second I think he acquits himself well here even if his chops might not be as sharp as they once were. Lastly, I think that Leslie Odom, Jr. is excellent in his time as at first a soldier to Dickie and then later a rival. That said, Chase still does not know quite what to do with race in the world of the mafia. It's not poorly done, but not enough space was perhaps given here to fully flesh out what he attempted. Perhaps if this was stretched out to a full season rather than nearly two hour film.

Now on to the meat of the film:

This was billed as "how Tony got his start" but by now you surely know that it is really no such thing. The film belongs to the character of Dickie Moltisanti. It follows his rise and inevitable fall (no spoiler there) and only shows Tony's reaction to it from time to time, first as a small child and then later as a teen. I honestly do not have a problem with that except for the mislabeled pitch. As stated, Nivolo is excellent as Dickie and Chase takes him through his paces as he at first deals with his father, then his rivals and lastly with his girlfriend (and sometimes all of them together.) In the show, we were led to believe that Dickie was a junkie just like Christopher would later turn out to be, but this is not portrayed here. Now that could just be another lie Tony would later tell Christopher or it could be a missed opportunity for Chase to remember all of the things he put out there back in the show. However, what IS shown is just as troublesome. I will not spoil any of that in this thread, but if you thought Tony had some terrible traits, you will see a lot of that as well with his "uncle Dickie." Can we say that Tony learned such from him? I doubt it since Tony is rarely around when Dickie is doing these things (unlike when he sees Johnny Boy chop off Satriales finger or get arrested at the circus...which is somewhat recreated here.) But maybe he later heard the stories. Who can say?

And speaking of Johnny Boy, he's really not in the film that much which was a bit disappointing. I grew to love the actor that played Johnny in the flashbacks on the show and while this actor is good, he just isn't given much to do other than fill the beats of things we've already heard about him (yes, we do get a scene of when he shot through Livia's hair bun.) In many respects, what Chase has floated here is that it was Dickie as much if not more that was the natural father figure to Tony which both fits somewhat what we know of Tony's troubled relationship with his father but also contradicts the same at the same time. The real truth is that Dickie was fleshed out so little as a remembered character on the show, Chase had plenty of a blank slate to work with whereas he had only limited room with Johnny and Livia. Again, maybe not a missed opportunity but not enough time to truly explore these complex relationships as it relates to Tony and then later to Christopher.

And here is where my real beef comes into it...the framing device used. It is Christopher that narrates during the film. From beyond the grave. Knowing nothing about his father outside of what lies he's been told. Now true...who knows what we find out in the afterlife? And sure, it is surely tempting to try and tie this film to at least once actual actor that was in the original show. But it is the least workable aspect of the film. I just don't buy it. AND that it comes and goes, it's not even used particularly well. Sure, if Gandolfini were still alive, I can see the use of this narrative device. But Chase no longer has that luxury and should not have tried to shoehorn another into that role.

I'll say that Alan Taylor's direction is to his usual excellent ability and the music, as always is used well. Perhaps too much at times, but well. There remains no doubt that Chase still belongs to the Scorsese school of using rock music and liberally for his mafia stories. Locations were often quite nostalgic and I'm sure some would say too much as easter eggs throughout but I found them welcoming. I was a little confused about the house the Sopranos live in when Tony is a teen because I thought that would be the one used at the start of the show, but things could have changed between the 70s and 90s.

Overall, I really enjoyed this extra glimpse into the universe so many of us spent hours and hours considering many years ago. It brought back many memories and I'm sure I'll have more to say as I re-watch and/or read what others have to say. If you want to read some of the more spoilery things, you can go to The Chase Lounge, but I will say this here on my own platform...

 

AND YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED...

 

It turns out is was Junior that called the hit on Dickie! I would have never guessed that even if it fits his personality in every way. So good on ye there, Chase. An inspired choice, especially since he puts out a hit on his own nephew many years later (a failed one, but "cunnilingus and psychiatry brought us to this!") 

So for this review, these are my two boxes of ziti. A good movie, but not great. Certainly worth my watch. That is all.