Oh, if only I knew

Zuerst: The University of East Dakota Drivers Education at Fargo. Saw that university name on a chat, as part of a question about the Minnesota Gophers. Beats "East Jesus Bible College" or somesuch. Probably the best cupcake u. name of all time

---

College Football: I just have one thought. Why the hell is there a game (ECU-Houston) on tonight? (I know, I know...money...*sigh*). They need to stick to Saturdays.

---

Pro Football: The Bears didn't come back. I said that I wouldn't do analysis, and I won't.

---

TMQ: TMQ mentioned, under the Obscure College Score of the Week, or the Bonus OCSotW, or one of those features, mentioned that Liberty got hammered by Youngstown St. No problems yet. TMQ went on to mention that Liberty, the university associated with Jerry Falwell, was located in Lynchburg, Tenn. Umm...no. Being a Virginian, I can tell you that Liberty is located about 90 miles east of where I sit, typing this blog. Being an aficianado of bourbon (or imitations), I can tell you that Jack Daniels Tennessee Whiskey (or Jack, or JD for short) is distilled in Lynchburg, Tennessee (in Moore County which, incidentally, is dry; you have to go over the county line to purchase any alcohol). Bourbon is so named after the region in Kentucky in which it's produced; namely, in and around Bourbon Co., Kentucky (they are not so named after the French royal family of the 17th and 18th centuries, as I had thought some time ago). Imitations can be made elsewhere (such as in central Tennessee), but they're not, in the strict sense, bourbon. Something tells me that Liberty U. doesn't approve of the consumption of JD. Maybe it was meant to be ironic.

Something else; TMQ mentioned, whilst talking about Liberty, that they were promoting the "2002-2003 Liberty University Jeep Giveaway!" on their page. Apparently he didn't click the link. Other than the fact that it's the 2003-4 school year (which they correctly note on the contest page), there's the fact that the contest is only open to 15-20 year olds (i.e. prospective students). The problem I have with this is that 15-20 year olds are the people most poorly suited to drive SUVs. The fact of the matter is that SUVs aren't exactly safe, primarily because of their high centre of gravity; this leads to rollovers. I understand the demand for SUVs, and, to be honest, wouldn't mind one myself. But teenagers don't have the requisite experience to safely drive one of them. Were I ever to have children, the last thing I would want them to drive is an SUV. It's nice to have in a head-to-head collision with another car, because of the weight and bulk of the thing. However, the weight and bulk, along with said centre of gravity, makes the SUV

• more difficult to stop;


• more liable to roll over;


• ineconomical with fuel use;


• generally harder to control.

You'll note that I don't stand here and deny people their right to drive them, or of the automakers their right to sell them.

---

Baseball: According to Vegas Club Online Sportsbook, the odds for a Cubs-Red Sox series is 25/4, or a little more than 6/1 (each 5/2 to win their respective pennants). The longshots in each league to win their pennants are Minnesota and Florida (each 9/2, making the odds of a Twins-Marlins series 81/4, or about 20/1). The favourites appear to be the Yanks (6/5) and San Francisco (7/5). The remaining 2 teams still alive are Atlanta (2/1 for the flag) and Oalkand (13/5 for the flag). The Yanks are the favourite to win the series, getting 14/5 odds.

And, apparently, these are current (about 22.00 EDT, 30Sep03); I guess the Twins win tonight dropped them from 5/6 odds for the pennant.

The Twins finally win one from the Yanks. First time all season. Probably the last; I think part of the reason they lost was the "distraction" of playing a matinee. I say "distraction" because Steinbrenner bitched and moaned about it. Not sure that happens again.

---

Zuletzt: What was Brenda Warner thinking? It's nice that she wants to stick up for Kurt, but shut up. Your comments are nothing but a distraction to your husband's team. And what's this "we'll play elsewhere" crap? Since when did you suit up?

More later - R.

Zuerst: Insomnia sucks. I can't remember the last time I got a really good night's sleep. In any case, I'm awake (and thinking of personal issues)...which isn't really good news for you, the reader, because I'm gonna air some of them out. And if you're linguistically squeamish, or prudish (i.e. agree with the FCC that various words are not for public consumption), then turn back now. You've been warned.

Stream of consciousness: Well, not really. I just posted a quick hitter here; sometimes I'm not sure what to do with nouns which represent abstract ideas. I'm more the concrete thinker type. Whatever else it is, it's a good exercise of mental agility. I like to think that I am fairly intelligent even if I'm positive that I have NO idea how to exercise said intelligence, or help transform it into wisdom. To tell the truth, I'm not sure how intelligent I am; it may be, after all, that I'm merely knowledgeable, rather than intelligent, and that intelligence requires an ability to analyse. Whether I am unable to analyse, or just insecure enough that I'm afraid that my analysis will be laughed out the room, I don't know. Maybe a little of both.

In any case, I'm here, can't sleep, and thinking about various fuckups that I've committed over the course of my life, and especially in the last 5 years. Well, that's most of the time for me, except when I'm (a) absorbing new knowledge or (b) disseminating my sophomoric analysis. Over the last 3 days or so, I've become obsessed with the lady that I took to homecoming my senior year of high school. I'm equally obsessed with how royally I fucked that particular situation up. Suffice it to say that I had (a) made no plans (although was saved by a group of her friends) and (b) ignored her at said homecoming...what a cockup that was. I've also thought about a personal apology. The next time I see her, I will apologise. Question is, when will that be? At some HS football game, were I to make it back to Ffx. Co.? At the 10th anniv. class reunion in a couple of years? Who knows? In any case, if my memory hasn't failed me, she's probably a lot more attractive than I remember her being. Social retard that I was (and, to be honest, probably still am), I didn't find her unattractive, but I wasn't a big fan of the braces she wore, and remember thoughts from time to time that if she didn't have braces, she'd be pretty good looking. And it's not like I had never worn braces. I had mine taken off 2 years previously. Her locker was a few feet from mine, separated by a couple of others. It probably didn't help her cause that, next to my locker on the other side (to my left; my date was the 3rd locker to my right) was an absolutely gorgeous redhead. Missed opportunities. Anyway, back to the lady who accompanied me on my date. I did a google search for her, and found a bunch of stuff from a couple of years ago, and a couple of fantasy stories that she had written. Romantic stuff, to boot. I did a search on my own name, and found:

• A linebacker at BYU


• A freshman QB at Oregon St., who I had heard of vaguely when folks talked about recruiting; he was a highly rated prospect, evidently


• A high school hockey player in suburban Philadelphia


• A coach/administrator of some Minnesota amateur athletic assn.


• An amateur golfer in Minnesota


• A race car driver (I didn't even look if it was a stock car, or one of those goofy F1/Cart/IRL things)


• A competitive fisher (yes, a fisher)


• And me (about 3 or 4 pages in)

Considering that I've fucked up my post-high school life (which may be a future entry, should I ever choose to share that with my loyal readership), it's always good to see that folks with whom I share a name are doing well. Maybe I should get off my duff and pull myself up to their level, rather than just being idly envious.

Enough, I'm going to try to get a couple hours more sleep. Ryan

Zuerst: Listening to MNF, called by Marv Albert and Boomer Esiason. Both (and sideline reporter Bonnie Bernstein) have Washington connections. Boomer and Bonnie are alumni of Maryland. Marv's son Kenny called Caps games on the TV for Home Team Sports, since purchased by Comcast, back in the days when the Caps would only televise about 40 or 50 games locally. And Marv's bizarre sexual incident happened while he was in town to call a Wizards game for NBC, in a hotel in Arlington.

---

Pro Football: I'm 10-3, and picked the Packers to win the game tonight. Thoughts:

• So here's my question: Does Minnesota's ass kicking of San Fran say more of Minnesota or of San Fran?


• Nice to see that David Carr can lead a comeback, even if it is against Jacksonville.


• I think that the Ol' Ball Coach needs to work on discipline. All these penalties!


• As an aside, Ahman Green just plunged in from 6 yds out for his second touchdown of the 1st quarter. This following a blocked punt. 17-0, Pack. Methinks I'll have 11 wins on the week by midnight or 1AM EDT.


• Well, I was right for a half. But Tennessee showed what it was made of in the 2nd half, though. 20-0. Ye gods.


• You don't suppose that Baltimore, like Chicago, will work on special teams?


• Maybe Philly isn't as bad as I thought, and maybe Buffalo isn't invincible at home.


• Signs of life for Chicago. Brett Favre was just intercepted. If the Bears win, though, I'll eat my DVD remote.


• I guess there was a reason that Michael (no, not Mike) Vick was taken first overall, and Doug Johnson wasn't. Not to mention that Carolina's defence is something special. I heard that the early line is that Carolina is favoured by 6 1/2 over New Orleans (more on the Aints later).


• I'm happy for Marvin Lewis, but does anyone outside Ohio care?


• Nice to know that San Diego can blow leads with the best of them. Before this season, Marty Schottenheimer always did well early in the season. His players don't show the stress of the hard training camps until December. Hate to think what December's gonna be like, playing horribly and tired.


• Put Detroit on the list to practice special teams. And always good to know who to call if you need a good chop block.


• Left 4 Dead. 4th and Wrong. I liked the headline (I think it was the Post, but I'm not really sure...it's been 2 weeks) when Dallas beat the Giants more: "Tuna Surprise". And, since you asked, no, the New York media aren't putting any pressure on Herm Edwards. Or Terry Bradway. As an afterthought, here's the recap.


• Peyton Manning comes home, and promptly conquers the town - or at least the team. Nice way to repay a team that you grew up with, Peyton. And way to get smacked in the mouth on national TV, Aints.


• Final thought: Da Bears have pulled to within 14. Papa Joe occasionally (as often as he can) plays a polka: "Da Bears Still Suck". Unsurprisingly, everyone singing (men and women) sound like they're from Wisconsin. And, damn his eyes, it's stuck in my head. Just as I finished this thought, William Henderson caught a Brett Favre touchdown pass. So the margin is 21. And the Bears Still Suck.

---

College Football: Never gave my top ten.

1. Oklahoma
2. Miami
3. Va Tech
4. Ohio St
5. Florida St
6. Arkansas
7. LSU
8. Tennessee
9. Washington St
10. Nebraska

---

Politics: Was cruising the 'net, and saw this. I figured, hell with it, and included folks who aren't in a major party, haven't yet declared, and have withdrawn. I figured that I wanted a narrower list, I could filter the list manually. My Results:

1. Libertarian Candidate (100%)
2. Bush, George W. - US President (90%)
3. Buchanan, Patrick J. – Reform/Republican (73%)
4. Bayh, Senator Evan, IN - Democrat (65%)
5. Daschle, Senate Minority Leader Tom, SD - Democrat (65%)
6. Edwards, Senator John, NC - Democrat (63%)
7. Clinton, Senator Hillary Rodham, NY - Democrat (56%)
8. McCain, Senator John, AZ- Republican (56%)
9. Lieberman Senator Joe CT - Democrat (55%)
10. Feingold, Senator Russ, WI - Democrat (54%)
11. Feinstein, Senator Dianne, CA - Democrat (54%)
12. Kerry, Senator John, MA - Democrat (54%)
13. Kucinich, Cong. Dennis, OH - Democrat (54%)
14. Gephardt, Cong. Dick, MO - Democrat (53%)
15. Leahy, Patrick Senator, Vermont - Democrat (53%)
16. Phillips, Howard - Constitution (52%)
17. Dodd, Senator Chris, CT - Democrat (49%)
18. Dean, Gov. Howard, VT - Democrat (48%)
19. Biden, Senator Joe, DE - Democrat (48%)
20. Graham, Senator Bob, FL - Democrat (45%)
21. Kaptur, Cong. Marcy, OH - Democrat (43%)
22. Jackson, Cong. Jesse Jr., IL - Democrat (42%)
23. Sharpton, Reverend Al - Democrat (39%)
24. Green Party Candidate (35%)
25. Moseley-Braun, Former Senator Carol IL - Democrat (34%)
26. LaRouche, Lyndon H. Jr. - Democrat (34%)
27. Socialist Candidate (31%)
28. Bradley, Former Senator Bill NJ - Democrat (28%)
29. Hagelin, John - Natural Law (25%)
30. Clark, Retired Army General Wesley K "Wes" Arkansas - Democrat (24%)
31. Gore, Former Vice-President Al - Democrat (15%)
32. Vilsack, Governor. Tom IA - Democrat (13%)
33. Hart, Former Senator Gary, CO - Democrat (4%)

Suffice it to say that I'm surprised about the relatively strong showing by Hillary in my poll. Didn't think that I was that socialist. Guess that there have to be a few Democrats with whom I have a few policy agreements.

---

More later. The Packers-Bears game just went to half. Barring a huge comeback, I wlll forego analysis. Here's the recap. As a caveat, the recap won't be ready until well after the game.

Zuerst: Happy birthday, Angela. Welcome to geezerhood (luckily, I don't join that club for another few years).

---

College Football: Thoughts on my picks:

• I guess I was right about the Minnesota-PSU and UF-UK parallels. Both ranked road teams beat both unranked home teams by small margins. And I was wrong about both. Whoops. If Zook - and maybe this criticism is misplaced; perhaps I should say Zaunbrechner - got the offensive play-calling straight, perhaps this could be a really good team. Even though Zook has shown himself to be a mediocre game coach, the talent he recruits is absolutely amazing; when they play a vertical passing game (like in the second half at UK, or whenever they fall 3 touchdowns down) they do fairly well; when they dink and dunk and play a conservative game plan, they end up losing (the 2nd half of the Miami game, for example). If the coaching staff can figure out how to manage a game, and use the talent that they recruit, they'll end up being a very good team.



• I also lost the Texas A&M game. Allowing 21 points in the 3rd quarter (to an explosive Pitt team) will do that.



• I won Washington St and Va Tech. Wash St forced nine turnovers. Nine! I don't care who you are, if you turn the ball over 9 times, you're gonna lose. Come to think of it, I'm no college football historian, but I can't remember ever hearing of a team turning the ball over 9 times.



• I bet that Va Tech's defense was exhausted. I can't remember the last time I saw that a team had held the ball for more than 40 minutes. UConn's 2 touchdown drives totaled 23 plays for 177 yards. Tech had a defensive touchdown (Int return) 84 yds; 2 special teams tds (blocked punt and kickoff return) totaling 107 yards; 3 offensive touchdown drives totaling 6 plays for 177 yds; 2 field goals, the drives to get which totaled 12 plays for 42 yards. So Tech did what it's done consistently since the days of Michael Vick: struck quickly. Their defense, though, allowed long drives. If this happens against Pitt or Miami, expect them to lose. This is, in my mind, the primary reason that they lost to Pitt, allowing 275 rushing yds in the process. They scored quickly, but then allowed Pitt to come back on long drives, and eventually tired out.

---

Other thoughts:

• 6 more teams fall from the ranks from the undefeateds.
  
  • Cincinnati: Rivalry games are always intense. Miami of Ohio had the home crowd, and the best QB in the game.
  
  
  • Iowa: Maybe Michigan State's loss to Louisiana Tech was a fluke. It didn't hurt that they were at home. And Iowa has games against Michigan and at Ohio State looming.
  
  
  • Missouri: Maybe I was wrong to call (by inference) Kansas "football hell" in my entry where I busted on K-State. Kansas beat the crap out of Mizzou. Neither team will win the division, but UNLV's loss to Kansas doesn't look nearly as bad these days.
  
  
  • Oregon: See above. The St. Louis Rams would have lost if they'd committed 9 turnovers against Wazzu.
  
  
  • Stanford: Until about Thursday or so, I didn't know that Stanford was undefeated. Perhaps Ty should have stayed, eh? And they lost to a ranked Washington team. Probably the least shocking of these 6 results.
  
  
  • Southern Cal: They played close against Cal last year, winning 30-28. That was their last win of less than double digits. They played close again this year, and it cost them. SC was favoured by 13 on Friday; Kevin Wheeler, among others, asked why the spread was so low. Evidently Jeff Tedford's Cal team matches up well with Pete Carroll's SC team. And, to be fair, I would have taken SC and laid the points.


• ...which leaves 14 undefeated teams in the ranks of Division 1-A.
  
  • Florida State: Last loss was against Georgia in the Sugar Bowl...next big test is Miami, 11 October in Tallahassee.
  
  
  • Miami: Last loss was against Ohio St. in the Fiesta Bowl...next big test is at Florida State, 11 October. As an aside, Miami plays 3 of the remaining undefeateds (vs. Tennessee, at Va Tech).
  
  
  • Digression: Listening to CBS Radio's coverage of Indy vs. New Orleans, I just heard a commercial for NFL Kickoff 2002, from Washington, DC. Now, I'm a big fan of the National Mall (though not of Pepsi Vanilla or Pepsi in general), but why are they playing this commercial more than 3 weeks after the fact?
  
  
  • Back to undefeateds. Va Tech last lost to Miami last December. Next big test: Miami, 1 November in Blacksburg. They follow that up with a trip to Pittsburgh the next weekend.
  
  
  • Minnesota: Last lost to Wisconsin last November. Next big test: 10 October, against Michigan in Minneapolis. They don't face Ohio State this year.
  
  
  • Speaking of...Ohio St: Last lost in the January 2002 Outback Bowl to South Carolina. Next big test, at Wisconsin 11 Oct. They also have games against Iowa, Michigan St. and at Michigan.
  
  
  • Nebraska: Last lost in the Independence Bowl to Ole Miss. Next big test is at Texas, 1 Nov. Smaller tests in October: At Mizzou (11th) and home against Texas A&M (18th).
  
  
  • Oklahoma: Last lost last November to Okla. St. Next big test: 11 Oct, against Texas in Dallas. Though, given how poorly Mack Brown has coached big games, is it really? If it isn't, then the next test is 1 Nov, against Ok. St in Norman. Oklahoma hasn't won against Ok. State in 3 years.
  
  
  • Texas Christian: Last lost to ECU last November. Next big test is 4 November, against Louisville in Ft. Worth.
  
  
  • Louisville: Last lost to Marshall in the Motor City Bowl. Next big test is 4 Nov, at TCU.
  
  
  • Northern Illinois: Last lost to Toledo last November. Next big test is 25 Oct, at Bowling Green.
  
  
  • Air Force: Last lost to Va Tech in the San Francisco Bowl. Next big test is 4 Oct, against Navy in Landover, Md. Service academy rivalries are always intense, and always tests. The next big test following that is 16 Oct, at Colorado St.
  
  
  • Tennessee: last lost to Maryland in the Peach Bowl. Next big test is 11 Oct, against Georgia in Knoxville.
  
  
  • Arkansas: Last lost to Minnesota in the Music City Bowl. Next big test: vs. Florida, 18 Oct in Fayetteville.
  
  
  • Louisiana St: Last lost to Texas in the Cotton Bowl. Next big test is 11 Oct, vs. Florida in Baton Rouge (at night). Should LSU win, the game against Arkansas should decide the West's representative in the SEC Championship.


• Toledo builds on a big win against Pitt by...getting smacked in the mouth at Syracuse.


• I wonder what the over-under is on how many of the remaining games Notre Dame wins. Can it be more than 3?


• 3/9, 5/8, 7/11, 8/12, 6/10, 4/12. These are the ratios of number of teams with 1 loss or fewer to total number of teams in each BCS conference. The only conferences which have more than 4 teams with more than 1 loss are the two conferences deepest into conference play: the ACC and SEC.

---

Will dissect my pro picks tomorrow. Ryan.

Zuerst: Did you see this? "Big Government" are bad words, especially at the national level. The fact of the matter is that government stifles growth. She points out, correctly, that many functions of government are taken for granted by Americans, including FEMA, Social Security, Medicare, CDC-P, and functions more local by nature such as firefighting, police, and education. I will concede that certain services - not necessarily those listed above - are necessary. However, the problem with big federal government, though, is that government can easily abuse people's rights, such as through Eminent Domain; moreover, the colonists came over from England to escape the oppression of big central government, or of government that would do too much. The fact of the matter is that local government is more accountable than is central government; if I don't believe that government should steal my money for Medicare, for example, it is much easier to vote out a county board of supervisors were this proposed on a local level than it is to vote out congressmen and senators who pay for this boondoggle year after year.

She makes the nonsensical statement that "These are not entitlement programs. These are not excesses." Huh? Of course these are entitlements. Moreover, I happen to believe they are excesses. The U.S. Department of Education, for example, has never educated one single child. And how, exactly, is education free? Last I checked, it was paid for primarily by property taxes, and other local taxes. And, lest we forget, there were no government schools until the 1830s; schools competed with other schools; those that did the best job educating the children, and those which offered the best value for the education dollar, were the ones that got the students; that is, the students who were not homeschooled. And, in the last 40 years, since the explosion of government under President Johnson, poverty has increased - especially in urban areas, crime has had an attendant increase, the American education system - once regarded as the best in the world - has plummeted in its goal of educating children.

The federal government has abused its powers since the administration of Woodrow Wilson, but that abuse kicked into high gear under the administration of F.D. Roosevelt, and the abuse turned on the afterburners/turbochargers/etc. under the administration of L.B. Johnson. Wilson, a central government hawk, forced an amendment through which allowed a tax on incomes; this was for the sole purpose of raising revenue so that government could be expanded. This was followed by the "New Deal", under which FDR expanded the central government to well-beyond-unconstitutional proportions by blackmailing the Supreme Court into going along. Johnson decided that even this wasn't enough, and expanded further. Why, you ask? To get the votes of those dependent upon the expansion. Power. Simple as that.

Social Security, since she brought it up, is nothing more than a Ponzi scheme. Why should I be forced to contribute to a program whose solvency I don't believe in, and when I could get a much better return on investment elsewhere? My father had said, before any of his children (my 2 siblings and me) had started working, that he would be willing to pay social security premiums (they are properly premiums, not taxes, since social security is nominally insurance; however) for the rest of his life if we didn't have to do so. At this point, I feel the same way about any future children that I may have. One of these days, the system is going to collapse. And it ain't gonna be pretty, especially that we'll have to pay for it.

I'll grant that there must exist some government. Certainly, locally, first responders and law enforcement officials need our support. And, certainly we need to invest in infrastructure, such as roads. And, should some things affect interstate commerce (such as the interstate highway system) the federal government should regulate (and, perhaps, help in paying for it). However, the federal government's place is in foreign relations, and to resolve interstate disputes. They have no place owning such land that they will not use in conjuction with their constitutional duties (I am thinking here of national parks and national forests specifically); the only domestic actions that the central government should take involve:

• regulation of interstate commerce


• resolution of interstate disuptes


• regulation of lower governments, to make sure that the citizens' rights are not abused or infringed.

That's it. That's the list. It has no business spending money to educate students; those decisions are best left to governments closer to each child; that is to say, local government. The federal government has no business subsidizing medical care. And under no circumstances does the federal government have any business administering a financial endeavour that would land a private adminstrator of such a program in jail on charges of fraud. The issue is not a blind hatred of government, but government's best function is to make certain that citizens don't violate each other's rights, not to violate the rights of certain citizens to buy the votes of others.

I apologise for the diarrhea of the keyboard. I guess that Ms. Streisand has no problem with the government robbing Peter to pay Paul. I do. She should just shut up and stick to singing.

---

Pro Football: Just some thoughts on my picks:

• Jacksonville sucks. Houston isn't much better. But the game is at Houston, so I figure that gives Houston the edge.


• I figure that Minnesota will win against San Fran, if only because the game is in Minneapolis. If Minnesota wins, perhaps they prove that they are legitimate. Their wins thus far haven't done so, though.


• Fine, Arizona beat Green Bay. Does that mean I should pick them? Nope.


• Patrick Ramsey has passed for close to 700 yards the last 2 games. Add to this a New England defence which is banged up, and maybe, just maybe, Washington doesn't fall far behind.


• I'm picking Pittsburgh solely because they're at home. Tennessee is good, Pittsburgh is good, but the game is at the Pickle.


• Baltimore got thrashed in week 1 against Pittsburgh. Kansas City beat Pittsburgh a couple of weeks ago. I can't see how KC loses this game, especially since Baltimore is one-dimensional offensively.


• Buffalo has kicked everyone's asses at home. Philadelphia has scored, to date, 10 points all season.


• Atlanta is still without Michael Vick.


• Since I don't live in Ohio, nor do I have Ohio roots, I don't really care about the Cleveland-Cincinnati game.


• San Diego sucks. Oakland hasn't played well, but San Diego sucks. I don't think you can say it enough. San Diego sucks.


• How could I pick Detroit to beat Denver? Denver laid an ass-kicking on Oakland, while Detroit has lost its last 2 to division rivals. And the game is in Denver.


• The Tuna beat a Giants team which is better than this Jets team. And Chad isn't back.


• Indy is good. New Orleans isn't, especially. Doesn't matter that the game is in New Orleans.


• Chicago is Green Bay's bitch. Chicago may be everyone's bitch, this season (except maybe San Diego).

---

More tomorrow...will comment on my college picks - R.

Zuerst: Folks who play fantasy leagues are losers. The only time that the word "fantasy" should be invoked is when you're discussing Nicole Kidman or someone similarly beautiful.

---

Pro Football: I'll just say this about the Maurice Clarett situation: Maurice, if you want to get your jack, go to Canada. The NFL has (or should have) every right to limit their pool of employment. And what does it say about Clarett's case that the union isn't supporting him. Suffice it to say that I agree with TMQ; opening the draft will undermine the teaching of fundamentals. Because of this, if the draft is opened to anyone, you'll have a bunch of impressionable 18 and 19 year olds being advised by selfish agents who just want their money up front. And the NBA is fundamentally flawed; I enjoy watching college basketball, especially smaller colleges; these small colleges realise, even if they don't get the most talented prospects, that basketball is a team game.

Anyway, suffice it to say that I'm not a big Mo Clarett fan.

Will have thoughts on my picks tomorrow.

---

College Football: I saw this; I have no problem with Notre Dame joining the ACC; the only hangup that I see from the ACC's POV is geographic; South Bend is a long way from College Park, Miami and everywhere in between. And then I saw this. If this is true, what the hell is Swofford thinking? Since adding Miami and Va Tech was solely a football move (the conference doesn't need the help in basketball - which neither program brings in any case - and, to be honest, the non-revenue sports really don't matter since, at its base, this is about money), why would you delay Notre Dame's entry in the football conference? This doesn't solve the conference championship issue in the near term, and only leaves one more program to suckle at the ACC teat while suckling its own football teat on the side. Personally, were I ACC commissioner, I would bring in one of the following (and, to note, any university I brought in would be brought in as a full ACC member immediately):

• South Carolina:
  
  
  • Pros: This is an obvious geographic fit; they have rivals in Clemson and Ga Tech, and were a charter member of the ACC.
  
  
  • Cons: Their breakup with the ACC was a bit acrimonious, if I understand the information I have correctly, involving the fact that USC didn't want to raise academic standards beyond NCAA standards, but were outvoted by the others. Moreover, they're in the SEC (i.e. already have a championship game) and have denied interest in rejoining the ACC.


• West Virginia:
  
  
  • Pros: By this point, you've noticed that all my choices so far are in (or very near) the geographic footprint of the existing members. They also have two big rivals, and a big potential rival in Maryland, Va Tech and (potentially) U.Va.
  
  
  • Cons: I am not sure of their academic reputation; if it is not up to the standards of the other schools (and apparently FSU and Clemson are held in higher regard than I thought, so there is something to this argument) then they don't really belong. Moreover, WVU's biggest rival is Pittsburgh.


• Florida:
  
  
  • Pros: Again, this is an obvious geographic fit; moreover, they, too have rivals in the ACC, in Miami and FSU. Their athletic program has a tradition of excellence.
  
  
  • Cons: Florida is also in the SEC, has denied interest in joining the ACC (Tudor, or Doyel, or Barnhart, or one of those columnists from south of here suggested UF; I forget where I saw it), and several big rivalries in the SEC, having been in the SEC much longer than neophyte USC.


• Pittsburgh or Penn State: Both of these are northeastern schools. Moreover, taking them out of their area hurts recruiting; the prime example of this is Penn State. JoePa isn't getting his pick in Penna. and N.J. anymore because they play primarily midwestern teams. I'm sure that this factored into Kevin Jones' decision, being from Chester. I'm sure he'd rather play at Temple, and (not too far up the road) at Rutgers rather than at Minnesota or at Iowa. Likewise, I'm sure someone from Penna. or N.J. would rather play at Temple or Rutgers than play at FSU or Miami or Ga Tech. Note that these arguments also apply to Syracuse or (perhaps more relevantly) Boston College. So don't hold your breath.


• Notre Dame: Notre Dame has a lot of good things going for it. It is an excllent academic school; it has a fine football program, a good athletics program, and a national following. However, if they wish to keep their independence in football, playing a partial schedule for several years before fully joining, then they can keep their current affiliations, or join the Big Ten (note: were I the Big Ten, I would consider this deal, considering that UND is in the middle of that conference geographically). It isn't worth it to have a program which is, at a minimum, 500 miles from any current ACC program.


• UCF, USF, East Carolina, Louisville: None of these have the academic reputation on the level of the other ACC schools.


• Navy: Navy is a unique case, in that it is one of the few I-A schools which measure up academically, but does not put enough emphasis on intercollegiate athletics to compete, week in and week out, against the ACC. They also have a national following; their alumni are stationed all over the country, and around the world. Navy, I'm sure, would love to do this, if only because they welcome the opportunity to measure themselves against the best. Don Devoe has pushed to enter the Big East for years. However, Navy just isn't at the same athletically as the other conference members. A similar argument could be made against Army (or Air Force), with the inclusion of the "geographic footprint" argument.

---

Anyway, on to my previews for the weekend (and, by the way, did anyone else expect Nebraska to kick Southern Miss' ass? USM lost to Cal, themselves a 2-3 team.):

• Virginia Tech beats UConn. Connecticut is a good team which thumped Indiana, but Va Tech always does well in September, especially at Lane.


• Texas A&M beats Pitt. Between the fact that Pitt is overrated, A&M played Tech a lot tougher than the final score indicated, and the game is at Kyle Field, I like A&M to upset Pitt. If the Aggies can contain Larry Fitzgerald, this should be a win for the Ags. Gig 'em Aggies!


• Washington State still wants to prove that the collapse at Notre Dame was a fluke, and beats Oregon. Oregon has a letdown after beating a very good Michigan team last week.


• Penn State played Nebraska close a couple of weeks ago in Lincoln. On the other hand, why is Minnesota ranked? They've beaten Tulsa, Troy State, Ohio and La.-Lafayette. Penn St. will look to prove that the BC game, and Minnesota, are flukes.


• Kentucky-Florida reminds me of Penn St.-Minnesota. Florida has beaten San Jose St and Fla. A&M. Football powerhouses, to be sure. Plus the game is Lexington. This adds up to an "upset".

---

More tomorrow - R.

Zuerst: If you look at my 7 Sep archive, you'll know how I feel about socialism. Suffice it to say that I find it appalling that teenagers are spouting something akin to the socialist line "From each according to ability, to each according to need". A caller on the Papa Joe Chevalier Show spoke of government's responsibility to care for everyone; this was on "Bite Me Wednesday", and the point of the call was to tell Papa Joe to "Bite Me" for Papa's supposed anti-Canadian bias. I felt the need to call in and vent at those people who put these ridiculous notions in their heads, and to vent at the idea that it's okay to steal. Forced charity is, after all, theft by another name. Plus, while on hold, I heard some loser closet Cowboys fan bash us Redskins fans. I felt the need to get my licks in concerning him, too.

---

Politics: If this isn't just some campaign bull, then perhaps I'd have to give my endorsement to Arnold. After all, if he wishes to "terminate taxes", then I would have to consider him more seriously than I had before; suffice it to say that I feel obligated to endorse Tom McClintock; however, if he is unelectable, I can in good conscience support Arnold, given his campaign promise. And here's my reaction to those people who call Ariana Huffington "conservative": You're joking, right? Once upon a time, she was, but she has since converted to populism or outright socialism; she doesn't seem to believe in capping spending, but rather raising taxes. Bleah.

According to the BBC and the New York Times, the draft report by David Kay contains no proof of WMD in Iraq. However, the report does, apparently, cite evidence of precursors and dual-use equipment that would, possibly, suggest WMD programmes in Iraq. A couple of observations: If Saddam had rid himself of such weapons, then why would he not call for inspectors in Iraq to prove the same? Why would he not, in the first report by his government to the various UN agencies, explain what had happened to them since 1998? Were I a betting man, my money would be on the fact that such weapons have been moved to Syria. Both the Assads and the Husseins, after all, head(ed) Ba'athist (something between Nazism and Stalinism) regimes; that Syria is sending terrorists across the border to combat Americans suggests, to me, that Syria and Iraq are (or were, until the change of government) allies against the United States, or more broadly, western civilisation. This operation was, after all, a very telegraphed punch. Saddam knew that we were going to enter the country well before it happened, and could have disposed his weapons accordingly.

Zuerst: Thank goodness we only have bees. Kyrgyzstan has rats. Gotta love genetic engineering and crossbreeding, eh?

---

Pro Football: Listening to the Raiders-Broncos game. Was 7-6 on yesterday's games. Thoughts:

• Guess I should have gone with my head rather than my gut in the Tennessee game.


• How the heck does Green Bay lose to Arizona; since Detroit beat them in week 1, how does anyone lose to Arizona?


• Guess I should have picked Seattle. Don't know that I'll pick St. L. anytime soon, considering that Marshall Faulk broke his hand. Actually, I lied. St. L. gets Arizona in St. L. next Sunday.


• Minnesota has gone 3-0, beating teams with a combined record of 2-6 (or 2-3 against teams other than Minnesota.) The three other teams in the NFC North have gone 0-3 against Minn., 1-1 against Ariz., 0-1 against SF, and GB beat Detroit. Minnesota gets a test as they host San Fran next weekend.


• Then again, San Fran may not be as big a test as previously thought. How do they get punked by Cleveland at home?


• The tale of two halves. If the 'Skins can get their act together before the game, maybe they could do some damage, predictions notwithstanding. They're making great halftime adjustments. Though, admittedly, they aren't nearly as good as the 1991 squad.


• How is it that two professional teams combine for 32 penalties for 266 yards and 7 first downs by penalty?


• Until their last drive, Buffalo had fewer than 100 offensive yards. For that matter, until their last drive, they had given up more yards because of penalties than they had gained with the offense.

---

Off...more later.

Zuerst: Did you see this? What a mess. Maybe the teams can rename themselves the Bloods and Crips. Or the Jets and the Sharks. Or the Montagues and Capulets.

---

College Football: Michigan...goes down. Georgia...goes down. Florida...goes down in the Swamp. Went 2-3 this week (Va Tech and Iowa). Thoughts:

• You don't suppose that Michigan - and for that matter Oregon - will work on punt/kick protection this week?


• LSU beat a banged up Georgia team. Add to this the fact that Ga's kicker was 1 for 4 on field goals, and Georgia could have pulled out the win. Not as impressive as you might think.


• One reason, two words, for the Florida loss: Ron Zook. The way he coached the end of the first half was very Fassel-esque. Add to this the fact that he almost seems scared of opening the offense up, and you get, well, a home loss to the biggest conference rival.


• Surprise, surprise. The team which couldn't beat Utah State by more than 10 at home got their asses handed to them on the road. I'm shocked, shocked!


• How about the MAC? As much as I hate Ohio State (the goddamn insufferable fans, especially), the 7 point win against Bowling Green didn't look quite as bad by the end of the night.


• Does this mean that, over the next year or two, we'll hear things like "Wow, they had the stones to schedule a MAC team?"


• HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! That's the sound of me laughing at the Mildcats. Now the only way they get a BCS bid is to win the conference. Considering the North is so weak, I don't doubt that they'll win the division, but they'll have to play, more than likely, Oklahoma to go to the Fiesta Bowl. Enjoy the Holiday Bowl, guys.


• Evidently Pitt's secondary is weak. Toledo's starting QB Bruce Gradkowski, who had started only 3 games previously, threw for 461 yards and 3 tds. Reggie McNeal can be mighty dangerous, and A&M will be at home against Pitt this weekend, not away. This may be closer than the line.


• Keeping with the special teams theme, you don't suppose that UCLA will work on punt coverage this week? Antonio Perkins had 277 yards and 3 touchdowns on 7 punt returns.


• I found this while looking for the team to whom K-State lost their last non-conference home game. "A Decade of Dominance"? Give me a break. Had you played decent competition, you'd still share football hell with Kansas.


• K-State's last lost a non-conference home game to...Northern Illinois. That's right, the team that yesterday handed a non-conference home loss to Ala-damn-bama. Makes me laugh.

Because I don't feel like doing much more (my 'Skins are about to play) I'll leave you with my top 10 list:

1. Oklahoma


2. Miami


3. USC


4. Ohio State


5. Virginia Tech


6. Florida State


7. LSU


8. Georgia


9. Tennessee


10. Michigan

Will look at my NFL picks later. - Ryan.

Zuerst: 35-19. Not only did Tech win - and respond big when they needed to - they covered. I'm 1-0. Reggie McNeal looked like something else until Tech moved in and started putting pressure on him. But KJ looked damned good...188 yds and 3 TDs on 30 carries. Nice to know that Tech can run the ball.

---

The Friday Five:

1. Who is your favorite singer/musician? Why?

I'll expand this to include a band. I am a big fan of AC/DC. I enjoy listening to the raspy, up-tempo loud falsetto with a high energy level and which screams "PSYCHO!" Very entertaining to me.

2. What one singer/musician can you not stand? Why?

Any singer/songwriter/group younger than I am who sings some sappy, sentimental garbage about how "I was made for you" or "we were made for each other" or some other bullshit. Daniel Bedingfield comes to mind. It doesn't help that his voice isn't especially masculine.

3. If your favorite singer wasn't in the music business, do you think you would still like him/her as a person?

Probably, although I would have to meet them to be sure of it.

4. Have you been to any concerts? If yes, who put on the best show?

I've only been to a few concerts here locally, involving local bands. The music is normally good, even if it is loud enough to burst your eardrums.

5. What are your thoughts on downloading free music online vs. purchasing albums? Do you feel the RIAA is right in its pursuit to stop people from downloading free music?

I have downloaded free music off the internet, although it is not something that I have done in the last year. I can understand why it is illegal; music is the intellectual property of the musicians or, where they have contractually traded it for such things as studio time, production, exposure, etc., the studios. It is the right of the industry to charge whatever they wish for this music (and it's the music for which they charge; it takes somewhere between a nickel and a dime to produce a CD in mass production); likewise, it is the right of the consumer to purchase - or not - these media. The only CDs that I have bought in the last 2 years have been either (a) discounted significantly, so that the record store could get them off the shelves, or (b) filled with music significantly older than I am; that is, music which has withstood the test of time, and for which I am willing to pay significantly more than I am for modern trash.

Having said all that, I am not sure that the RIAA is going about this in the right way. What they should do is encourage their members (the studios) to institute legal file-sharing services on the internet, and to charge some fee per song therefor. The RIAA's approach is misguided because the technology is not going to disappear, much as they would like it to.

---

Pro Football Picks: You'll notice these games are straight up, not ATS. The more I think about it, the more it makes sense, considering that the spread exists solely for gambling purposes. Teams play to win straight up, not ATS. Some thoughts:

• I could change it, but sometimes I go with my gut; taking the Saints is one of those times, although intellectually I should change my pick; suffice it to say that I'm not a big fan of what Tennessee has done this year - they did, after all, get blown out by Indy.


• I picked the Pats because they're at home and because Vinny's still QB; the Jets coaching staff has no idea what to do with Vinny.


• Vick is still out, and Tampa is motivated after getting beaten by Carolina.


• I picked St. Louis solely because Seattle plays on turf. If Marc Bulger has as mediocre a game as he had against Frisco, Seattle wins.


• I can't imagine life is good in San Diego right now. I'm not quite as confident of this pick as I am of some others; Baltimore may very well have a letdown game, and San Diego does have Ladanian Tomlinson.


• The 'Skins haven't proven anything yet, having won both games against backup QBs. That said, the Giants played as uninspired as I've ever seen last Monday. Add to that the short week, and I think Washington wins, but part of that may be the fan in me wishing.


• Buffalo has played well in the first 2 games, but both were at home. I think it's close, but I think that Buffalo actually proves they belong.


• Home field advantage is felt nowhere more than in Denver. The fans love their team, but, additionally, the Broncos are accustomed to the high altitude.

---

College Football: Two SEC games top the slate. The game which has been, in the last decade or 15 years, the game in the conference, and the first matchup of top-10 teams in Death Valley in the last 16 years: respectively, Tennessee at Florida, and Georgia at LSU. Picks in bold.

• UF is just too fast, and The Swamp is, even in the Ron Zook era, The Swamp. Add to that the fact that I have never thought particularly highly of Casey Clausen. Perhaps UT's running game can show me that I'm wrong, but I think that UF will win a close one.


• Georgia has some injuries, sure, but their defense is very good; add to this the fact that Mark Richt was the architect of Bobby Bowden's offense down at FSU, and you have a formula for a Dawgs win.


• Iowa is playing at home against Arizona St. I can't say that I know too much about either program. So, since Iowa is ranked in the polls above ASU, and because the game is in Ames, I'll pick Iowa. Just remembered that ASU beat Utah St. by only 10. So, another reason to pick Iowa.


• Michigan goes out to Oregon. Michigan's defence hasn't been tested yet; Oregon's passing attack will test it, but Michigan will live or die on the legs of Chris Perry. If Perry does well (and no one's stopped him yet) Oregon goes down. If Oregon can force Navarre to pass, they have a very good chance to pull the upset.

More later - Ryan.

Zuerst: "You're getting soft. We need to bring you back to Chiberia" - Heard on The Papa Joe Chevalier Show on Sporting News Radio. Papa Joe is broadcasting from the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino in Las Vegas.

College Football: How is it that a little rain and a little wind threatens to stop a football game? Tech's favoured by 14 1/2. They always do well on Thursday nights, especially when big opponents come to town. Expect them to cover.

Pro Football: I went 7-8-1 ATS last week. Bleah. And the hated Cowgirls won. Double bleah. I can't argue with Mike Lupica. Not that the Giants winning would have been much better. But at least the Cowboys would have lost.

In related news, I noticed an error in yesterday's TMQ, specifically in the Good Seats Always Available!, below all those Stats of the week; he mentions that the Arizona Cardinals had 23,127 fans at Sunday's game against The Town That Would Not Tax Espresso; he went on to say that this meant that they committed one turnover for every 3,854 customers at the game. He then says " It is impossible to calculate how many points Arizona scored per customer, because in mathematics, you cannot divide by zero.", to which I respond (in TMQ style) "Aiiiiiiiyyyyyyeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!"

Whoops. Last I checked, you can divide zero by any non-zero number, with the result being, of course, zero; in this case, the number of points scored by the team from the Mojave is divided by the number of customers (23,127 according to the team; TMQ mentions that he thought the number was closer to 15,000). Whether the number of customers is closer to the team's count or TMQ's count, it is definitely non-zero. It is very possible to calculate the number of points scored by the Mojave per customer, and it is zero. Methinks he's trying to figure out - much like he did with the customer per turnover ratio - the number of customers per point scored. If this is the case, and it's just a misstatement, then his statement is valid and germane; you can't calculate the number of customers per point scored because you can't divide by zero.

Another case of "Their Pockets are Deep, Therefore They Must Be Culpable": I was trolling on Drudge and noticed this. It's good, I think, that these little punks are under indefinite detention; my question is why the suit isn't solely directed at them, or their family. It's not Sony's fault that these little punks popped off and started shooting at cars. It's not the fault of Rockstar Games. Who does this leave? Why, it leaves the kids! Who would've thought? And the family, possibly, for failing to instill the sanctity of life in these two little nitwits.

I'll leave you with this: What's the difference between a Cowboys fan and a cow? One smells bad and makes weird noises, and the other gives us dairy products. Also courtesy of Papa Joe.

I'll give you my other picks, and maybe another rant or two, tomorrow or Friday, although I'd bet Friday. I'll be busy tomorrow night watching the Texas A&M - Virginia Tech (Side note: These are the only two large civilian schools with a Corps of Cadets; that is to say, a military formation outside ROTC. One is Virginia Tech, the other is Texas A&M. Whichever team you root for tomorrow night, remember the graduates of both of these universities serving in our military, and indeed graduates of any university, or those who chose to serve instead of attending university, especially overseas. You can, if you so desire, thank them for their service here.)

Zuerst: What I'm going to show you requires Flash player, available here. It also requires about 5 minutes of time. Anyway, here exists a great primer in Libertarianism. I was tipped to it by Boortz, under Neal's Nuze.

Football, briefly: I'm 7-7-1 ATS in the pros this week, and have the Giants - 7 1/2 against Dallas tonight. The KCRG audio server is down, so I had to go off and find this. As I write, Quincy Carter runs into the end zone for the score. Shit. Will let you know how I do tomorrow when I write.

Miscellanea: Found this rather explicit blog whilst trolling the other day. Interesting, and to be honest, it was a turn on. I'm not especially sure whether this is welcome or unwelcome by the writer; whether she feels turned on, vindicated, violated, or some other emotion by my arousal. I am much too private a person to talk so frankly about my sex life; whether that is good, bad, or just is, I don't know; I would guess that she doesn't feel violated, in that she posted in such a public place. And I think that if her exhibitionism gets her off, more power to her.

I'm off. Didn't have too much to say today. -- Ryan

Zuerst: The internet may be useful and all, but I can't get the CBS radio feed of the NFL game tonight. Yeah, I'm lazy and don't feel like looking; I did find this, and I was able to listen to the 'Skins-Jets game last week, but they're broadcasting the A's-Angels game. Can't really blame them: early season NFL games are interesting to me, but late season baseball games affecting the race for the pennant certainly have their appeal. Sorry that got out of hand. Just had to vent.

Since it's the weekend...

College Football: I finish my commentary on coillege football this weekend by noting that Ohio St. probably got jobbed by dropping in the poll. Texas, on the other hand, deserved exactly what it got. I won't dignify UF and LSU's wins with comments. I won the ECU and Penn St. games, but lost on ASU (side note: if they only won by 10 against Utah St. at home, then they'll get smacked around when either USC or Washington St. plays 'em.) and FSU (I guess I underestimated Ga Tech's defence. Shame they folded in the last 5 minutes. So I finish 8-7, having not picked games on which there were no lines. Having said all I'm going to say, off to...

Pro Football: I had a losing record for the 1pm EST and 4pm EST games. I won on North Havana, VD Central, Cheesetown, The Only Place That Snows More Than Chicago, The City Of Sin Now That Las Vegas Is Run By The Corporations, and The City That Would Tax Espresso.

I lost on:

• Music City. Apparently their offense never found a rhythm.


• The Heart of the South. Apparently my taters had more heart, coming back from 17 down to win by 2.


• Steel City. Why don't you put some in your defence, Cowher?


• Strippertowne. Yes, I just called Tampa "Strippertowne". Apparently I badly underrated Caccalac's defence.


• The City Of Hate. I imagine that must be how it feels now that they've opened their crib with 2 bad losses.


• Tijuana's Northern Neighbour. Beuerlein threw for more than Joke the Choke. And San Diego sucks!


• No There There. Maybe the Queen City is on track to actually win more than 4 games sometime in the next decade.

By my mark, I'm 6-7-1 ATS (Arch City beat Bridge City by 3).

Programming Note: I doubt that I'll do more than 5 college and 5 pro games in the future. I'll devote future weekend blogs to other topics of note.

All I have for now. I'm exhausted from doing just about nothing over the course of the day. -- Ryan

Zuerst: I spend wayyyyyyy too much time with football; I don't even spend this much time watching hockey.

College Football: As I write this, I'm 3-3, and in the games currently being played, I think I'll end up 2-3. Bleah. Guess I wildly missed the mark (as did the bookmakers, it would seem) in the UNLV - Wisconsin game. Whoops. I hope Pitt comes out that flat against Tech when they visit in November. And Wake. Whoops. I guess I measured both Wake and Purdue wrongly. I guess that Wake may (or may not) be as good as initally thought. And Purdue, I guess, had to get it back after the abortion against Bowling Green. As I speak, a loss goes my way: Our Lady U. got hammered against the Big Ol' Rats of UM. Even though I lost that (and how!), I ain't complaining. I have family in suburban Detroit, and root for Michigan. I guess that Navarre and (especially) Chris Perry had something to prove to armchair coaches like me.

I just checked the scores, and with 11 in, I am 5-5, with a potential win at USC in the 4th q. (UH needs 18 to tie the line as I write). And I didn't bother to call the K-State game, or the Florida game, which is in the 2nd q. as I write. I picked up OU, which I thought I wasn't going to get, because Fresno just completely got their asses kicked. I'm guessing that it was OU's 2nd string defence on which Fresno scored 21 in the 4th q. The other loss on which I haven't commented is Georgia/USC. I ignored (utterly and completely) Mark Richt's offensive reputation, and I also called USC despite knowing that Lou's message of "we suck, we should be 4 td dogs" was undermined by the asskicking they laid on UVa last week. My bad. And I should have known better.

On to the wins. Actually, I'll let them speak for themselves, other than to say big ups to Washington State for coming back from last week and kicking Colorado's ass, and to ask the following question: Why did Chuck Amato not have Philip Rivers pass the damn ball in the 3rd OT, or at the least, have T.A. McLendon run the damn ball for more than that 4th down?. I lied. I want to say one thing about Texas: Maybe it wasn't all Chris Simms' fault. What big game has Texas won under Mack Brown? Chew on that. I'll make one more comment: I had written the Fresno St. game off in the 2nd q. when OU had a 31-0 lead (dark times!). Let that be a lesson. The game ain't over until the game is over (if anyone reading this doesn't groan and say duhhhhhhhhh then they just don't understand the concept of tautology. Anyway, enough of that. On to the pros. And remember that you're an idiot if you use my ill-informed intuitive picks, and that the picks are, in any case, for entertainment only.

Miami (-3) @ N.Y. Jets: Redemption games for both. But Miami is much more talented.

Cleveland (+2) @ Baltimore: I know that Baltimore looked like shit last week, but Kelly Holcomb's big numbers last year were against bad (such as Pittsburgh's) pass defences. Baltimore, though not as spectacular as they were once upon a time, still sports a good defence.

Tennessee (+1 1/2) @ Indianapolis: Tennessee beat a very good (if old) Oakland team. Indianapolis squeaked by (without scoring or allowing a TD) a decent Cleveland team. Add to that the fact that Tony Dungy just doesn't coach well in big games, and you get the fact that Tenn. will come out primed, and Indy won't.

Detroit (+7) @ Green Bay: How can I pick against (a decrepit) Brett Favre in Lambeau? And how can I pick Detroit to beat Green Bay?

Washington (+3) @ Atlanta: Washington struggled at home to beat a mediocre Jets team. Atlanta beat on the road a mediocre Dallas squad. Much as I like the 'skins, I can't say that I like their chances.

Buffalo (-3) @ Jacksonville: Jacksonville blew a lead to Carolina! Carolina! Buffalo delivered one of the bigger ass-kickings that I have seen in a while. You tell me who you'd pick.

Houston (+8 1/2) @ New Orleans: This is a lot like the Ga Tech - Fla St game, in that New Orleans is much more motivated and talented than Houston, who is still probably looking back at the Miami win.

San Francisco (+3) @ St. Louis: Yeah, I know, St. L. looked good in the preseason, but they looked like crap against the Giants, whereas Frisco looked very good against the Bears (I know, who doesn't?) I can't pick against Frisco, a good team in their own right, and St. L. having the distraction of a QB controversy.

Pittsburgh (+3 1/2) @ Kansas City: Pgh. looked good against Baltimore last week, I thought, and if they can stop Priest Holmes (my bet is yes), then they can win this outright.

Carolina (+9 1/2) @ Tampa Bay: Last week Tampa proved that they aren't messing around, where Carolina may well be caught looking back at their comeback.

Seattle (-5) @ Arizona: If I end up picking the Cardinals at all this year, I'll be surprised.

New England (+5) @ Philadelphia: This week Philly proves that last week is a fluke; they have the weapons to do so, helped along by the fact that New England dumped their defensive leader.

Denver (-3) @ San Diego: I know what you're thinking: San Diego sucks! Can't argue too much there, but Schottenheimer does well in the early season, and he'll look to prove that last week is a fluke. And I'm not sure that I can pick Joke the Choke Plummer. You can't place all the blame on his garbage career on the fact that he was in Arizona.

Cincinnati (+12 1/2) @ Oakland: Cincinnati isn't Tennessee. And if Cincy loses by 20 at home to Denver, then they'll get blown out in Oakland.

Chicago (+9) @ Minnesota: Minnesota won at Green Bay, which should be a confidence builder. And Chicago has Kordell Stewart which should be a confidence killer. As a side note, I'm sure that ESPN is thrilled they have (possibly) the worst team in the league playing in prime time.

Dallas (+7 1/2) @ N.Y. Giants: Dallas looked poor losing to a backup QB, and New York beat St. Louis. Add to this the distraction of Tuna coming back to Giants Stadium, and you have a formula for a big win.

Just noticed that I won the SC game by 9. Will look at the rest of my college picks, and my pro picks, tomorrow. -- Ryan.

Zuerst: Ich spreche nur ein Bisschen Deutsch. Not much, but I know phrases here and there. Just thought I'd let you know. And why I'm not titling this First things first: or somesuch.

Politically: Perhaps introduction is in order. Probably the best way to describe my political views is to say that they are just to the right of libertarianism. I favour local governance, rather than national governance; the national government has, unless my interpretation of the Constitution is completely wrong, usurped several powers not enumerated and has eroded several liberties. Perhaps you're thinking, given the introduction, that I'm a Bush basher. I'm not, but I have my quarrels with him - primarily with his expansion of social programs like the prescription drug benefit, or Ted Kennedy's education bill, or, to hear Kennedy and other statists, "downpayment". The best part of this is that this expansion of central government started not only before I was born, not only before my parents were born, but before my grandparents were born. The worst amendment to our constitution was the 16th. It is the amendment that provides for the taxation of income: this is a huge source of revenue to the federal government; deny this and federal government is smaller out of necessity. Where, for example, does the Constitution mention education? How about the environment? What does our Constitution say about gun control? Why, then, are there these vast federal bureaucracies - created by federal laws - which exist to enforce other federal laws regarding these topics? Moreover, what business does a large central government have enforcing some one-size-fits-all regulation over all the land? I will leave you with a thought from ex-President Ford: "Government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have." The founders knew this; why don't we?

Football: I will offer picks against the line in this space of both college football - NCAA warnings against gambling notwithstanding - and the NFL. I will predict every NFL game on the slate, but will only predict those college football games involving teams in the top 25 in either the AP (writers) or ESPN/USA Today (coaches) polls. Note: all picks for entertainment only; further note: if you're dumb enough to wager money based on a pick by me, then you deserve to lose it. I'm not betting my money on my picks; they are little more than intution based on incomplete information. All lines courtesy of Vegas.com. I am using the Caesars-Hilton line.

On to the picks (my picks in bold):

Fresno St (+28 1/2) @ Oklahoma (1 AP/1 ESPN): Fresno lives for these games, and OU has, in the past, looked beyond some of the games that aren't qute as important (i.e. not a major bowl, and not Texas). Do I think Fresno will win outright? Not in Norman. But I can't see them getting blown out to the tune of a 4 touchdown difference.

ECU (+41) @ Miami (2/2): I hate lines this big. And while ECU will get blown out, I'm guessing that Miami's 3rd stringers won't get the final margin to 41.

N.C. State (24/22) (+10 1/2) @ Ohio State (3/3): NC State will look to prove that last week was a fluke. Problem is, their defence looks like a very movable object. Lucky for them, Ohio State's offense seems to be the resistible force.

Hawaii (+21) @ Southern Cal (4/4): This is Hawaii wunderkind QB Tommy Chang's first game this season, having sat out the first game for an academic suspension. I can't imagine that there could be a worse opponent against which a QB shakes out the rust than SC. SC blows UH out.

Notre Dame (15/14) (+10 1/2) @ Michigan (5/7): If Notre Dame can't slow Chris Perry down, this should get ugly. But Notre Dame showed their grit coming from behind to beat Washington State last week. Michigan hasn't proven a thing, with big wins over Central Mich. and Houston. Please. And these games are always close.

Arkansas (+13 1/2) @ Texas (6/5): Arkansas hasn't lost to Texas since the split of the old Southwest Conference, including a win in the 2000 Cotton Bowl in which coach Houston Nutt flashed an upside-down "Hook 'em Horns" sign at the end of the game. Motivation? Sure. But Nutt always does well in big games; just ask Phil Fulmer.

Massachusetts (NL) @ Kansas State (7/6): K-State's second I-AA opponent this season. Expect a blowout, but it won't help KSU down the road in figuring out where they stand as a team, or in the BCS formula. Expect them to lose 1 or 2 games and get jammed up by the BCS. And withhold your sympathy.

South Carolina (25/NR) (+14 1/2) @ Georgia (8/8): South Carolina has won 2 of the last 3 in this series, and in those three games, Georgia has scored exactly 1 offensive touchdown, in the first possession of the 2000 game, a 21-10 loss in Columbia. To be completely honest, I'd be more surprised if Georgia covers than I would be if South Carolina wins outright.

Georgia Tech (+24) @ Florida State (10/10): Georgia Tech will have an emotional letdown after dropping Auburn to 0-2, and FSU is still playing the "us-against-the-world" card, which means that Tech will come out less than sharp, that they won't have the crowd to get behind them, and that FSU will come out sharp. Since Tech's talent isn't nearly as good as FSU's, expect a blowout.

Ball State (+31) @ Pittsburgh (11/12): Rod Rutherford gets the start after not starting last week; expect him to put big numbers up against another weak MAC team.

Western Illinois (NL) @ Louisiana State (12/11): Expect a blowout, even with 2nd or 3rd teamers playing.

UNLV (+21) @ Wisconsin (14/15): UNLV beats a decent Toledo team (down 10-7 at Marshall as I write this), and then goes off and gets blown out by Kansas. I can't see them doing anything but getting blown out at Wisconsin, because of the lack of mental toughness.

Utah State (+27) @ Arizona State (16/16): Just guessing. Don't have a clue about either of these teams, but I figure that being 16th in the country and being at home is worth 4 touchdowns against Utah State.

Washington State (+4) @ Colorado (17/17): Washington State showed me something in how they got out big at Notre Dame. Can they do it again, against a Colorado who beat UCLA by 2? I'm guessing yes, if only because I think UCLA isn't as good as WSU.

Penn State (+9 1/2) @ Nebraska (18/18): Penn State will look to rebound from the egg they laid at BC; NU will look for revenge from last year's 40-7 asskicking. I think that NU will win in the end, but by only a field goal.

Florida A&M (NL) @ Florida (19/20): Florida looks to rebound, and prepare for Tennessee next weekend. It's bound to get ugly.

Purdue (PK) @ Wake Forest (20/21): Pick 'em? Are you kidding me? I guess that Wake has to look out for an emotional letdown, and a motivated Purdue team, but Wake laid an ass-kicking on NC State, and Purdue lost to Bowling Green at home. Please. If Wake doesn't win by a touchdown, I'll be disappointed.

Iowa (23/19) (-5) @ Iowa State: This game is at Ames, and ISU has won the last 5. Considering that Iowa is much more talented than ISU, expect a blowout, even in Ames. Iowa has to be motivated for this game; if they aren't, then Kirk Ferentz isn't nearly the coach that he's reputed to be.

NFL picks to follow later.

Hello, world. If only I knew what to say. Or, to use my title, Oh, if only I knew what the heck I was doing. It's amazing what you can do on the internet nowadays. News gathering and dissemination. Write your own column. The big question is whether anyone actually gives a good goddamn. I mean, who reads this crap? Sure, some of it's entertaining, some of it is informative, and certainly I hope to communicate well enough to be included in both categories. In any case, I am who I am - to you folk reading, likely no more than just a few words on a page, little more than a complete abstraction; hopefully this will blog will give a sense of what I think and, in the end, who I am, even if there is nothing you know about my physical self. From time to time, I'll do regular features in this space. You'll figure out what they are.

College Football: I, probably like most people not students or alumni of small schools, or otherwise residents of the towns in which said schools hold class, do not closely follow college football that is not NCAA Div. IA. Whatever else I am, I am a fan of the Virginia Tech Hokies. I get to a couple games a year, although I haven't been yet this season. Blowouts against UCF (last I heard, it's not Central Florida, it's UCF, according to the athletic department down there; I guess acronyms are their own abbreviations now) and James Madison: I'll pass. I'll probably try to get something from a scalper for the Miami game or BC, or maybe Syracuse, which happens to be homecoming, like I did last year when I went to the Pitt game. Anyway, I heard today that Cal and Utah were playing tonight. The question I'm about to ask is probably about 10 years too late, but I'll ask anyway. WTF are college football games doing in the middle of the week? Autumn Saturdays are made for college football, and while weeknights aren't bad - Tech is one of the worst offenders as regards playing in the middle of the week - it makes you wonder what the purpose of the institution is. At Tech, they treat game nights as Saturdays, regardless of any academic concerns; the parking lots are (perhaps unsurprisingly, since those patrons bring money into the university) used for the fans, rather than for the students. Pardon the French, but what a crock of shit! I think that the Big Ten does it right with their schedule: they only play Saturdays, and they finish up the weekend before Thanksgiving. I can't say that I have a big problem with schools playing immediately following Thanksgiving - even if it isn't Saturday, as Ole Miss-MSU traditionally does, or UVa-Tech has done in the past, or even the following weekend, although I would prefer that only (1) conference championships and (2) the Army-Navy game be played the second weekend after Thanksgiving. In any case, I am not a big fan of the midweek game. Moving on.

Cal is at Utah in a few minutes (it may actually have started by the time that I post this). When I first heard that they were playing tonight, I thought of this. There's a great quote in there where some degenerate gambler (has to be, right?) calls the Atlanta Journal sports department, asking about Wyoming and Utah State, David Davidson answers the phone and, hearing the question, says "Wyoming and Utah State? Who gives a shit?" To be perfectly honest, that's how I feel about Cal-Utah. I can't really get worked up for a Pac-10 team that got whacked by K-State, and a mid-major.

Side note: I just heard a commercial for this Canadian tribal casino which featured Andrew Dice Clay, or an impersonator. I'm still not sure which. And, to be sure, I don't want to know. Dice can't be desperate enough to do commercials for said casino, can he?

Anyway, back to college football. I will merely say this about Tech's schedule: I wish the Pitt game was in Blacksburg, but, considering what happened last fall, maybe I should be glad that it's up in Pittsburgh.

11 Sept: It has been 730 days since Islamist terrorists hijacked 4 airliners; all 4 were cross country flights, so as to be loaded up with fuel. 2 from Boston to Los Angeles, one from Newark to San Francisco, and one from Washington Dulles to LA. 2 were American Airlines flights: AA11, which hit the North Tower of the World Trade Center and AA77 which struck the west side of the Pentagon. 2 were United Airlines flights: UAL175, from Boston to Los Angeles and which crashed into the South Tower of the World Trade Center 20 minutes after AA11 crashed into the North Tower, and UAL93, which is believed to have been headed for the Capitol or the White House, but whose hijackers were forced to crash in Somerset County, Pennsylvania. Over 3,000 people died that day. And all because some folks thought that we were too free. One hopes that they realise that Jihad isn't the answer before they themselves are exterminated in, if you will, a counter-Jihad.

Anyway, that's all I have now; the great thing about having a blog - rather than a regular column - is that I don't need to update it unless I have something to say. Although, the flip side of that is that columnists get paid for doing this. -- Ryan