I guess we can take a look at "Pick 'Em" scores:

Jake (that's me!)
NFL: 7 points (yipee!)
PAC-10: 21 pts.

Tyler:
NFL: 17 pts
PAC 10: 30 pts (bing bing bing bing bing! It's a perfect score!!!!!)

Tad:
NFL: 13 pts
PAC-10: 23 pts.

DanG:
NFL: 9 pts.
PAC-10: 30 pts (bing bing bing bing bing! It's a perfect score!!!!!)

Greg:
NFL: 25 pts.
PAC-10: 9 pts

So, this is the first week "That Counts"
Congratulations to Greg for winning the NFL this week, and Tyler and DanG on the PAC-10 perfect scores

To all my faithful readers: don't ever forget who loves you
for those of you who haven't heard, its the "new" old Nirvana song:

You Know You're Right

So I made a bunch of cider on Saturday --- if you look at "Picture Ofthe Day" you probably just gathered that --- and now I'm making a couple batches of hard cider from it -- again, as "told" in "POD." In all, we pressed close to, if not more than, 30 gallons of Pure Apple-y goodness, and I came away with some 14 gallons. Yeah.

the Bengals are the sleeper team in the NFL this year

I guess its time to post my picks

well, the loser of Sunday night's big 0-3 clash between the Vikings and Seahawks is officially "out of it." You can recover from a 1-3 record -- in fact, New England was 1-3 last year and won the damn Super Bowl -- but 0-4 pretty much dooms you to 12 weeks of football purgatory. Play for "respect" and trying to salvage the season. The loser Sunday night officially joins the flunky teams in the NFL, the winner stays in that group of 20-24 teams that are still "in it" and aren't really any better or worse than most anyone else, save for the elite few and the flunkies. Where does this Hawks season lead?

Denver over Baltimore
Green Bay over Carolina
New England over San Diego
Cleveland over Pittsburgh
Minnesota over Seattle

I'm going to hell for not picking the Cougs... and I really want them to win...
Arizona over N. Texas
UCLA over S.D. St.
ASU over Stanford
OSU over USC
Cal-Berkely over WSU

So this evening/tonight I headed over to Cap'n Jon's to "do something." Anneke was on a major cleaning jag, and Jon decided it would be besat to just clear out (really the best thing to do) and came up with the excuse of heading down to Boeing Field, where he needed to stop by the office and do some paperwork.

At first I was reluctant, of course, wondering if I was just supposed to stick my fingers up my ass while I waited for him to do some shit. I did want to head out, and maybe drive around aimlessly like the good old days, and this did provide an excuse to get out. He reassured me it would be quick, he just had to turn in a couple invoices (being officially unemployed, Jon is now a contract pilot, which means instead of drawing a paycheck, he must now beg for his slice of the money he has earned for the company... god bless America). So we headed out.

Of course, after his very brief "paperwork," we walked arond the ramp for a bit and headed over to the hanger. I suppose at this point I should point out that as we were arriving at the office, I got the chance to meet Chris Degarmo, who was in the band Queensryche, and is now a pilot for NEA. It really wasn't all that great, he was just another guy in a nice Mercedes.

So, I got to sit in a couple airplanes, and generally soak up a bit of the good 'ole aviation business.

But the whole point of this is that as I was doing all this, it was just another reminder of the fact that I am completely wasting my life.

So as we were leaving, right as I turned on the car (the timing couldn't have been more perfect) "Gimme Shelter" came on the radio, tuned to KZOK 102.5 FM. What a great fucking song. We cranked it up and sang along:

Oh a storm is threat'ning my very life today
If I don't get some shelter
Oh yeah, I'm gonna fade away

War, children, it's just a shot away, it's just a shot away
War, children, it's just a shot away, it's just a shot away

See the fire sweepin' out very street today
Burns like a red coal carpet, mad bull lost its way

War, children, it's just a shot away, it's just a shot away
War, children, it's just a shot away, it's just a shot away

Rape! Murder! It's just a shot away, it's just a shot away
Rape! Murder! It's just a shot away, it's just a shot away

The floods is threat'ning my very life today.
Gimme, gimme shelter or I'm gonna fade away

War, children, it's just a shot away, it's just a shot away
It's just a shot away, it's just a shot away, it's just a shot away

Love, sister, it's just a kiss away, it's just a kiss away
It's just a kiss away, it's just a kiss away
It's just a kiss away, it's just a kiss away

We were ostensibily headed back to the condo(m) but it seems neither Jon or I really wanted to go back. Ultimately, we decided to stop by McDonalds for a couple burgers, then swing by 7-11 for a 6-pack of Corona, and sit out on the baclony and eat our burgers, and rink some Corona.

After that, I came home.

Do you give a fuck?

This quiz style was designed by alanna, adapted by Batfish Designs, and created by Missanthropy.

So I�ve been feeling a little melancholy this week. Actually, seeing as how I am generally just sort of depressed anyway, �melancholy� for me would probably be a little closer to �wrist-slitting-erific� for most people, but that whole rant is off topic just now. So, anyway, about the melancholy.

Unless you were comatose or still recovering from Oktoberfest, you were aware that the Autumnal Equinox, aka the First Day of Fall, was Monday (the 23rd, as it were). I know that to many people, particularly those associated with school, or have kids who go to school, or are just generally big football fans, �fall� starts just after Labor Day. In fact, I�ve always said that �official summer� (as compared to the �calendar summer�) starts on Memorial Day Weekend, and ends Labor Day Weekend. Of course, before college, it was end of school to beginning of school, as I suppose it is for the aforementioned school-related people. But I�m once getting drifting off topic.

So, anyway, its Fall� or Autumn. Whatever. But even more so, for me, is the realization that October is a week away.

I suppose I should point out in my post-school, post college reality, September is a �transitional month.� There are two of them a year, the other being May. These are the months when Seattle is transitioning from its otherwise gloomy, rainy self, into its glorious, god-damn-it-this-is-the-best-place-to-live-on-the-fucking-planet self, and then back. September is usually a beautiful month, like it has been this year. Warm, but not hot, generally not very wet, there is as little snow up in them thar mountains as there will be all year, and the bugs are not as bad. It�s good stuff. Unfortunately, it�s on the �down slope,� and Everyone realizes it. At the beginning of the month, you realize the sun is actually setting before 8. By the end of the month, you realize the sun is setting before 7. And that has always been a bit brutal psychologically, on me at least.

October is usually a pretty nice month, as well. So is April, for that matter. In fact, they seem pretty similar to me. Both can be pretty damp, but they have their share of very nice days, and because of the rainy ones you appreciate them more. April, however, is at the peak of the �upward slope,� and being such always seems filed with such optimism. October is more or less the start of the rainy season, and we all know that November is the wettest month of the year, and well� it�s all downhill once October starts. Granted, that doesn�t keep us from enjoying the handful of great days that October usually offers us, but it�s always seemed to me there is a certain sense of urgency which accompanies those days. The kids are out playing soccer, and the moms are just glad they won�t be wet and muddy after the game. The joggers, hikers, bikers, boaters, and such are all out trying to get as much of their schwerve on as they can knowing the end is near.

When I was a kid, there were always a lot of pleasant diversions to keep me happy in the fall. After I got over the crushing psychological blow of school starting, I had soccer season, football to watch (back in the Seahawks �glory days of �83-�89), cider to make, pumpkins to gather and carve� and later in high school, I had cross country as well. When I hit college, I was happy that school started, mainly because, being a student, that was my purpose in life. I didn�t much enjoy my summers in those days� it was kind of stupid looking back on it, but I digress (again).

As an �adult� I�ve found a real appreciation for this time of year. However, there is an odd �relic depression� that sets in. Beyond that, though, is that I usually just can�t get over that summer is over, and there are all these things I didn�t do.

I suppose that is a big part of my problem, and why I suck. Most mentally healthy people look back with fondness on what they did. I always seem to dwell on what I didn�t do. And then I get frustrated with myself and my life.

Summer of �97, I finished college (the 6-week summer session ended July 30th), then went on my epic Alaska trip with Tyler. Despite having to move back to the rent�s house, I was pretty cool with it all. I was going to screw around for a year, and go on another adventure the next summer. That was a great fall. I was coaching the cross country team back at my high school, and training for the Seattle Marathon. I worked a crappy part-time job at RPS, but in late October I started that sweet cosmetics stockroom job at Nordstrom. Things were good.

Summer of �98 was the epic summer of hiking the PCT. After Labor Day, however, I began to realize it was time for me to start looking for a �real job,� and that whole prospect scared me to death. I was also a little disappointed in myself for not finishing the hiking I had set out to do at the beginning of the summer. I remember visiting Bellingham a couple times to visit the WWU Career Center, and a couple other times to �hang out.� Greg was the only one left up there any more, and I remember feeling pretty melancholy about the whole experience, sort of a �college is really behind you know� type thing. I was a supposedly a full-fledged adult then, and I didn�t handle it too well. Jon also moved out to Michigan that October for a flying job (he would be back in May) and that sorta sucked to.

After that, Fall has just reminded me of the end of youthful, carefree Summer. In �99 I climbed the volcanoes, but I actually worked through the entire summer for the first time in a while, and that made me feel like I was missing out on a lot of things. I felt satisfied enough with my summer that fall wasn�t so bad that year.

In �00, August was blown by my quitting a job, finding/getting a new one, and moving into and preparing this house. I had suffered a knee injury in May, and was out of shape much of the summer, and didn�t do any climbing, nor much hiking (except for a one-week vacation hike out on the coast). I sort of felt like that summer had been blown, and I cam remember feeling really disappointed and desparate about this time. I had the new house to take a bit of the sting off, however.

Well, I�m sort of rambling here, and I�m trying to remember what point I was getting to. I guess it�s just that the weather has been so damn nice this week, it�s like a tease, and I keep thinking of all the shit I Didn�t Do this summer. I�ve dwelt too much on where my life is going (or isn�t going) and I just want to go out, lie on a beach or something, and try to soak up as much of this beauty as possible and try to get a clear head.

after a much-too-long sabbatical, the Good Doctor is back

Here are next week's "Pick 'em" games. If you haven't figured it out by now, It is the Sunday and Monday night matchups, the Hawk's game, and two others that look interesting to me. This week, the Hawk's have the Sunday night game, so a third "interesting" game has been selected:
Monday: Denver @ Baltimore
Sunday night: Minnesota @ Seattle
New England @ San Diego
Carolina @ Green Bay
Cleveland @ Pittsburgh

The PAC-10 intra-conference games get going next weekend, so this starts to count
WSU @ Cal-Berkely
Oregon State @ USC
Stanford @ Arizona State
UCLA @ San Diego State
North Texas @ Arizona

email me at jake@ambiguously-disgruntled.com with your picks

it's time to look at the "Pick 'Em" results.

Jake (that's me!)
NFL: 26 points
PAC-10: 9 points

Tyler
NFL: 25 points
PAC-10: 19 points

Tad:
NFL: 25 points
PAC-10: 9 points

Greg:
NFL: 9 points

Laurie:
NFL: 14 points

Greg:
NFL: 15 points

And it looks like I am the winner! Woo hoo! With props to Tyler for winning the PAC-10, and scoring the most overall points, and having the highest two-week total. But as we all know, PAC-10 doesn't count until NEXT WEEKEND and the NFL cumulative season total doesn't start until NEXT WEEKEND.

So get your freakin' picks in!

as I've said before, if ya don't know what's goin' on read here and then here (if you want to) and figure it out.

Some of you will read this and not participate, because you are LAME! I have prepared the following, to try to convince you to send me your picks:

You say: "But I haven't put any thought into it."
I say: "Perfect, that is the best mindset for picking NFL games, as far as I'm concerned. Most of you would be Shocked to discover how little thought I put into my picks. I maybe spend 10 seconds pondering each game. It takes about a minute total. It's not like I'm studying over these matchups for hours.

You say: "But I don't really pay attention."
I say: "Okay, I'm someone who 'pays attention' and I scored a whopping NINE (9) on my NFL picks last week, and a whopping NINE (9) on my PAC-10 picks this week. I'm sure you can at least challenge that kind of 'knowledge!'"

You say "It's too complicated"
I say "If that's the case, you must have trouble dressing yourself in the morning. You pick the winner in 5 games, you arrange them in order of how strongly you feel about each pick. Gee, tough."

Before the NFL season, I decided to forgo posting my NFL picks, choosing to not join the throngs of people who consistently seem to get it all wrong.

Well, I've changed my mind... sort of. Now, three weeks into the NFL season, I am prepared to give my NFL forecast.

Some of you may think this is cheating, seeing as how I can get a better determination of who is a contender now that (most teams) have played 3 games. While I will not argue with this, it is also important to note that this IS THE NFL, and to beat a dead horse, even after three games, you simply Do Not know what is going to happen in this league!

After three weeks, it is the opinion of This Writer the following are Always the case:

1) Many team's records are more a consequence of schedules than anything else.
Case in point, the Carolina Panthers and San Diego Chargers, both 3-0. While the (Super?) Chargers may be a solid team with a great defense, I see mediocrity in their future (It is also worth noting that they started 3-0 last year and finished 5-11, but more on that later). Carolina has taken advantage of three teams that are a combined 0-9. Their win yesterday over Minnesota seemed like a somewhat surprising "big win" at first, until you consider that the Vikings just can't seem to get things right, and look to be well on their way to another 5-win season (if that). Getting back to the Chargers, at first blush it seems as though Their 3-0 is a little more "legit" (and, to be fair, it IS) with their wins coming against teams at a combined 2-4. But, for the sake of nit-picking accuracy, we're talking a Texans team that will aspire to win 3 games this year (one of which just so happened to come against a crap Cowboys team in week 1) and a Arizona Cardinals team that managed to beat a 0-3 Seahawks team.

To get even More nitpicky, we can borrow from the much-maligned BCS formula and look at that weird "schedule ranking." This is essentially 2/3 opponent's records, with 1/3 opponent's opponent's records. An important stipulation is that you must throw out the head-to-head matchups when you look at this. Confused?

Carolina's opponents are a combined 0-9, but throw out the games Carolina has played against those teams and they are 0-6. To get a feel for the opponent's opponent's records, you do the same thing for each of Carolina opponents this season (the Lions, Vikings, and Ravens). Doing this, you get a 3-5 record, not atrocious, not stunning either. Now, figure in the 2/3-1/3 thing: 0-6 = win % of 0, 0 x 2 = 0, and 3-5 = .375, add the win %'s and divide by 3 and voila, the Panthers have a "schedule strength factor" of a whopping .125. Do the same for the Chargers and you get a "SSF" of .305. Now consider that the median, by statistical law, for SSF is .500 (which makes it such a great tool) and these records suddenly don't look so hot.

My point? You will see neither the Chargers nor the Panthers in the Playoffs this year.

2) Teams that start hot often falter.
This is closely related to law 1, but this has more to do with legitmately good teams -- meaning they have defeated good teams -- just losing it. It happens every year, and it happened to our Beloved 'Hawks in the '99 season (remember the 8-2 start, and the 1-5 finish?). The Raiders kinda did it last year, looking like the dominant team in the AFC until a lackluster finish handed them a 10-6 record. Who are the candidates this year? That is tough to say, but keep your eye on the Raiders (who with the bye have only played 2 games, against the 0-3 Hawks and 0-2 Steelers) and the Browns (who are a helmet-throw away from 3-0, but against teams that are a combined 2-4). The thing about these two teams is that they seem to be playing pretty well, which is my arbritrary judgement keeping them from the above "rule 1" rant.

3) Teams that start the season with seemingly no chance can win the freakin Super Bowl.
If the Hawks win their next game, against a fatally flawed 0-3 Vikings team, they will have an identical record to last year's New England Patriots after 4 games. Welcome to the NFL. Again, this is a tough one to call, but you can expect at least one team, and probably two, that seem to have no chance right now at least make a playoff run. It just happens. This is also closely related to "rule 1," and again the boundaries are largely arbritrary. Last week I called the Atlanta Falcons the best 0-2 team I've ever seen. Now they are 1-2, beating a hapless Bengals team yesterday. Their SSF is a somewhat uninspiring .389, so they get included here. I also include the Buffalo Bills, who look to have the tools to make a bit of a "Cinderella" run. They are 1-2 with a .495 SSF, having defeated only the aforementioned Vikings (in an OT squeaker, helped by two missed PAT's), but they also lost a heartbreaker to the Jets, and in Denver to a Broncos team that looks like Super Bowl contenders. The Chiefs are an interesting conundrum. They "should" be 0-3, but for a helmet-throw, but they have the best running back in the NFL in Priest Holmes, and an offense that scores a lot of points. They just took the Patriots to OT in Foxboro, and looked like they would win the game for most of the first half. They have a SSFof .511, which is worth noting. I think they can do something this year.

Before we get to the "good" teams, let's eliminate some who absolutely won't have a snowball's chance in hell this year. Last week, I picked out my "bottom 4" of the Bengals, Ravens, Texans, and Lions, and predicted a combined win total of 16. We'll have to track my progress, but I'm predicting these four won't even sniff contention this season. And that leaves only 28.

AFC:
Division Champs:
New England Patriots (East)
Cleveland Browns (North)
Indianapolis Colts (South)
Denver Broncos (West)
Pats and Broncos get 1st-round byes
Wild-Cards: Raiders and Dolphins
(and yes, I'm aware of the fact I named the Browns and Raiders under "rule 2" but picked them for the playoffs anyway. I've never claimed this made sense!)
What can you say about the Patriots? The Dolphins might be the second-best team in the conference, but must settle for a wild card thanks to being in the Pats division. The Browns win the North by default, maybe with only nine wins, but they could get to 10 or more. The Colts division looks only marginally tougher, and I think they can manage 10 wins this year. The Broncos might be the best team in the conference, and are certainly Super Bowl contenders. The Pats, Broncos, and Dolphins are definitely the top 3 teams.
Close, but no cigar, thanks for playing: Tennessee Titans, Kansas City Chiefs, NY Jets. The Jets just seem to be there every year, the Titans should be better, or it seems like it, Kansa City has a good offense and can hang with anyone.

NFC:
Division Champs:
Philadelphia Eagles (East)
Chicago Bears (North)
New Orleans Saints (South)
San Francisco 49ers (West)
Saints and Bears get 1st-round byes
Wild Card: Atlanta and Green Bay
How good are the Saints? Right now, I've got them tabbed to be the #1 seed out of the NFC. They are 3-0 with a SSF of .630, that's as signifigant a 3-1 record as you will find right now. I still have a hunch the 'Niners won't win anywhere near 12 games this year, but with the 'Hawks and Cardinals in the division, they will beat out a sloppy, self-destructive Rams team with 9 or 10 wins. Atlanta and Green Bay are both flawed teams, but will get there on the strengths of Brett Farve and Michael Vick. The Bears, of all my picks, I am least confident about. For some reason, I smell a "rule 2." The Eagles will take advantage of a dvision with the Redskins and Cowboys, and a Giants team I see as mediocre. They are probably a better team than I want to give them credit for.
Close, but no cigar, thanks for playing: St. Louis Rams, Tampa Bay Bucs, New York Giants. St Louis has too much talent not to win at least 9 games, Tampa Bay just can't figure out an offense, and the Giants ride the "strong 'D' and occasional great play from Kerry Collins" train to a solid season.

The Oktoberfest pictures are up

I suppose I should post my picks for the weekend:
NFL:
Atlanta over Cincy
NY Giants over SeeHacks
Miami over NY Jets
New Orleans over Chicago
St. Louis over Tampa Bay

PAC-10:
Cal over Air Force
USC over Kansas State
UCLA over Colorado
Oregon St over Fresno St
Wisconsin over Arizona

and now its back to normal

okay, I hated the new look... it was terrible, to say the least.. so I have promptly switched back to the old one, but have lost my customizations...

I have been posting regularly to my blog, but ther have not been getting published all week because of an error that has been occuring in Blogger. I had just continued to naively post, believing that it would somehow fix itself and all my posts would be published. Of course, that hasn't happened, and today I finally decided I needed to do something about it. After searching through the Blogger.com help section, I realized the only think I could do was to change the "template" (the appearance of the page). So, I have done that, and now my page looks different, but I will probably be changing ot back shortly. At least you can read what I have been writing all week.

every sports fan, near-sports fan, or anyone who has ever watched/and/or/followed sports NEEDS to know about the Ewing Theory (thanks to the Sports Guy!)

Here are the "Pick 'Em" games for next weekend:
NFL:
Sunday night: Cincinatti @ Atlanta
Monday night: St. Louis @ Tampa Bay
Seattle @ NY Giants
New Orleans @ Chicago
NY Jets @ Miami
PAC-10:
Fesno State @ Oregon State
USC @ Kansas State
Colorado @ UCLA
Arizona @ Wisconsin
Air Force @ Cal

PAC-10 contest os "just for grins" until the PAC-10 inter-conference games start on the 28th (Sept) and 5th (Oct). At that point it will be similar to the NFL contest...

I'm going to start keeping "season totals" in the NFL contest on week 4 (that's Sunday the 29th). The season (that is week 4 through 17) high point winner will win something (details forthcoming) and each weekly "most points" winner will be entered in the drawing to win something (details forthcoming) -- each week you win means you get a "ticket" in the "raffle."

Don't be LAME! Just enter your picks! If you read this and don't send in your picks, you suck!

if you have no idea how this works, read here

"Pick 'Em" results from last weekend:
Jake (that's me!)
NFL: 9 pts.
PAC-10: 17 pts.

Tyler
NFL: 22 pts.
PAC-10: 11 pts.

Tad
NFL: 16 pts.
PAC-10: 13 pts.

Huaaah's to TYLER and ME for getting the high scores on NFL and PAC-10, respectively. Actually, more Huzzah's to Tyler, as the PAC-10 thing really doesn't mean anything until PAC-10 teams starts playing each other. So, Tyler is the big winner! Yipee! He wins a... 6-pack of my new Falling Leaf Autumnal Ale. Ya see, you DO get something for playing this silly little game!

Well, here�s my take after 2 weeks of the NFL season:
Category A: The �Good� 2-0 teams

New England Patriots:
These guys are like the �01 Mariners (pretending that the M�s had won an improbable World Series in �00), they just do it with incredible defense, generally opportunistic play, great �in-game� coaching, a dearth of superstars (although people have attempted, wrongly, to put Tom Brady in this role), and a slew of solid offensive contributors who seem to take turns stepping to the forefront. Another lesson in Sports Chemistry.

Denver Broncos:
Okay they just beat the 49ers and Rams� holding both the offenses in check� and QB Brian Griese is supposedly mediocre at best and Still on the Hot Seat�?

New Orleans Saints:
They were clearly the better team against the Packers. This is a dynamic team that can score a lot of points.

Miami Dolphins:
They have a �big play� defense that creates a lot of turnovers. They have a very productive Ricky Williams. Jay Fielder is apparently pretty good. I wondered how in the hell they won 11 games last year, this year it will be no mystery.

Oakland Raiders:
A great start, but all they�ve beat is a fatally flawed Seahawks team and a Pittsburgh team that can�t seem to get its act together.

Chicago Bears:
It looks like this is one of those teams that just seems to get lucky all year long.


Category B: The �Bad� 2-0 teams:

Carolina and San Diego:
Let�s see, a combined 4-0 against the Texans, Bengals, Ravens, and Lions. Those are unquestionably the 4 worst teams in the NFL.

Category C: The �Good� 0-2 Teams:

Sub-category 1) AKA the Atlanta Falcons. Has there ever been a better 0-2 team? They lose, in OT, AT Green Bay, then they lose to the Bears on a missed field goal. Ouch!

Sub-category 2) AKA the fatally flawed �Super Bowl Contenders� St. Louis Rams and Pittsburgh Steelers. These guys won�t be considered �good� too much longer if they keep this crap up. The Steelers have Kordell at QB and a pass defense that has been exposed. The Rams� well, they play sloppy, make stupid mistakes, and are getting horrible coaching (for a good take on that, read this)

Category D: The 0-2 teams you would expect to be and/or get better:

Seattle Seahawks and Minnesota Vikings: The �Hawks are going nowhere without Some ability to run and stop the run (but more on the �Hawks later), the Vikings need to get that potentially great offense on track and play at least Some defense. We�ll just have to see what happens.

Category E: Do they even have a prayer?

The aforementioned Texans, Bungles, Ravens, and Lions. These guys all aspire to make it to 4 wins.

Category F: Divisional Malaise

Part 1: the AFC South
Indy Colts, Tennessee Titans, Jacksonville Jaguars (Houston Texans are also here, but they�ve already been categorized). If I could put money on it, I would lay bets that the winners of this division (and AFC North) will have no better than a 9-7 record. In fact, I look at the AFC South and see three 9-7 teams, with the Texans at 3-13. The only team out of the bunch (including the North) I can see winning more at this point is the Colts, who have a lot of upside with the Manning/James/Harrison trifecta and a theoretically improved defense.

Part 2: the NFC East:
Washington Redskins, NY Giants, Dallas Cowboys, Philly Eagles:
We�ll have to see what happens in the Eagles-Redskins game tonight, but I don�t see a real power here. The Redskins should be exciting, but I see 8 wins. I don�t think the Eagles are as good as a year ago, and Dallas has a great defense, but a Quincy Carter-led offense will take them nowhere this year. The Giants may actually be pretty good, but more likely Kerry Collins will come back to earth and they will be largely uninspiring again.

Category G: Defining mediocrity

My central NFL theory is that about 24 of the 32 teams are solidly mediocre, as defined by being 7-9, 8-8, or 9-7. A few of those teams win or lose won or more games they �shouldn�t have� to climb to 10-6 or 11-5, or dip to 6-10 or 5-11. In other words, there are �bad� 6-10 or 5-11 teams or �good� 10-6 teams or 11-5 teams, and there are �mediocre� teams with those same records. In a true testament to NFL parity, one of those �mediocre� 11-5 teams won the Super Bowl last year (that would be the New England Patriots). So, as usual, most teams are 1-1 after two weeks. These guys could be okay, they could be bad, but it seems to me they are just �mediocre�:

Cleveland Browns: �should� be 2-0 (with that flukey loss to the Chiefs last week), but then all they�ve beat is the Bungles. They also have a couple of real cupcakes in the division, which should help their win total.

NY Jets: this is a hard team to figure. They strike me as an example of �mediocre� teams posting good records and making the playoffs the last two years.

Buffalo Bills: Like the Pats of a few years ago, will go as far as Bledsoe�s arm carries them. I hope Patriots fans got a chance to see the 4th quarter/OT of the Vikings game yesterday, when he willed to team to victory.

Kansas City Chiefs: so� do they have a great offense, or not?

Tampa Bay: are they Ever going to have a productive offense?

San Francisco: For whatever reason, I just don�t see them as being as good as a year ago.

Arizona: For whatever reason, I think they can manage their division and have a 7-9 year.

Green Bay: Of all the teams in this category, they have the best shot at being �good,� but they are also one Michael Vick play away from being 0-2. I�m not sure what to make of these guys, but as long as Favre�s in town, they are contenders.


The Seahawks: Boy, did Trent Dilfer look good running that offense. It almost made you forget that the Seahawks are destined to win no more than 5 games this year without drastic improvements.

While it�s easy to point at squandered red-zone opportunities (they should have scored at Least 13 more points yesterday) and the kickoff return TD they gave up � and these are certainly factors in this loss � it begins and ends with the running game. Simply, the Hacks can�t run, and they can�t stop the run. Through two games, here are the numbers: Seahawks 45 attempts for a 2.8 yard avg. Opponents 75 attempts for a 6.3 yard avg.

they say pictures are worth a thousand words... so to "tell" you all about our day trip to Vegas on Saturday, check out my Las Vegas Picture Files

It's time to make my Pick-'em picks. So far, only Tyler has decided to participate in this, and everyone else who reads this and has not made their picks is Lame! Email me at jake@ambiguously-disgruntled.com with Yourpicks! So, if you haven't been paying attention, look here and here.

NFL games:
1) Seattle over Arizona
2) Pittsburgh over Oakland
3) San Fran over Denver
4) Buffalo over Minnesota
5) Philly over Washington

Pac 10:
Has WSU ever played in a bigger non-bowl-game than their match against 6-ranked Ohio State on Saturday? Other than the '97 Rose Bowl against 1-ranked Michigan, this has to be the biggest game they've played. It breaks my heart to pick against them... but at least it's in the 5 slot!
1) Mich State over Cal
2) UCLA over OK State
3) Arizona over Utah
4) Colorado over USC
5) Ohio State over WSU

Well, It looks like my team (indoor soccer) wrapped up first place for the August-September session at Arenasports, but it wasn't without some drama.

We were in first coming in to tonight, a point up on two teams in 2nd, and were playing the last place team comng in (this is a 6-team league). Earlier in the night, both the team in 2nd had won, meaning we needed to win to clinch 1dt place. We played like crap, and stumbled to a 6-5 win, pulling it out... somehow, despite giving up 2 (two!) own goals. Individually, I guess I played pretty well, but it doesn't feel like it given the circumstances. We were down 3-1 at the half, amd scored two quick goals to start the second. I scored to make it 4-3, then we scored again to go up 5-3. After that we alternated goals, with them pulling within 1, then us getting our insurance goal back.

I scored my second of the game on a free kick with about 7 minutes left, to put us up 6-4. Then, two minutes later, I knocked in the second own goal trying to make a defensive play to give the goal I'd scored right back. I was disgusted, and subbed out, thinking we would cycle through the subs and I'd be back on for the last 2 minutes or so.

As it turned out, I didn't get back on -- even though some of the guys on the field really shouldv'e subbed out, but I don't really want to open up that can of critical worms -- but one of our guys got called for a foul with just under 2 minutes left. It was a horrible call, as the referee would later claimed he was screened from seeing what was really happening, which is that our player was grabbed by the arm and pulled down. Our player protested, and was given a two minute penalty.

Despite being a man down, we somehow clung to our 1-goal lead, and preserved the win. A contentious argument/shouting match ensued between our player given the penalty, the referee, and me joining in howling my protest. I guess what set me off, other than the horrible call that very well could have cost us the game, was that the referree was saying our player was lucky to not get a red card. I let the referee know, rather forcefully, that he blew the call and should just admit it, because giving out a red crad on his mistake is bullshit, basically. Fortunately, things cooled down, and it ended as amicably as such a thing can.

On another sporting note, the Mariners aren't going to the playoffs. yeah, mathematically, they are still in it, but the loss tonigh to Texas just aout does them in for all practical purposes. But more than that, i feel compelled to comment on the Booone incident in the top of the ninth, when he failed to score from second on a double.

To me, that is on the third base coach. I can understand how a runner on second can have trouble tracking a line drive to center. That is why the third base coach is out there... if not, what IS his purpose? Scratching himself?

So, it's the 9/11 anniversary, and i'm wondering if I am supposed to write something... maybe something poignant or thoughtful, maybe go on one of my rants that I am so famous for... maybe come up with a unique perspective on the whole thing... in general, be creative and put up some content for my avid readers (ha!)

But I don't feel like it

I came up with some good lead-ins in my head today, but I don't really feel like writing any of them. That's really about it.

next week's "Pick 'Em" points contest games:
Sunday night: Oakland @ Pittsburgh
Monday: Philly @ Washington
Arizona @ Seattle
Buffalo @ Minnesota
Denver @ San Fran.


Once again, for those of you not paying attention, you can read the Blog one down (from 9/7/2002, before my protracted 'Hwks rant) for an explanation. Just pick the winners -- no point spreads -- and rank them in order. We'll see who scores the most points, and in a couple weeks after some "warm-up", I want to start keeping season totals. The total points winner can get... some free beer or something.

As I stated before, I'd like to get some PAC-10 action going to (as a separate contest from the NFL) but the schedules are still pretty scattered. The Huskies have a bye, and most everyone else is playing pushover teams. But as a "warm-up" here are some games featuring PAC-10 teams to pick:
WSU @ Ohio State
Utah @ Arizona
Cal @ Michigan State
USC @ Colorado
UCLA @ Oklahoma State

Well, not a good Sunday for me in my football picks. At least I got the 8-pointer, which is the one to get, obviously, if one will be 1-for-4. My faith and confidence in the Bledsoe-led Bills was shattered by two kick returns for TD's by the Jets to lead the way to a win in a game "statistically dominated" by the Bills. I'm beginning to wonder if the Rams, while being the most skilled team on paper, are also the most self-destructive. Fumbles, miscues, bad play-calling, general lack of execution. It seems Mike Martz is a great "X's and O's" coach but a horrible game manager... aka he is a great O-coordinator, but crappy coach. And this preseason press about the 'Boys rising back to contender status seem to be bullshit. They may have a great D, but Quincy Carter is simply incapable of being an NFL quarterback, and their offense will never be good enough with him in it. Also, reports of a terrible Texans defense seem to be egregiously false.

But what I really want to talk about is the 'Hawks, and their poor performance against the Raiders in a 31-17 loss that wasn't nearly as close as the score seems to indicate. It is disturbing to me that this was seen as a game they had no chance to win, then promptly went out and had a lost cause by halftime. Self-fulfilling prophecy... or a prime example of a team not prepared for the Season?

And doesn't that reflect on the poor job that Mike Holmgren is doing as King of the Franchise. As a coach, he can hardly be blamed for the inadequate personel which took the field for the game. He did what he could with what he had -- sort of , but that is another rant for another day -- and they lost. But Holmgren is also the GM, "Vice President of Football Operations," (whatever That is supposed to mean) and de-facto offensive coordinator -- seeing as how he calls the plays. There isn't a bit of the day-to-day and game-day operations of this franchise that don't bear at least the partial mark of King Mike, and he is Very well compensated financially for this, and seems to enjoy almost unheard-of job security in the NFL (but these two issues are also another rant for another day!)

So, it seems to Me -- who will readily admit to knowing squat about the X's and O's of game-day and game-preparation of professional football, but from a fan's standpoint feels like I know enough to know a poorly-run team from a well-run team -- that this utter lack of preparation for the Season we saw manifested on Sunday IS Mike Holmgren's fault. What are we paying for again?

It is all-too-easy, and tempting, to blame this all on Trent Dilfer's knee "sprain" in the 1st quarter of the 1st preseason game, and Walter Jones' inexplicable holdout. Throw in some injuries, like All-pro calibre DT John Randle's offseason knee surgery from which he is still recovering, the fact that leading tackler Anthony Simmons went down with an ankle injury early, starting Tackle Chris McIntosh is Out for the year with a chronic (and seemingly career-threatening) kneck injury, and suddenly one can piece together a reason for the fact the 'Hawks didn't have a prayer to win yesterday.

EXCEPT... isn't it Mike Holmgren's Job to put together a competitive team, while dealing with injuries, holdouts, and other "unforseen circumstances." Isn't this what separates the Men who Are capable of doing this job in the NFL from those who Aren't? It is incumbent upon the men who run NFL franchises to field a team that Can win despite various personnel issues, and whil there are admittedly very few of these, it is also becoming more and more clear to me the Holmgren is certainly NOT one of them!

We Knew about Randle's knee surgery. We Knew that Chris McIntosh had chronic kneck problems (as he missed most of last year with the saem thing). We Knew Matt Hasselbeck was largely incapable of being a competent starting QB. We Knew all this before training camp even started!!!

The Seahawks lost yesterday because they have no foundation as a team. This one isn't on Hasselbeck. Granted, 155 pass yards is hardly noteworthy, but 23 of 32 with 2TD and 0 INT for a 103 rating are the kind of performances that made Tom Brady a "superstar" and MVP for the Patriots. Seattle hardly got torn apart by a Raider's high-powered passing attack, either. Gannon's numbers (19/28 for 214, 2T 1INT) are Solid, but not Great. No, the 'Hawks got blown out yesterday because of the most fundamental apsect of football.

40 attempts for a 5.5-yard average. Those are Raiders rushing numbers. 16 attempts for a 2.7-yard average. Those are the Seahawks rushing numbers. From that alone most anyone could tell me who won the game.

And that speaks to the Offensive and Defensive Lines, the foundation of any succesful football team.

"Sure!" you say, "but the injuries and holdouts." Sure, but I re-iterate, isn't it Holmgren's Job to work through those things, to take the 6 weeks of training camp and preseason to field a team that Can win? And please correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't he Fail to do that?

I see porous run defense, and I immediately think of the DT's and middle linebacker. John Randle Was gone yesterday, but Holmgren also made a highly questionable decision before training camp to cut Levon Kirkland, who had a superb year at ML last season. Ostensibly, it was because of his "weight problem," but it seems to me that it was am attempt by King Mike to prove a point and piss his territory... and I think it Hurt the team. Don't get me wrong, I like Isiah Kacyvinski as much as the next guy, but...

More damning than anything about yesterday's awful performance was that two of the 'Hawks scores were set up directly by long returns. Maurice Morris took the first kick return (after the Raiders quickly socred) of the season 66 yards to set up the Hawk's first TD of the season, and lent the game an all-too-temporary feel of competitiveness. Later, Shawn Springs returned a fumble 71 yards, setting up the offense for a scintillating 10-yard drive to set up a field goal to pull the Hawks to 31-10. Yipee.

Despite all the negativity flowing out of their opening performance, there may still be reason for hope. This was only one game, and one loss, and the first game at that. Last season, they stumbled to a 9-6 win over Cleveland before getting creamed by Oakland and Philly, and a 4-or 5 win season seemed a certainty. They recovered, found their stride, and made a semblance of a playoff run and at least got us a winning season at 9-7. I guess we'll just have to see what happens.

Are you ready for some FOOTBALL!!!

Woo-Hoo, NFL starts tomorrow (well, except for the "teaser" game we got Thursday night) and it's time for me to make my picks...

no, screw it, Everyone makes NFL picks, and Everyone is wrong Most of the time. I just don't feel like joining that club this time. The NFL has just become almost Impossible to forecast, and even the most Expert of "Experts" can only really forecast approximations, like the weather, and hope to stay above 50%.

But, I would like to take a look at the games this week, and start a sort of contest I'd like to get going on this site in future weeks. It is a sort of "Accuracy contest" in which you pick winners of games, rank them in order of how stongly you feel about the picks, and score points depending on that order. Confused? It's simple. Each week, probably by Wednesday, I'll post the Sunday night, Monday night, Seahawks matchup, and two other games that interest me. You pick the winners -- no point spreads -- and put them in order, 1-5. You get that pick correct, and you score points. 8 pts for the #1 game down to 4 pts for the #5 game. That makes a "perfect score" for a week of 30. if the pick is incorrect, you score zero points (so there is no negative points here). Simple.

So, obviously, it's too late to get this up for this week, but that's okay. I'll give my picks anyway:
Monday night: Steelers @ Pats
Sunday night: Cowboys @ Texans
Seahawks @ Raiders
Jets @ Bills
Rams @ Broncos

1) Raiders beat 'Hawks
2) Cowboys beat Texans
3) Bills beat Jets
4) Rams beat Broncos
5) Steelers beat Pats

I'd also like to get PAC-10 games going with the same system. Most teams are still playing non-conference foes, but as the PAC-10 schedule heats up, we'll get it started!

I just saw "One Hour Photo" and to anyone who may believe that I am some sort of deranged psychopath stalker guy, they should see this movie. That is all for now.

Today was an incredibly frustrating day for me... the kind of day you come home and kick the dog... the kind of day that makes you want to pound some Whiskey and Yell at things...

I've been worried all along about the plumbing on the waterfall I'm building at my Aunt's house in Gig Harbor. I wasn't quite sure how it would all work out once I got everything hooked up, filled it with water, and turned the pump on.

I did just that this morning, and to put as simply as possible, there was Way too much water coming through the waterfall. It just overwhelmed the stream that I had constructed, and it seemed pretty clear there needed to be a way to limit the flow of water. After talking to to Dan at Erin Rockery (the lanscaping supply place in Gig Harbor where we have gotten most of the supplies) we decided we should try a valve along the pipe to limit the water. He showed the most basic way of doing it, setting it up so that you just divert some of the water back into the pond, instead of up the pipe to the top of the waterfall, and told us where to go in Tacoma to get what we needed.

After some hesitation, pondering, and uncertainty at the pipe supply place in Tacoma, we walked out with what we thought we needed. We brought the stuff back to the house, where I quickly assembled it and we ran another test. It still didn't seem to work right, and after some more fiddling, we finally decided that the pump we had was just Too Strong. So we headed back to Erin Rockery.

At this point, I must point out that the usual method of constructing these pond/waterfall things is to draw out a plan: how big the pond will be (and thus the total amount of water involved), how high the waterfall is, and so on. At that point, the company that makes all this stuff send you a sort of "kit" that includes the skimmer box (which is situated by the pond and contains the pump), the "Purialls" filter (which is a box you put at the top to "start" the waterfall) and the right size pump you need. We didn't have a definite plan, but we did have a solid idea about what we were going to do. Jan (my aunt) and I had already been in a couple times and talked to Dan about what we needed (or more appropriatetly, thought we needed), and through that, Dan talked to the pond people and ordered up a pump, skimmer box, and "Purifalls."

Well, to try to shorten a lengthening story, we ended up with way to big a pump. Of course, the pump size dictates the skimmer and "Purifalls" size, but we are keeping those as they are already installed, and it isn't that big a deal anyway. Had we known exactly what we needed, and known more about pumps, we would obviously have ended up with the right stuff in the fist place, and me being the perfectionist that I am, it will bother me for a bit. It also turns out that Dan, although he has been incredibly helpful and very willing to deal with us throughout this entire process, doesn't seem to know too much about pumps and plumbing either, and we may have "trusted" his judgement that he simply didn't have. I don't want to criticize the guy, as he has done very good work for us, and we didn't give him a whole lot of data to work with, and he did what he could.

So, we returned the pump, I talked to Dan and we looked through the listing of pumps, deciphered the stats, and ordered a smaller one one that Should be the "right one," or at least closer to it. It should be in in a few days.

Then, on the drive back to the house, I realized how I had been configuring the diverter/flow-control valve setup wrong, and started feeling like an idiot because it seemed so simple. Of course, I started doubting myself, thinking that perhaps the pump we had would've been just fine, as long as the valve was set up correctly. But, at the same time, having the lower-power pump will be better, because it just doesn't make sense to have a vastly over-powered pump. Of course, the old pump had 2" output, so we have 2" pipe, and the new pump will have 1.25" output. We can just use the 2" pipe, and havd an adapter piece, and it will be just fine, but there is still that "if we had known what we were doing, we would have the right stuff in the first place" thing going on, just like with the skimmer and "Purifalls."

So, after all that, I had a shitty indoor game tonight. We lost 8-6, to see our record fall to 3-1-2 (at least it was our first loss) and just generally played poorly. It was one of those "enema games" where you just want to go home and clear the shit out. I had a goal, but it wasn't very authoritative, it sort of trickled in because I only got a piece of the ball on a deflection, and it was more lucky than anything else. I didn't play particularly well, barely contributed anything offensively, and negated the few good defensive plays I made by taking a stupid 2-minute penalty with just 5 minutes left, right after blowing a great scoring chance. Add to that some questionable refeering... but more than anything we were just outplayed. A very frustrating game...