i used to think aaron rooted for the underdog, but now i don't know what to think

i spend part of most saturday afternoons watching college football with gavin. every week we flip through random games looking for upsets (unless florida is playing, then we watch that game hoping that urban meyers plays tim tebow, but meyers is an idiot and he barely uses tebow). a month or so ago we saw michigan destroy notre dame. then the next week we were heartbroken as notre dame came back to win against michigan state. then there were a bunch of weeks with out any real threat of upsets--at least in the games we partially watched.

today we were watching florida and georgia. but, like every week except one, meyers hardly even used tebow. so we switched over the the second-half of the usc/oregon state game. it was awesome. oregon state got up by 20 some odd points. then usc worked its way back into the game. with seven seconds left, usc scored a touchdown. they needed a two-point conversion to tie. gavin and i watched in fear. it's so sad to see such an underdog play so well only to lose the game at the last second. but oregon state totally stopped the conversion.

my first thought was to call aaron. i figured he likes and upset as much as me. plus, he goes to oregon state and, even though he doesn't care about the sports program there, i thought he'd feel a little sentimental about his school knocking off an team like usc.

so i called him. except he didn't care at all. not only that, but he thought it was dumb that i thought he'd care.

maybe that's why he hardly posts on this thing anymore.

History of the Underdog

Greetings, it's my first post on "this person know what i'm talking about."

I don't actually know the history of the underdog but I'd like to make some general statements about it that sound reasonable. The attractiveness of an underdog victory is obvious for a sports fan. My first assumption is that sports are a substitute for war. Now of course we still have wars, but with all technical advances these days they're so hard to follow, all the covert ops and whatnot. Who would watch the superbowl if it wasn't scheduled, and one team would sneak up on the other whenever they found them, play a down, and then retreat for days?

So the days of spectatorship for war are gone. I guess that started with the first Olympic games. Sports of whatever kind now provide a forum for the virtues of the warrior to be displayed, even though we've come a long way from archery and wrestling and now have bowling. (Bowling still requires its own physical virtues of strength and finesse and pinpoint accuracy, it just doesn't require the all-around fitness that the decathlon strives to display.) A competition is the chance to see the skills and attributes of the warriors of the respective sports to be tested and admired by the spectators.

Implied in this situation is that the spectators do not possess the virtues in the degree that the warriors do (or they would be the warriors). This allows the spectator to participate by proxy, aligning themselves with one side or the other and experiencing the battle emotional if not physically. We all know those people, usually moms, who walk in during a televised sporting event and make some comment about how they just want a fair game and the best side to win, with no regard for the fact that some of us have devoted months or years to the particular team and don't appreciate comments about "good plays" by the enemies. But we also know those people, who are usually moms, wouldn't be in war anyway and that's why they have no appreciation for the beauty of the battlefield. Would they want the best army to win if it meant their husband never came home again? Pick a side!

Anyway, in picking sides it is more often than not the underdog that most people side with when they have not been devoting their lives to one of the particular sides. And I assume that this is owing to the fact that it makes a more fulfilling proxy experience because the vast majority of people assume they are the underdog in life. It's certainly the case if they have delusions of grandeur, but it's the position of all of us in relation to entropy. That makes it natural to side with the underdog in sports, and demand happy endings to movies. It provides hope for each spectator that despite the fact they weren't endowed in abundance with the virtues of _______, if they show enough heart, the virtue that can be self-produced, they can achieve victory.

I often cheer for the underdog. I will admit I'm no Yankees fan. But I don't advocate it as automatic as it too often is. There is pleasure to be found in rooting for the leviathan, and it is the appreciation of beautiful and skillful execution. This path is more difficult because the proxy connection is often lost if we consider ourselves inept, but it may reap greater spoils. I use the Chicago Bulls led by Michael Jordan as an example. They were my team while they were good, and only then. It was bandwagoning at its best, I didn't even like them much until after the first title, but the next five titles were a pleasure. I even loved it when they brought in Dennis Rodman and only lost ten regular season games. Rodman was an easy target for devoted underdog rooters but he didn't give them what they wanted. I got what I wanted. I watched the greatest team of basketball players in the world win and win and win, specifically Michael Jordan. The grace and skill with which he was able to dominate was awe-inspiring, and ennobling to me. Underdoggers missed all that, consumed by his supposed arrogance, sidetracked by his gambling, private life, or sought to qualify it with the story of him not making the high school team and therefore making even his dominance an underdog story. I would have none of it. Fortune favored Michael Jordan and all anyone else can do is watch in awe.

The spoils of cheering for the favored are confidence and an appreciation for excellence. There is a danger of becoming haughty, but nothing the occasional underdog can't remedy. The benefits of siding with the strong have bled over into my own life. I have a healthy confidence that I can accomplish what I want. I don't fear for my survival and completely enjoy my life. With an underdog disposition I could believe it possible but the odds would always be against me. This way they are in my favor. It's an easier way to live. And so I will continue to root for the favored and admire the virtues of the warrior.

looks like i'm not the only ike diogu fan out there

a tribute video to the future best-player ever. watch to the end to see the cute illustration they made of x-men's "beast" but with ike's boyish face. i wish i made this video.

in soccer, a pitch is what they call the field

i saw this movie called fever pitch. clif told me he read the book the movie is based on. the book is a memoir about being an arsenal fan. clif said the book is good and bears no resemblance to the movie. the movie was terrible. so terrible it was actually pretty funny. hopefully no one saw it, so i'll fill you in on the details. jimmy fallon is a die hard red sox fan. his uncle used to take him to games at fenway park. then his uncle died and jimmy inherited season tickets. so his life is all about the red sox and these kids he teaches at school. then he falls in love in the off-season. you see where this is going. jimmy's love of the red sox interferes with his love of this girl. they kind of break-up and jimmy decides to sell his season tickets to some asshole. but drew barrymore (his ex-girlfriend) can't let that happen so she scalps some tickets and runs onto the field at fenway to stop him. the night she runs onto the field? the fourth game of the alcs where the red sox come back against the yankees and eventually win the series. the point? jimmy and drew's love is the reason the red sox win the series.

i seriously doubted the point of the movie. how do our baseball-related actions have any effect on the outcome of baseball games? but then i realized which two teams are playing in the world series.

at the beginning of last summer i needed a new baseball cap. i was at target and noticed they had all these mlb caps that were the style i like--simple, adjustable and fits the shape of your head. and they were only like ten dollars. so i bought a detroit tigers hat. not because i like the tigers, but because their hat is blue and not the yankees or red sox. aaron really liked my hat, so he went to target to buy one. he chose the cardinals because their hat was blue and not the yankees or red sox. and what two teams are in the world series? the detriot tigers and the st. louis cardinals.

Go Blue!

for those of you (or more realistically the [maybe] one person) who have read my previous posts, you might remember that I was born in ann arbor, MI and grew up singing the u. of michigan fight song. so i just have to give praises to the great year this has been for my former state. the detroit tigers swept the american league championship and are in the world series for the first time since i was just a little lass of 6. i know some of you think baseball is totally boring, but i love it (then again, i can get into pretty much any sport when watching it). so anyway, in other MI news, the wolverines are currently 8-0 and ranked number two. yay them.

the end.

a man and his footy

I was surfing blogger and found this article ... and thought the readers of "this person" might enjoy it.

what's the deal with bob costas?

have you ever really watched this guy? i mean really really watched this guy?

i'm pretty overwhelmed with the subject matter. where do i even begin? i wanted to set up some bob costas context (or bob costext?), but that would mean i would have to do a little work looking for costas quotes and costas clips. so fuck that. i'm getting (relatively) straight to the point.

here's what bob said on football night in america:

"now to the absurdly hyped return of t.o. to philadelphia. the return wasn't as warm and fresh as a philly cheese-steak right out of the oven, but the game was darn good."

i've been trying to unpack this statement since last night. looking at the first sentence, the awkwardness comes from the double qualification of absurdly and hyped. granted that t.o.'s return to philadelphia was hyped to levels bordering on absurdity, but bob costas and his show are as guilty of this over-hype as anyone. maybe he means absurd in an existential sense. maybe not. maybe he's taking a jab at his own show and sports coverage in general. but that doesn't seem like bob costas. he's an asshole. and assholes have a difficult time making fun of themselves.

as weird as the first sentence was, the second is weirder. bob said it with this kind of smirk on his face; like he was about to bust up laughing before he finished the joke. here's how i imagine the pre-show meeting went:

bob costas: i wrote this line about t.o.'s return.

co-workers: what is it?

bob: the return wasn't as warm and fresh as a philly cheese-steak

co-workers: that's not funny

bob: yes it is. philly cheese-steaks are the identity of philadelphia

co-workers: no there not and that joke makes no sense. don't use it.

but bob believed in the joke so much he used it without permission. but he's bob fucking costas; no one tells him what to do.

i think i figured out the problem with his joke, besides it not being interesting. warm and fresh are both ambiguous words so it's supposed to be a play on words. the philly cheese-steak refers to physical characteristics of the sandwich having to do with heat and how old the bread is. warm and fresh do have other meanings--how a movie makes you feel warm, which is different from a space-heater, or how fresh used to be used in hip hop. however, the return of t.o. can neither be warm or fresh in any sense of the words. so the joke doesn't make any sense. and bob costas is still an (fat and ugly and stupid) idiot.

who do you like?

or


The other day I was flipping through the channels and happened to see Mr. Marino's face staring back out of my t.v. He was there talking with a few other "less important" guys talking about the week in american football. The reason that this caught my attention was because they were all talking about Brett Favre. It was only interesting because they were talking about the "current events" that were happening when Favre hit the NFL. Some of the things they mentioned: Last of the Mohicans was the top movie, grunge music came onto the scene lead by Nirvana with Smells like Teen Spirit, both Mike Tyson and Jeffrey Dahmer were arrested that year (tyson for rape, Dahmer for murder), Super Nintendo was released, The Gulf war, Magic Johnson announced that he has HIV, etc. The other men on the show started "ribbing" Marino about how Brett has 402 career touchdown passes, and is quickly approaching Marino's own record of 420 .

this caused me to think... i mean, one would hope that after 16 seasons straight, starting every game a quarter back would have at least 400 touchdown passes. I looked up Marino's career and found out that he actually played for 17 seasons. So essentially Favre has another season along with the current one to make 18 touchdown passes. I think he will do it. I just don't know if he should.

After reading up on Mr. Favre's life from here, I found out that he's become a corporate machine. The boy that started out so well has apparently come to the point where he's lost touch with what really matters in life. In his early years he was a fun guy, making silly bets and having a good time. From there it seems that he's changed his focus to numbers and records. I don't know if Marino was the same (i didn't pay him any attention when he was a QB).

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I really don't know much about it at all, so I ask: who do you like? Farve or Marino? Should Favre break Marino's record, or should the record stand at 420 ?

tough talk towards t.o.; too bad t.o. totally topped trained theory

monday is all about the nfl. that's what this commercial i saw told me. i figured sunday would be all about that but i guess it's all about the nfl and trimming the hedges and laundry and maybe cleaning the garage.

the point of the previous paragraph: i watched like twenty minutes of espn's nfl countdown this morning.

this show was out of control. it started with a virtual tornado of football, i hope. otherwise i have no idea what the opening graphics were all about. every segment of the show was brought to me by a different product--ibm, marriot courtyard, fidelity, ibm again, old spice, direct tv. every anchor(?) was dressed for success. chris b (black blazer, white shirt and a pink tie [pink ties are awesome]) looked the best. but where was steve young? did he speak in conference this week? or was he just in slc for the serious mormon parties? i imagine that young, marriot, covey, thurl bailey, that girl from survivor, boyd k packer and the ghosts of eliza snow and joseph f smith all hung out on top of the conference center last night. i guess steve young was too hung-over to make it back for the show.

t.o. and his accidental overdose opened the broadcast. here's what t.o. said: "i don't think i'd be here if i took 35 pills." he makes a good point. chris b turned it over to the panel to give this quote some context. i'll try and put there context in context.

irvey (white shirt with orange stripes going horizontally and vertically, light blue tie with blue something on it and a black blazer): the cowboys should have been thinking about the titans, but it's all t.o., t.o., t.o.

me (black t-shirt and grey shorts): i'm glad someone sort of defends t.o. it seemed like he was saying that t.o.'s teammates were concerned for t.o.'s health (like normal human beings would be) when they should have been focusing on football. but how do you focus on football when your friend overdoses?

t.j. (black blazer with thick white pin-stripes, white shirt and a black and red striped tie): it's always something with t.o.

me (same as above): t.j. probably thanks god that guy's in the league or they'd actually have to come up with some stories. i mean, this is a two-hour show about (american) football.

glassface, who other people call jaws (black blazer, peach shirt and an orange and black tie): speaking for bledsoe, if t.o. is always overdosing on pills, how are we gong to work on our timing and chemistry? speaking for myself, how can you win with t.o. on your team?

me: speaking for glassface, i wish i was half the qb bledsoe is when i played, but i was and am too much of a hater. if i hate someone, i hate someone. i especially hate black athletes who don't know there place.

dikta (navy blazer, blue shirt, grey tie and an american flag pin): so long, don't let the door hit you on the way out.

me: i guess dikta would fire anyone on his team with any kind of mental health problem. real men don't have mental health problems, i guess.

t.o. may have tried to kill himself. can't espn lay off him for a week?

here's what else i learned:
-phil simms won a bunch of money off his son playing poker while his son was in the hospital and probably groggy from the meds.
-chris henry doesn't mind his rap sheet.
-espn loves alliteration. here are some of the teasers for stories coming up later in the show: too much t.o., tom's troubles, smith the savior, winning without shawn, dallas distraction and chad's comeback.

finally, everyone but irvey thought t.o. would hurt dallas this week by playing. he didn't. they won easily. not only that, t.o. played pretty well. he lead the cowboys in receiving. however, that's not good enough for espn. i watched a little of the blitz--a show on espnews that recaps the day in (american) football--and saw another t.o. quote where he said that he exceeded everyone's expectation (maybe he should work at espn writing teasers). sean s took exception to this (maybe i should). first sean talked about how terry glenn stepped up as a number one receiver since t.o. played so bad. while glenn did have a couple touchdowns, he had a lot less yards than t.o. i don't get his point. then sean talked about why everyone hates t.o. i guess it's because he says things like exceeding everyone's expectations even though he did. i thought about this logic for a while and figured that you're supposed to hate athletes who play better than espn thinks they will. i guess that makes sense.