more Reivers

If you clicked on the link to The Reivers in my last entry, you might have been thrown off by all of the Zeitgeist references. They're one and the same! The thing is, they had to change their name because another group had the name Zeitgeist first, hence The Reivers. I remember when I first learned about them, I decided to check out their albums at the local record store and found a sticker saying formerly known as Zeitgeist stuck on each of them. Eh, I bought an album anyway and next thing I knew, I had a new band to count among my favorites!

When I first got online many years ago, one of the first things I typed into a search engine was 'the Reivers' just to see what was out there, and lo and behold, a new website dedicated to them had just been created:
The Reivers

And here is a link to a video they made:
The Reivers - In Your Eyes

Exciting for us Reivers fans is they have more or less gotten back together, this time with an additional member and a new name, Right or Happy. Here is a link to a performance I just found posted on YouTube:
Right or Happy (live at SxSW)

The Reivers

Yesterday's entry got me thinking about other favorite lyrics. The first set of lyrics that came to mind is by a favorite band of mine called The Reivers. They were a band out of Austin, TX back in the mid-80's to early 90's. From their album The End of the Day is a wonderful song called Star Telegram, written by John Croslin - here is a line from that song:

If you're looking at me
If you watch me make my way
I hope you're proud of what you see

At the time, these lyrics reminded me of my late father who died when I was a boy, and what he thought as he looked down at me. Now that my mother has passed away, I wonder what she thinks now too.

beautiful lyrics

I don't pick up song lyrics very well - some stand out, whereas others never really sink in and I just go by how they make me feel. And even when I try and focus, I can't pick them out including some Carpenters songs! Still, I have my favorites...

While listening to Music Choice just now, I came across the hit song by John Denver, Rocky Mountain High, and I was reminded of one of my favorite lyrics and the only line that really stands out from this song for me:

He was born in the summer of his 27th year,
coming home to a place he'd never been before.

It was years before I paid attention to the irony in those lyrics; aren't they beautiful?

just like in nature

Watching the 49ers game today reminded me of something I saw on an old videotape highlighting a 49ers championship season from yesteryear. In that particular year, their opponents in the playoffs were the Vikings and the Rams. Prior to the game as part of their psyching up and preparing for the game, two of the Vikings players slammed the crowns of their helmets together, then afterwards circled their heads around. It's a nice close-up shot taken by the camera person establishing a great mood for the battle ahead.

And yet I couldn't help but imagine how much better it would have been if instead of two Vikings players slamming their helmets together, it had been two of the Rams players. The sound their helmets would have made, the visual of seeing a couple of Rams smashing their heads against each other and then shaking off the effects of such a violent act, it would have been a perfect impression of two actual big-horned rams charging each other and smashing their heads against one another, awesome footage which I have seen on nature shows.

Of course none of the football warm-ups above were scripted but just the thought that one of the playoff opponents that year included the Rams brought this vision of nature to mind.

great name for a band

In light of recent events, I don't know why I find this thought so amusing and why it keeps entering my mind. I remember learning about musician and Foo Fighters front man Dave Grohl many years ago, back when he was the drummer for Nirvana. What always stuck with me was the name of a previous band he was in... Dain Bramage.

aw shucks

There's an ad campaign now for the 250th anniversary of Guinness, and quite frankly, it makes me blush. One of these days I'll have to capture the commercial on videotape or something. The first time I listened to it, I wasn't sure I was hearing what I thought I was hearing, but it turns out they were saying what I thought they were saying:

"To Arthur!"

some R & R

This morning, I saw the list of nominees for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, Class of 2010, and did a search on Google to see what additional information I could find. I found a nice page with brief bios and musical excerpts of each nominee on the website of the Rock and Roll HOF.

Naturally I was excited to see that ABBA was included (I wrote about them in a previous entry called the beauty and the cutie); what surprised me was what I learned about Laura Nyro. Her name was already familiar to me for composing Eli's Coming, recorded by Three Dog Night, but that was it.

Among the many records that were around for me to listen to while growing up were an album or two by the Fifth Dimension. In particular, I can picture the cover of their greatest hits which included the songs Stoned Soul Picnic and Wedding Bell Blues, both as it turns out, written by Laura Nyro. Another song of hers is And When I Die, which was recorded by Blood, Sweat, and Tears.

As I mentioned before, I love finding out these new bits of information, especially about music!

widescreen format

One of my favorite films is The Guns of Navarone starring Gregory Peck, David Niven, and Anthony Quinn. It is a film from 1961 about a group of commandos during World War II whose mission it is to destroy an installation of massive guns that overlooks the Aegean Sea. There is a scene in which three of the characters are shown sitting in the front of a truck, speaking of past hurts and their plans for after the war. What I can't recall is ever seeing all three of them at the same time in this emotional scene.

Which reminds me of the time I tried watching the film The Graduate, but getting dizzy. In fact I got so dizzy this one time, I had to find something else to watch. Watching films re-sized for television screens and then being subjected to the 'pan-and-scan' technique often does this to me - the camera is in constant motion trying to capture the most important part of each scene, and The Graduate suffered more than most films from this. I've wondered if the directors themselves have anything to do with just how this technique is used - if not, they ought to be. After all, it's their vision and unless they can be assured that their creations are only seen in widescreen format, then they should be involved in how their films are seen in television format too.

Then again, television screens have gotten so big over the years, shouldn't movies only be shown in widescreen format?

As for the scene in the truck, sometimes scenes are truncated entirely. Hopefully the next time I watch The Guns of Navarone, it'll be on DVD and as it was originally filmed in widescreen movie format so I can see how the one character reacts to hearing that another character plans to kill him after the war.

what's a pie?

When the word pie is mentioned, I first think of a dessert. It might be banana-cream pie, or Boston cream pie, or perhaps one made with a custard filling. Hmmm... pie. That's what pie means to me.

On a separate note is pizza. Hmmm... pizza. I love pizza. Hawaiian pizza. Pepperoni pizza. Vegetarian pizza. Not so much chicken on pizza, but that's another story. What throws me off however is when somebody says pizza pie.

It got so bad hearing yet somebody else say "pizza pie" (on the Food Network last night) that I actually looked it up in the dictionary just now.

And what did I find?
pie 1: a meat dish baked with biscuit or pastry crust 2: a dessert consisting of a filling (as of fruit or custard) in a pastry shell or topped with pastry or both.
(according to Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary - 11th edition)

I wasn't expecting a different definition let alone for it to be the first definition. So I guess from now on, I will have to think of pizza as a pie.


But not a pie pie.

jam cars

Chase for the Cup - the playoffs of NASCAR are here!


I don't get it.

In other sports, qualifying for the playoffs means participating in the playoffs, and consequently, not qualifying for the playoffs means not participating. Years ago, when I first heard that NASCAR was implementing a playoffs to determine the champion for the season, I thought how cool and started imagining races with only so many cars on the track.. now races will be different. Imagine - a playoffs in car racing - that shakes things up!

Then I watched one of these playoffs races... whaaat? Apparently there were the same number of cars. And when I read through the horizontal scrolling which indicated who was in what place, the only thing I could find was certain drivers had a different color next their name. As it turns out, those were the drivers that were racing for the championship. But what about all the other drivers... what were they for? Were they just on the track to be jam cars??

bunny ears

I've fantasized about being a NASCAR race-car driver. And it's not the driving that I find appealing but the car I would drive because of my fantasy sponsor... Playboy!

So this is what I imagine my car would look like:

The color would be black. It's been awhile since I've watched a stock car race and I don't even know if there have been any black cars since the late Dale Earnhardt and his iconic #3 car. Or maybe he's the only driver I can think of that ever drove a black car because he made it a part of his image.

The number would be 82 because that was the number of my all-time favorite football player, John Taylor, who was a wide receiver for the San Francisco 49ers back in the 80's and 90's. He caught the game winning touchdown in Super Bowl XXIII.

And of course, the hood would then be adorned with a big and bright white Playboy bunny logo. I would pattern my style of driving to the great Dale Earnhardt, who had the reputation for hard, aggressive driving. I would strike fear into the hearts of all other drivers, and they would shudder with the thought of being followed by the bunny ears... FEAR THE BUNNY!

team slogan

Being that they are the local team (close enough anyway), I root for the San Jose Sharks. And with hockey season on the horizon, I thought that I'd share my idea for a team slogan: deal with the teal. It sounds better spoken in an ominous tone.

Go Sharks!

the mindbenders

What a cool name for a band! hmmm... sounds familiar

Back to today's entry: I recently read an article about the repairs made to the Hubble telescope. Accompanying the article were a couple of the more spectacular photographs that were taken with it... WOW! And then to think of it all, about how potentially big the universe is (the known and unknown universes - now what does that mean?), remembering the sound of Carl Sagan's voice saying "billions and billions...", wondering how small our solar system is compared to the entirety of the Milky Way, trying to imagine the number of galaxies there are beyond ours... it's all so mind-boggling, it's all so mindbending.

I suppose that for most people living near cities and lights, it has gotten impossible to see the sky as our ancestors did, being able to look up at the stars at night and feel overwhelmed by the sheer number of them. I recall going up to the mountains and looking up at the night sky in wonder, almost frightened by how many stars I could see. So perhaps we'd have to go back in time to actually catch up to and appreciate what is being captured with modern technology. It's all so wondrous imagining just how expansive space really is.

To go even further with this idea of space and the size of the universe, is it easier to imagine that we are the only forms of so-called 'intelligent' life, or that we are not alone? And if we are not alone, where are we in the time continuum? If there are other forms of life, how advanced are they?

Is there such a thing as the beginning of time? If The Big Bang Theory is valid, what existed before? These questions and more have been asked by some people countless times, while others haven't given them a second thought. I've sometimes wondered how fun it would be to blow the mind of the intellectually gifted by asking them to make sense of the numerical figure: A googol to the googol power. Maybe it wouldn't be so much fun as kind of mean...

Too much to think about! So instead of asking myself "What is the Meaning of Life?" maybe I'll just flip on the TV and see what's on.

follow-up

Yesterday morning was my first follow-up appointment with the surgeon that performed the surgery on my brain. The scheduling made by my health plan worked out nicely since it's over an hour's drive to get there from where I live, and I had an MRI of the operated site taken beforehand during the same visit.

All in all, for what I had, the surgery was a success! On the day of the surgery at the end of July, we were told by the surgeon that he was able to remove approximately 90% of the tumor, while not harming any of the nerves which the mass had already grown large enough to become mixed up with, except for losing the hearing in my right ear which I already mentioned in my previous entry I'm back!. But my balance continues to improve, as are my facial muscles (specifically on the right side), and I've got almost all of the taste in mouth back, so I am able to eat pretty much what I want again. Although I would like to keep the added weight off, I have gained a lot of it back so am feeling normal in that respect again.

My next scheduled appointment is just over a month away with another doctor to see if I should consider having radiation treatment to make sure that the growth of the mass stops.

With this in mind, my thoughts will again start turning towards finding a job. I had surgery on my lower back 4 1/2 years ago, and when I recovered from that, I had the honor of caring for my late mother whose health had started to fail. Now I look forward to when she appears in my dreams. Anyway, with brain surgery to add to my earlier back surgery, plus the struggling economy, who knows what I'll be able to find?

Creed!

See if you recognize Creed Bratton from The Office in these videos from when he was a member of The Grass Roots back in the late 60's.

Look for Creed with the Fu Manchu mustache:
The Grass Roots - Bella Linda

And in this more familiar hit song (for those of you old enough to remember), Creed is the guitarist stage right of the drummer:
The Grass Roots - Midnight Confessions

the *ucked rule

Growing up in the San Francisco Bay Area, I naturally became what I call a Bay Area fan: the 49ers, the Giants, the A's, the Warriors, the Sharks, and sometimes the Raiders. There was a time when the Raiders probably meant more to me than any of them, but then they moved...

I rooted for the local teams because I sensed that they were representing me, that they were competing for me. And back in the 70's, the Raiders were always televised, more so than I remember the 49ers being televised. I can even recall the tag line of the network that broadcast them: "Representing the best of the National Football League - the American Football Conference." I imagine that as with most people, my childhood impressions are to this day the strongest with me, and as far as the Raiders are concerned, there were the good (Sea of Hands, Ghost to the Post, Holy Roller), the bad (Rob Lytle's fumble while playing Denver that went uncalled, the Immaculate Reception (until this play happened, I was an optimist)), and even the tragic (the hit on Darryl Stingley that caused his paralysis). That last play notwithstanding, the Raiders meant a lot to me, even as they were building bad karma with the rest of the league, and I fear, everything else.

When the team moved down to Los Angeles back in the early 80's, it ripped my heart out. It's as if my girlfriend decided to move, telling me that she had found someone else, that he was better looking, had more money, and oh yeah, lived in L.A. I'm reminded of a co-worker back when I worked in Modesto saying that (and I am paraphrasing) he was sick of all the panty-assed whiners who abandoned the Raiders when they moved to L.A. Wait a minute - who abandoned whom? Anyway, when they moved back, it's like my girlfriend moved back and wanted to get back together. And now every time we embrace, I can't help but think that she is looking over my shoulder for someone who is, again, better looking and has more money. But I digress... where was I?

Oh yeah, the Raiders. How do I know that I'm not as big of a fan of the Raiders as I was growing up even though they've moved back to Oakland? Well, I enjoy it when they are successful but not terribly upset when they lose. I watched last night's game against the Chargers and was super excited that they put themselves ahead for a possible victory. That they ended up losing, oh well... no biggie. It's a bigger disappointment than usual, but it will still take some time to get me back as a die-hard fan, if it can happen at all. And coincidentally, their original move away from the Bay Area was around the same time the 49ers started winning Super Bowls.

Getting back to karma and the title of this entry. I think karma and years of bad mojo came back to haunt the Raiders big-time in that playoff game in the snow against New England, which by the way, much like the Immaculate Reception did for the Steelers, began a football dynasty. Patriots fans can go on and on that it was the correct call based on the rule, and I'm not going to dispute that here. I just can't understand why the rule is there in the first place. I think whether or not there is an incomplete pass or a fumble should be clear enough. But to rule a so-called tuck rule is a cop-out. Is it to protect the quarterback from injury? I need to look this rule up. And I can't imagine how many young impressionable football fans changed from optimists to pessimists with that single play, like a certain ruling did to a young impressionable football fan back in the 70's.

shriek-free tennis

I was flipping channels last night and started watching the women's final of the U.S. Open around the beginning of the second set. Because my father loved tennis so much, watching tennis is something I've enjoyed my entire life. It wasn't long before I started asking myself why I was enjoying watching this particular match so much, especially compared to the majority of matches lately - what was it about these two players that I found so appealing when I so often turn the channel nowadays? It wasn't long before the answer dawned on me: neither of them was shrieking!

It's so rare now to find a tennis match in which neither of the players shouts with nearly every single shot that they make. As with the martial arts, I can understand the argument that making a so-called "grunt" is helpful when properly executing a move, but the practice is more than I care for when watching tennis. For years, players just didn't grunt in the world of tennis, and now it is difficult to avoid. In this particular match, perhaps if one listens carefully, there can be a subtle "grunt" heard every now and again, but that would be an athletic breath, something voice-free that used to be defined as a grunt back in the day, not the out-and-out shrieking that is so common now.

And this grunting is either more prevalent in the women's game than the men's game or it's just that much more noticeable because they put more into it. Either way, if it gets really bad I usually end up watching something else. I wonder now if the people that more or less grew up with this vocal style of play are used to it, much like the sound effects that are currently so prevalent (like in Iron Chef America as mentioned in the previous entry Zing!).

So if I stumble upon a women's tennis match that reminds me of the good ol' days of quiet, classier players, I'm going to embrace it!

that's news?

Yeah, I like watching sports on television. And to go with today's sports-related entry, here is another gripe: trying to make something sound newsworthy when it really isn't.

Here is what I mean:

So many times I've watched sports reports and the announcer says something like: "and with that victory, Philadelphia makes the playoffs for the first time since 2007." 2007? You're telling me that they didn't make the playoffs last year? Why is that worth mentioning? Now if it's been many years since Philadelphia made the playoffs, that might be worth reporting. But a couple of years is no big deal.

all you did was weaken a country today

I came upon the film A Few Good Men about an hour into it this morning and started watching. It reminded me of something that I had been thinking for awhile now about this movie. For anyone not familiar with what happens, a couple of soldiers are brought to trial for the murder of a fellow soldier. Their defense is they were simply following an order, administering a form of discipline known as 'Code Red.' I have watched this film countless times, at various points, whenever I happen to come across it (much like other films as mentioned in a previous entry).

The defendants believe that they did nothing wrong.

I realize that the tenor of the film is to have us agree that they were just doing what they were told to do by a superior officer. But the 'Code Red' in this case was to administer discipline, not to kill somebody. Earlier in the film during the trial, another soldier was put on the stand to testify about some of his experiences on the base. He was asked if he had ever been given a 'Code Red' and he responded yes, that a weapon had slipped out of his hands once and that several members of his unit had thrown a blanket over him, punched his arms, and then poured glue on his hands. And he never dropped his weapon again. He didn't accidentally die either. And if he had, would his fellow soldiers have insisted that they were simply following an order?

Although the end of film does allow for a slight measure of 'feeling bad' on the part of one of the defendants, I am still bothered by their lack of compassion for the deceased throughout the film, and the sloppiness in their carrying out of the 'code' in the first place. And surely the commanding officer wasn't intending for the victim to die when he originally ordered the 'Code Red'?

calling balls and strikes

When watching baseball on television, I've occasionally seen a graphic that shows where a particular pitch has crossed the front of home plate. It is a rectangle shown near the batter and above the plate to help the viewer see where the pitch was and how accurate the umpire's call was.

With such technology available, why not use it in actual games to call balls and strikes? Something similar is used to make line calls in tennis tournaments, whether it is an automatic 'beep' sound on serves, or a close-up on other line calls that can be utilized when asked for by a player. I know, I know, there are traditionalists in baseball that are going to say that baseball is about personality as much as anything else, and how a particular umpire calls pitches is part of the game. But I'd rather have consistency and accuracy.

This would mean objectively calling pitches a ball and or a strike regardless of whether or not it hits the catcher's glove 'just right.' It would mean no more 'outside strikes' which I think ruined the game for years (the catcher would set a target outside the strike zone, the pitcher would hit the target perfectly, and would get the 'strike' call - even though the pitch was outside!). Batters had to protect against such pitches, which had an effect on inside pitches that were close to the batter. Or if a pitch were to cross the strike zone, but miss the target set by the catcher, it wouldn't be called a strike. Some umpires have a low strike zone, others have a high strike zone... there are lots of idiosyncrasies. It'd be nice to have one strike zone for a change.

I imagine that there must be a way to send the information that is made for television immediately to the masks of umpires so that they would be able to make calls as fast as they would otherwise. And given that they are only shown a rectangle and a 'dot,' they can still exercise some subjectivity, such as pitches that cross one of the zone lines.

Zing!

Continuing from my last entry, one of my favorite reality shows is Top Chef. And not because I have anything to do with cooking; I just find it very enjoyable to watch. The cheftestants are interesting (oops, I have to be careful about using that word, it's not a favorite when used by a judge when describing a dish), and the challenges that they are asked to perform are exceedingly difficult.

A production value from Top Chef that I enjoy is the effect that is used when either going to a commercial or coming back from one - the cooking knife moving vertically into the Top Chef logo while being punctuated by the sound effect 'zing!' But like most everything else, I only enjoy it in moderation, such as on this show.

And when is it not used in moderation? Well, and I am referring to the sound effect in particular, it is used excessively on Iron Chef America. Ugh... I can't even stand to watch that show at all due to the incessant use of that sound effect. Like an exclamation point, it is fine when adding occasional emphasis, but overuse something and I'm turning the channel. That sound is used over and over again: when compiling lists of ingredients, cutting from one shot to another, when introducing the judges for the episode, it just doesn't stop. An effect that I normally like becomes something quite upsetting.

Whenever I happen to catch the original Iron Chef, I enjoy the show quite a bit even though it is shown using voiceovers and the occasional subtitle. I'm sure that I would enjoy Iron Chef America if not for those awful 'zings' that drive me crazy. I like the format of the show and am even familiar with some of the Iron Chefs.

On the other hand, I suppose it is one less reason for me to spend so much time sitting in front of the television.

are they real?

I enjoy reality television shows - not all of them, but some of them. Of course, there are different kinds of shows, and each show has its own personality. Some shows are performance-oriented, show-biz competitions, whereas others are skills-based competitions. Still others aren't competitions at all.

Just how real they are is open to discussion. What they all appear to have in common is that they are non-scripted. And they can vary from production to production - I suppose only an actual participant can offer an opinion on what it's like to be in one.

One of the biggest advantages I can think of for a network to produce a reality show as opposed to a scripted show is the amount of footage that is naturally generated; I imagine that a lot of work must be set aside for editing down the material. A scripted show on the other hand must spend time writing the dialogue, rehearsing, and directing, among other things. In fact, I kind of wonder why scripted shows are so much easier to find on DVD than reality shows. There is so much extra 'bonus' material that could go on the DVD of a reality show.

Now depending on the participants, some seasons of reality shows are more enjoyable than others. And no, I don't prefer the so-called controversial participants to spark my interest. Charismatic, yes, controversial, no.

With the proliferation of reality shows, maybe scripted shows will become more popular again. Time will tell just where the balance will settle down at - and with so many choices such as cable available, technology could play a big role.

team and player

In a perfect world, former NFL wide receiver Willie Anderson would have played for Miami.


Get it? Willie "Flipper" Anderson playing for the Miami Dolphins?

The new season can't start soon enough...

beginnings

As many times as I've watched my favorite movies on television and as old as I am now, I am really quite shocked at how few times I've seen the beginning of them. The two examples that come to mind are El Dorado and The Godfather: Part II.

El Dorado, for those of you not familiar with it, is a John Wayne film that also stars Robert Mitchum and James Caan. It is an old West movie, and it seems as if I am always happening upon it when 'Mississippi,' the character played by James Caan, is entering a saloon to get retribution for the death of a mentor, whose hat Mississippi now wears. Until I caught the film at an earlier scene - just one time - I pretty much figured that the scene in the saloon was where the movie started. One day as I was flipping channels, I found myself watching the part where Cole Thornton (John Wayne's character) is sitting on his horse talking to Bart Jason (played by Ed Asner) outside a small building/residence; I watched it for awhile before I even realized that the movie was El Dorado. Naturally, there are other earlier scenes I had managed to miss for the longest time; Cole being shot by Josephine for example. I guess it's only natural when flipping channels on the remote control to catch movies somewhere in the middle, but I'm still surprised at how often I've managed to miss the beginnings of ones that I watch so often.

I'm sure that El Dorado is a bit obscure for most people, but The Godfather: Part II is probably quite familiar. And yet, again, I've only seen the beginning the one time. And I don't even know how close to the beginning I actually watched it. Many times, I had watched the part where the young adult Vito Corleone (played by Robert DeNiro) thrusts a knife into some old man sitting in a chair on the porch of a fancy home, and I remember always thinking, wow, I guess it's brutal getting to the top. It wasn't until I finally saw the beginning that I realized that the stabbing was actually pay back for what had happened to Vito's family earlier in the film, when Vito was just a young boy. Oh well, I've never watched Godfather II straight through anyway, as opposed to The Godfather. If I ever do, I'll probably get even more answers! One of these days, I'll start watching all these movies on DVD.

the no-fun-league?

What about showing some class?

We all draw lines somewhere, some more extreme than others. In football, questionable behavior is often penalized, but I think that it is usually justified. There are rules and standards, after all. Whether calling personal fouls (important in preventing injuries) or unsportsmanlike conduct penalties, it's all designed to enforce a sense of decorum - yes, even in as emotional a sport as football. And so far, I can't say I really disagree with any of them.

Going over the line for me would be penalizing a player for simply being happy and smiling, spiking the ball after a score, outstretching one's arms, many things... but choreographed dances, staged theatrics, mimicking the slashing of one's throat... that kind of behavior goes too far. Why risk pushing people's buttons even further? The first time I noticed such behavior was when one team's players literally circled around a couple of members of the other team after scoring a touchdown and danced. This is when I first thought that such behavior had gone too far.

Now it's difficult to decide just which behaviors are to be allowed, and which ones to throw a flag for, but I can't blame the league for trying. And maybe certain people are just trying to sound cool, but I don't care for those that criticize the league for trying to implement rules of conduct, calling the NFL 'the no-fun-league.' Isn't the game itself enough to enjoy it? The great blocks, the stutter-step moves, the incredible athleticism? How did these critics manage to enjoy the game before all of these additional antics?

the white stripes

For most programs, the college football season starts today. Which reminds me of something that I have wondered about over the years: is the college football easier to catch?

Something that I have observed is how players at the collegiate level often make grabs that professionals don't. Now one would assume that players at the professional level are the best of the best, and naturally, would be better at catching footballs. Yet, this doesn't appear to be the case. NFL receivers frequently misplay balls, and college players seemingly make the majority of their opportunities. What would the difference be? Don't professionals advance through the collegiate ranks?

One of the first things that one notices after watching the two levels of football is the difference between the balls: the college-level football has a couple of white stripes towards the ends of the ball which the NFL-level football doesn't. Looking at a few games today, those wide stripes don't encircle the entire ball - but they are still there and certainly help distinguish the dimensions of the ball, as well as the speed of the rotation, among other things. Making it easier to catch.

One would think that this is obviously the reason that players catch footballs more consistently at the collegiate-level, yet I can't recall ever hearing that as an explanation. I suppose that the explanations most often offered have to do with the differing levels of the two leagues: speed, complexity, skill of opponent... but I think it has to do with the white stripes. Am I simply stating the obvious, or missing it?

isn't it ironic?

Well, I love irony as much as the next person, and these are/would be a couple of my favorite music-related examples of irony:

ZZ Top is comprised of two front men with incredible beards (Billy Gibbons and Dusty Hill) and a clean-shaven drummer whose name is... Frank Beard.

What if each of the members of the Canadian rock band The Guess Who were married to American women? I remember listening to the radio a while back and there was a member of The Guess Who being interviewed. He was explaining that it wasn't so much that they were saying American Woman stay away, but Canadian Woman get closer. Uhhh... yeah... right... Seriously though, I guess it wouldn't have been as big a hit that way.

ABBA: the Beauty and the Cutie

I like ABBA. There I said it. Actually, I've said it twice now (the first time in a previous post). And I especially like the beauty and the cutie of the group. :-P

Now I understand that some groups and bands get overplayed to the point of putting people off. Fortunately, that didn't happen to me with ABBA, particularly here in the U.S. Not back in the 1970's when they first became popular. And their 'poppiness' didn't bother me either. Although I never went around telling people that I liked them - that would have been like admitting to liking the Carpenters, Barry Manilow, or John Denver for example. All of whom I like, by the way. But heck, I'm old enough now not to worry about what other people think (there are certain advantages to getting older!).

I suppose I didn't have really strong feelings about them either way when I ordered 'ABBA Gold' back in the 1990's. I just remember liking their music whenever I happened to hear it on the radio. And after I got the CD, I only listened to the songs that I already knew: Knowing Me, Knowing You; Take a Chance On Me; S.O.S.; Chiquitita; and Waterloo among them. And because I wasn't familiar with their other hits, I didn't bother listening to them: Mamma Mia; Super Trouper; Thank You For The Music; etc.

It wasn't until after the film version of Mamma Mia! was released last year that I even became a BIG fan of ABBA. Not that I've ever seen or plan to see the film; after it was released, I decided instead to go to YouTube and see what was available. There's a whole lot. I became familiar again with them and the several videos that brought back so many memories. I made sure to learn their names: Agnetha, Bjorn, Benny, and Anni-Frid. Anni-Frid (the brunette) is also known as Frida - in fact, I knew their names already except for the iconic blonde, Agnetha. It didn't ring a bell at all for me!

Now they're one of my favorite groups - I've since picked up a boxed set and several books. I've come to like all of their music. And I like both girls. I've been pretty surprised to find that many fans go the route of partisanship when liking Agnetha and Frida. Or should I say Agnetha or Frida. What's the point? I happen to adore them both. Which leads to who's the beauty and who's the cutie? Well, in my opinion, Frida is the beauty and Agnetha is the cutie...


Some of their best songs aren't even on 'ABBA Gold' or 'More ABBA Gold':

I've Been Waiting For You

Tiger

my bad grammar

I read recently that the word 'ginormous' is in the latest edition of Webster's Dictionary. Really? I suppose it sounded hip and inventive when people first started saying it, but to acknowledge the word by putting it into print makes it official or something. And just where does it compare with words such as huge and large? Is it bigger than enormous but smaller than gigantic? Do we really need another word to denote something that's big?

More examples:

Anyhoo? Or is it anywho? Horton Hears a Who?

And 'my bad.' Is that supposed to mean my mistake? Whenever I hear 'my bad,' I need to complete the phrase by adding the word grammar to it.

A popular phrase is 'it is what it is.' Actually, this one I kind of like, but I still add to it: "It is what it is. It was what it was. It's going to be what it's going to be. And if a=b and b=c, then a=c."

And the movie "Moon Over Parador"... I guess it sounded better than "Moon Over Equaguay." Hey, I just now discovered the word 'portmanteau'!

Setting up a chessboard

I think that people generally know how to properly set up a chessboard, even if they don't know how to play chess: the rooks go in the corners, then the knights, the bishops, the king and the queen, with the pawns going in front of them (for each color). The only thing that most people think they need to remember is the queen goes on her own color, meaning the black queen goes on the black square, and the white queen goes on the white square.

I can't imagine that I'm the only person that automatically checks whether or not a chessboard is set up correctly, but apparently I'm in the minority. I mention this because there is one other rule to correctly setting up a chessboard: the bottom right square is supposed to be white (or red - you know what I mean). And having observed the photography in catalogs, the boxes that chess sets come in, chess sets on display, etc., I've noticed that it is wrong more than half the time! And come to think of it, I rarely even look to see if the queens are correctly situated, since they usually are, but I'm always looking at the bottom right squares.

I recall watching a Madonna video years ago and the chessboard was incorrectly positioned. What does this all mean in the grand scheme of things? Not a whole lot, but it still gets to me!