Yoko Ono: It's Not Entirely Her Fault

During the (horrendously gawdawful) Grammy Awards on Sunday night, Yoko Ono was introduced as a “Grammy winner,” which prompted more than few people to rant on social media about how she only won those Grammys because of one John Lennon, and that she was the witch who broke up the Beatles.

Now, those of you who know me are aware that I am a rather passionate Beatles fan. I know lots of people who know a lot about music who say I know more about the Beatles than anybody they know. I am flattered by this statement, but at the same time I don't feel like I am worthy of such praise, because I learn most of my Beatles information from people who know much more about the band than I do. I would like to meet these people (like Mark Lewisohn, the official Beatles historian and author of the new thousand-page book about the band... that covers up until 1962) and pick their brain someday.

That said, when I run into Beatles fans (who are also passionate about the band) who hate on Yoko for causing the lads to break up, I am taken aback. Certainly Yoko was a factor. I could mention several reasons how Yoko helped speed up the end of the band. Okay, here's one: Beatles recording sessions were a boys-only club until John brought Yoko in for the White Album sessions in 1968, and it was resented. The insistence by John that he and Yoko should go everywhere together most assuredly put undue strain on the sessions.

Somebody in this picture was most responsible for the Beatles breakup. Hint: it's not who you think it is.

But the truth is that by the time Yoko became a continual presence in John's life, the band was already irretrivably on the road to ending. By 1968, Ringo felt like he was no longer an integral part of the band. When multi-track recording became the norm for the band, Paul would often erase Ringo's drum tracks, re-record them himself and not be coy about it at all. Ringo was actually the first Beatle to quit the band. During the White Album sessions, Ringo left and took the family off to Greece (it's where he was inspired to write “Octopus's Garden”). You know who's not mentioned at all in Ringo's decision to leave at that time? You already know who. Yoko. When Ringo tells the story she's not a factor. Paul being a jerk is the cause, not anything Yoko did.
Yoko was not the defining factor in the breakup. She was a factor, but so was Linda McCartney (who, let's be honest here, gets a free pass), and if you're going to blame anybody for putting undue strain on the band and being the biggest contributing factor to the end, it's Sir Paul McCartney (who needs to admit he's gone grey. He's going to turn 72, for pete's sake. If you compare a picture of Paul in 1993 to a picture of Paul in 2014, you'd say the 1993 guy looked older- and better). George quit during the Let it Be Sessions- again, because of Paul being a jerk- but came back to finish things up (after he wrote a not-disguised critique of Paul, "Wah-Wah"). Paul was the one who actually officially left the band when he secretly recorded his first solo album, McCartney, and released it a month before the Let it Be album.

There's a good story about when George quit during those Let it Be sessions. The other three had a meeting to try and decide what to do. Do they give George some time to cool off and see if he'll come back? Do they call it quits right there and that's the end of it? What do they do? John, and I swear to you this is true, asked if they should call Eric and see if he'd take George's place. Who's this “Eric”? Well, as it turns out, Eric was between gigs himself- because Cream had just broken up. Yes, John Lennon suggested that the Beatles continue with Eric Clapton as their lead guitarist. Does this sound like a man who'd been brainwashed by Yoko Ono into breaking up the band he'd formed when he was 15? You should be able to figure out that John never wanted the band to really call it quits. That fact gets glossed over all the time. John was, in many ways, incredibly insecure and reluctant to change.

Fat, depressed John, pre-Yoko

Which is why Yoko is unduly ridiculed for what she did with John. What we know John for now- as a peace advocate, a champion of human rights, a pioneer in how popular musicians will occasionally use their celebrity for change- (Good example: Bono. Bad example: Justin Bieber.) would never have happened had Yoko not shown up.

In 1966, the year John met Yoko, the most notorious thing he'd done outside the band was say that “The Beatles are bigger than Jesus.” And I want to be clear here (because like the Yoko situation, there are many who still hate John for this quote), I've read the original quote within context. In the interview, John is explaining that he's a spiritual man, and that he's troubled that religion is being pushed aside. He's saying that nothing should be more important that spirituality and faith, and that the Beatles being bigger than Jesus is a problem- it's something that troubles him- he's not boasting at all.

When he met Yoko, John was married to a woman he didn't want to be married to anymore (they only got married because Cynthia was pregnant with Julian), and when he wasn't part of the band he formed, he was either depressed at his house, or he was avoiding being depressed at his house- countless affairs, tripping on acid with Peter Fonda in LA (the basis for the song “She Said, She Said”). When the band stopped touring in 1966, before he met Yoko, John's depression got worse.

Yoko woke John up. The next three years were incredibly important in John's life- he re-invented himself as an advocate. Yoko showed him that he could use his powers for good, that he could make a difference in this world. Thus, the John Lennon we know was born.

 

 

After Yoko: Activist John

Now, did Yoko do this just so John could help the world? Obviously not. She recognized that she would be taken much more seriously if she hitched her wagon to this gravy train. So yes, she manipulated him and to some extent controlled and limited John in what he did for the rest of his life. She played upon his insecurities and reluctance to change. If you want a real good account of how much Yoko did this, read “The Last Days of John Lennon,” which was written by Frederic Seaman, John's personal assistant for the last two years of his life.

I don't hate Yoko Ono. Instead, I pity her. Clearly, her insecurities and fears that John would leave her for good led her to manipulate him for their entire time together. When John and Yoko separated for two years in the mid-70's, I think John put out his best solo album, Walls and Bridges. I also think that by the end of his life, John realized that he could be a successful musician and husband at the same time, and had come to grips with his insecurities just enough to be a success at both of them, no matter what Yoko did.

And I'm certain he would have had enough sense not to perform at the Grammys.  

photos courtesy: theguardian.com, beatlesbible.com, bluefat.com, theredlist.com

Klondike: We've Struck Mud!

Having recently gotten caught up on Game of Thrones, (Helloooooo, Emilia Clarke! Jared Leto knows what I'm talking about.) I saw some previews for “Klondike” and immediately noticed it was the next adventure for Robb Stark (aka Richard Madden, if you want to be annoying and refer to him by his real name), seeing as his time on Game of Thrones had ended rather violently and without warning.

In the many previews for Klondike (airing this week on Discovery Channel), it seemed like it had several good actor-types (Tim Roth and Sam Shepard among them), plus Robb Stark seemed to do well in cold climates in Game of Thrones. Then there's the part where I've been to Alaska and Skagway (we went partially because I was interested in the Alaskan Gold Rush) and I am a history kind of guy, so I gave it a whirl when the miniseries started on Monday night.

I got concerned when the opening shot of the whole thing was an out-and-out lift of Charlie Chaplin's opening shot from “The Gold Rush,” probably his best film ever (and one of the reasons I got interested in the Alaskan Gold Rush in the first place, because I saw it for the first time when I was about ten years old).

Chaplin on location (Sierra Nevada) for "The Gold Rush"

I am always concerned when movies repeat shots from other movies and it's not done for laughs, but to give the current movie seem more innovative than it really is. Brian de Palma is the master of stealing things in this manner. His entire career is built around the fact that he rips off Alfred Hitchcock shots, not to mention themes. Although not from a Hitchcock film, the baby-carriage-rolling-down-the-steps shot from “The Untouchables” is his most blatant example, because anybody who's ever taken a film class has seen the original version of that, in Sergei Eisenstein's “Battleship Potemkin.” If you're going to borrow a classic shot, do something different with it to make it your own or a homage, not a super-blatant rip-off? It's why the shot-for-shot “Psycho” remake is now universally seen for what it should have been seen at the time, a terrible idea. I'm more than a bit surprised that de Palma wasn't involved in that remake at all. Maybe even he realized it was too much.

In another de Palma movie, “Snake Eyes” with Nicolas Cage, there's a marvellous shot where it's like the ceiling doesn't exist over multiple hotel rooms, and the camera tracks over all these rooms where all these little stories are going on, and you don't get know about any of them because you're going to the hotel room at the end of the hall, where the tracking shot ends. I remember being told that somebody else did that shot and de Palma just stole it, but even Google can't tell me from whom. De Palma's only redeeming quality as far as I'm concerned is that he was a major influence on Quentin Tarantino, who is nothing but original. So there's that.

Anyway, the opening shot of “The Gold Rush” is hundreds of potential miners going up a snow-covered mountain. And since Chaplin based his opening shot on an actual photograph, it makes sense that “Klondike” would start with miners going up a mountain. But you can do that epic shot later in the sequence, not to start things off. I'd rather go with a close shot of faces, or worn boots, or sleds on the snow, or miners collapsing. Anything but a de Palma-esque shot. I was questioning my decision to watch this thing from the first five seconds.

(Side, side note that may or may not be even close to relevant: The opening shot of “Klondike” is a Charlie Chaplin rip-off, and Chaplin's granddaughter, Oona Chaplin, played Robb Stark's wife in Game of Thrones. It seems to be a theme in Robb Stark's recent career. Now, if in his next movie he does a scene dancing with dinner rolls... well, all bets are off.)

Kurt Russell and Elvis, "It Happened at the World's Fair"

And when I was done watching the first episode... well, Robb Stark should have stayed dead. The thing is plotted worse than an Elvis movie. If you're not familiar with Elvis movies, there are about ten of them where Elvis is playing an upstanding young citizen of America, trying to make it on his own... and his best friend is a degenerate gambler with a drinking problem who loses their money and gets them into trouble, which then causes Elvis to try and right the wrongs. “It Happened at the World's Fair” is the best example, because not only is Kurt Russell in it as a ten year old, but so is Yvonne Craig (who went on to be “Batgirl”).

(Another side, side note: Elvis was 27 when he made "It Happened at the World's Fair." And Kurt Russell played Elvis... when he was 27. Kurt feels a big kinship with Elvis, and does a damned good impression of him, too.)

In all of the Elvis movies, you wonder why on earth Elvis' character would even be friends with these degenerates. It's clearly not the first time Elvis has gotten into trouble, or threatened, or lost a bankroll while hanging out with this guy. Robb Stark is in the same fix in Klondike. Not only that, but there's no reason to have any sort of sympathy with Robb Stark here. At least in the Elvis movies something happens in the first five minutes to let you sympathize with the guy. Usually it's him singing the theme song announcing that he's making it on his own or something. In Klondike, Robb Stark is graduating from college in the first five minutes. I did that. You probably did that. How is Robb Stark any different?

In any series, you have to care about the main characters and want them to succeed. Klondike doesn't do a damn thing to make me care about Robb Stark in the first five minutes, and it starts with him nearly being covered by an avalanche. I don't care whether Robb Stark strikes gold or freezes to death in 40-below temperatures. His best friend was a tacky, overused plot point to get him here- anytime you're stealing plot points from “It Happened at the World's Fair,” you have made a major storytelling error- and so when his best friend is killed, I don't care if he finds out who did it or not. “The Maltese Falcon” is a vastly superior movie about a guy in a similar situation- except the guy who's trying to solve the murder is having an affair with the murdered guy's wife, and doesn't like the murdered man anyway. But like Humphrey Bogart says as Sam Spade, “When a man's partner is killed, he's supposed to do something about it.” It doesn't say anything about us giving a damn if we don't like the guy trying to solve the murder.

The other huge problem I have with this show is the dialogue. In Game of Thrones, even though it's a mythical world, the characters still talk like you expect 14^th century noblemen to talk. In Mad Men, the thoughts and idioms are clear 1960's America. In Klondike, everybody talks like it's 2014. It's not supposed to be 2014, it's supposed to be 1897. I'm fairly certain the phrase “lame-ass” did not exist in the Yukon Territory in 1897. Hell, I would wager it's not used that much today in the Yukon Territory.

Jack London looks an awful lot like Robb Stark

Finally, Jack London magically appears and becomes Robb Stark's friend. You may recall that Jack London got his fame and fortune by writing stories about the Alaskan Gold Rush back in the day. I'm just tired of the main characters of historical fiction of any sort running into famous people and becoming their friends. There were thousands of gold prospectors up there in 1897, and you run into Jack London on the first day? And then he follows Robb Stark around, presumably getting ideas for “White Fang” and “To Build A Fire,” and other London classics? Come on. The best historical fiction movie I've seen where a guy runs into a famous guy is Ernest Hemingway in Woody Allen's “Midnight in Paris.” Hemingway's there, he has some impact on the story.... but he and Owen Wilson don't become best buddies. Actually, “Midnight in Paris” is the best movie I've seen that's introduced famous people into the plot and made it seem natural.

Klondike is based on a book. I hope whoever sold the rights is satisfied with the check they got, because I will never read the book thanks to this disaster of a miniseries.

You want a story of the Klondike? Go read anything Jack London wrote. While you're at it, feast your eyes upon “The Gold Rush,” “It Happened at the World's Fair,” “The Maltese Falcon,” and “Midnight in Paris.” And may Robb Stark rest in peace.

Preach on, Brother Ernest

photos courtesy: huffingtonpost.com, monsterzeronj.com, getyourwordsworth.com, wifflegif.com

Colin Kaepernick Needs To Hang Out With Randall Cunningham

When the San Francisco 49ers traded Alex Smith and named Colin Kaepernick the starting quarterback, I heard from more than a few die-hard 49er friends that it was a bad idea. (Bizarrely, some of them still think that.) I told them at the time that they were wrong, and I still bring it up with some of them (not surprisingly, they want me to stop. Okay, I'll just forget the time you swore off the team you've rooted for since you were eight. No, I won't forget that. Loyalty, people. Look it up).

The biggest reason I liked Kaep over Smith had nothing to do with their stats, it had to do with, for lack of better word, is magic. You could use the word “watchability,” but that doesn't cover it. You saw the magic in the NFC championship game Sunday against Seattle, when Kaep took off for 58 yards. That's kind of magic, the ability to make something out of nothing. Kaep has it, Joe Montana and Steve Young had it, even Jeff Garcia had it for a decent stretch. Great quarterbacks have that, and Smith doesn't have that.

Which is why during the NFC title game, I heard myself saying that “Kaep's career will be a short one.” I don't quite know where that came from- maybe I've seen too many magic QB's like that have short windows of opportunity. You can argue that Robert Griffin III's window has already passed. Michael Vick. Tim Tebow, even. Magic QB's with very short windows. Kaep's window is open, but that 49ers defense is aging, and who knows when they start to fail. Kaep will be a better QB in three years, but where will the 49er defense be? What about salaries and salary caps and all that? Kaep's best chance to win the big one is now. He needs a boost from somebody to make sure next year is the year.

So with that in mind, I turned on NFL Network's marvellous series, “A Football Life,” and picked out what, at first thought to me, appeared to be a random episode I hadn't seen, the one on Randall Cunningham.

Not even five minutes into the show, one of the interviewees said, “If Randall played today, he'd be the best quarterback out there. He was 25 years before his time.” They talked about how in Randall's days with the Eagles, the QB with the rocket arm and dangerous legs was seen as something of a circus sideshow. Buddy Ryan, Randall's first pro coach, just kind of let him do whatever without much structure, and his second Eagles coach, Rich Kotite, tried to force him to do something he didn't want to do, become a full-time pocket passer. (You could make a real good argument that Rich Kotite is the worst NFL head coach in the past 30 years, more incompetent than Rod Marinelli, and Rod Marinelli went 0-16 one year. The top three worst coaches since 1992 are Kotite, Marinelli, and Marty Mornhingweg in some order. I'm certain they're all fine gentlemen in other areas, they just happen to be outrageously terrible at organizational heads. There's no coincidence that the Detroit Lions are involved here.)

It's fairly clear in the documentary that Randall's best season as a quarterback did not occur with the Eagles, the team he was drafted by in 1985, but 13 years later, with the Minnesota Vikings team that went 15-1 in the regular season and should have played John Elway and the Broncos in the Super Bowl. Even though Randall was in his mid-30's, he was still able to run, and still had a great arm- and now he realized that when you have Cris Carter and Randy Moss at their peaks, you don't have to run all the time.

At this point I realized that Colin Kaepernick needs to go to Las Vegas and hang out with Randall Cunningham during the off-season. Kaep could do what Randall failed to do, which is win a Super Bowl. Even though Kaep's head coach, Jim Harbaugh, was an NFL quarterback, he was not a Randall Cunningham type. There can't be a “Randall Cunningham type,” because RC is one of a kind. Kaep could be “Randall 2.0,” but Randall's career was salvaged in the mind of public perception by that 1998 season, no matter that the Vikings lost the NFC title game.

To win a Super Bowl with this group of 49ers, Kaep needs the knowledge that Randall Cunningham had in his 13^th year of professional ball. Kaep needs to make Randall tell him everything, because Randall has the best chance of knowing what Kaep is going through right now. He can relate to him as a young mobile QB with a rocket arm and more than a bit of an “I'm the Greatest” mindset, and show him where he can be if he realizes the things Randall took more than a decade to learn. Although I don't think Kaep could ever punt like that.

Now, it's not all on Kaep's shoulders... the 49ers receivers aren't exactly Randy Moss and Cris Carter, even when they're all healthy. But as opposed to Randall's early days, the 49ers not only are receptive to Kaep's magic, they encourage it. If Randall helped him out too? Off the charts watchability.

I think they're more alike than either of them have considered. They both went to school in Nevada (RC to UNLV, CK to Reno), and were under-the-radar picks in their respective drafts- Kaep was considered good but a reach in the 2011 second round, Randall was also taken in the second round and was considered a reach in the 1985 draft. It should not be too surprising that Kaep was the 36^th overall pick, and Randall the 37^th. Both are listed at 6-foot-4, with Randall's playing weight at 215 and Kaep's at 230. As I have mentioned, both have rockets for right arms and both have the magic. It would be terrible if Kaep and Randall didn't meet until Kaep's career was on the downswing. Randall is a preacher and a teacher, so I suspect that he would welcome Kaepernick and some inquiries on how to be a successful magic QB. Randall appears open to the idea; last year he said he was pulling for him to succeed.

Randall's not the only one. Even if it's just so we can tell our friends that Kaepernick is better than Alex Smith, one more time.

Who would you rather have?

 photos courtesy: newsday.com, realclearsports.com, vikings.com, arrowheadpride.com

Peyton Manning: One of the Best, No Matter Sunday's Result

Peyton Manning will go down as one of the best quarterbacks ever to play the game no matter what happens Sunday against New England in the AFC Championship game.

You say I'm wrong, and that's fine, but you would be the wrong person in this case. Who's on your list of best quarterbacks of all time? Top five is probably some variation of Montana, Elway, Brady, Unitas, and a couple other dudes. Manning is probably somewhere around there.

Here's my follow-up question: where's Dan Marino on your list?

I don't care who you are, the man can't be any lower than tenth. And that's an extreme.

Yet, what is his “success rate?” He made it to only one Super Bowl, as a second-year player, and the Dolphins got drilled by the 49ers that game, 38-16. In 18 playoff games, he was 8-10. He made just three AFC title games, going 1-2. Miami lost to the Patriots the following year, and then lost to the Bills in 1992. In 17 years, he made the playoffs 10 times. That means seven times in his career, Marino and the Dolphins missed the playoffs, with mediocre seasons (but only one season under .500).

The argument can be made that “The losing wasn't all Marino's fault.” Fine. Then how come making only one Super Bowl isn't Marino's fault, but it's Manning's fault that he only won a single Super Bowl? How does this even make a bit of sense?

How much would have Marino gotten ripped if he played today? “He can't win the big one.” “Hell, he can't even make the big one.” I can't even imagine the vitriol and hate Marino would deal with if he played today. Manning gets lambasted about one-tenth as much as Marino would be.

Sunday is Manning's 4^th conference title game and he's 2-1 so far. Betcha didn't know that. Manning's playoff record has been so maligned everywhere you go that he's been punished for making the playoffs 13 times in 15 seasons.

Perhaps the best comparison to Manning is not Marino, but the fellow he's tied with for individual playoff losses, Bret Favre. Favre only won a single Super Bowl, like Manning (so far) and lost another. He played 20 years and made the playoffs 12 times. Also like Manning (so far) he made four conference title games, and he went 2-2. Where's he on your all-time list? I bet he's pretty close to Marino.

Favre's playoff record is 13-11 all-time. Manning is 10-11. What people keep neglecting in the “Manning is terrible in the playoffs” argument is that in order to have 11 playoff losses, you have to make the playoffs at least 11 times. Um, that's kinda good. That's more than kinda good. Consider that the oldest franchise the in the NFL is the Arizona Cardinals. They began as the "Morgan Athletic Club" football team in Chicago in 1898. They have made the playoffs eight times in their history. Eight. Manning himself has been to the playoffs five more times than they have.

Peyton's Dad, Archie, played for New Orleans Saints, who were founded in 1967. The Saints beat Manning in his second Super Bowl appearance (and fine, that ended on a Manning interception). They have made the playoffs 10 times.

The Atlanta Falcons (1966) and Cincinnati Bengals (1968) have each been to the playoffs 12 times.  

Manning and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers were born the same year (1976). Manning has been to the playoffs three more times than they have. 
 
The other expansion team in 1976 was the Seattle Seahawks. This year, they tied Manning for total playoff appearances.

Peyton Manning is more than kinda good. He's one of the best all-time, no matter what happens on Sunday.

photos courtesy: denverbroncos.com, newsday.com, nj.com

Australian Open 2014: It's Not About the Tennis

I like watching sports. But I also like finding obscure sports to watch. Thus, the reason I've recently written more than a thousand words on curling. Sorry, Canada. And my favorite obscure sports are the mainstream sports that slip under the radar. I don't like using the word obscure to describe them, but neither do I want to call them hidden, underdogs or forgotten sports. There's probably a good word for it, and I just don't feel like looking for it right now. But you get the point. It's why every year I want to go to the worst MLB series that ends the regular season. It's why I want to go to bad bowl games. I always like finding the hidden entertainment in everything. Some people clip coupons and insist on never buying brand names for full price. I want to go a Cubs-Mets series in October. You get me.

Well, as it's a new year, it's time for my first obscure/underdog/hidden/forgotten/other sport of the year. It's the Australian Open. Now, tennis is already kind of a fringe sport anyway because, frankly, every time I try to play it, I inevitably get told that I'm breaking some rule of tennis etiquette that is ridiculous. One time, I was going into a court just to whap the ball against the wall, and the gate was near where these two people who clearly were well past their tennis prime were playing. So I went in the gate but didn't cross the court. When they were done with the point, the guy closest to me came over and berated me for even coming in the gate while they were playing the point, saying that wasn't “tennis etiquette.” I haven't picked up a tennis racket since that day. If that's how the bad players are going to treat me, how is anyone good going to react if I play against them? I'm sorry you never made your high school tennis team. Actually, I'm not. I'm not even close to sorry.

I tell that story every time somebody asks me if I play tennis, and every time I tell that story I wonder why I should even watch the sport, because it makes me mad. Also, every time somebody tells me they play tennis I count that against them, just a little bit. It makes me wonder if they're that much of a jerk when a newbie taking up the game makes an etiquette mistake. Congratulations, elite sport, you're discouraging people from taking up the game even on a casual, drop-in level.

Fortunately, I still enjoy watching the Australian Open for several reasons that really have very little to do with actual tennis. Which is good, because if I thought that jerk berated me for walking in the gate, what would McEnroe or Connors do? I'd probably end up wearing a racket.

Reason #1: Night Moves

The best reason for watching the Australian open is the simplest- some of the best matches happen at two o'clock in the morning. As a quirky human being (note: we're all quirky human beings), I get a big kick out of it being a time where I should really be asleep, yet I can watch a live sporting event. ESPN has taken this to a new level by having it's early season college basketball marathon, where a game tips off every two hours for 28 straight hours. I most enjoy looking at the schedule and seeing that, say, a team in Vermont tips off at 7 am Eastern time, or 4 am Pacific. I have always wondered why Oregon or Oregon State doesn't play in this marathon at like the midnight Pacific game, or even the 2 am Pacific game. Since at this precise moment I'm not responsible for covering Oregon or Oregon State basketball, I don't mind mentioning this out loud.

Anyway, the point is here, is that 2 am Pacific is right about prime time in Australia. So that's when the bigger matches happen in Melbourne, like Serena Williams or Maria Sharapova or Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal. And then in the second week I don't think the quarters and the semis even start until after midnight Pacific time, and run until 5 or 6 in the morning. That, my friends, is all-night high quality sports. (The first full day of action ran well past time, so we're already ahead here.)

This is not to imply even in the slightest that I stay up to watch all these matches. What I tend to do is set up on the couch with the volume on, but not too high, and then I try and mentally program myself to keep an ear on the crowd, because at some point I know I will fall asleep. I cannot tell you how many times I've woken up precisely for match point and seen an upset, or a big win, or something dramatic simply because the crowd got loud and the punch-cards in my brain processed the information and woke me up in time to see it happen, live. I also can't tell you how many times I've woken up to “Mike and Mike” yelling at each other, and been very annoyed, having missed the end of that day's coverage. Waking up to see Maria Sharapova get upset in the second round or Roger Federer win a tense five-setter in the quarters makes that worth it, though. More often than not.

Reason #2: The Heat is On

Caroline Wozniaki (aka future Mrs McIlroy) on Monday

When the Aussie open is on, not only is it the middle of the night here, it's the middle of January. Which means low temperatures. Polar vortexes and stuff. In Melbourne, they're in the middle of summer. It was 108 degrees there on Monday and people were having heat-related issues. I relish every single reminder of summertime watching the open. Heat indices. Sweat. Ice water. Sunglasses. Floppy hats. Beach towels. Bikinis in the crowd. And, yes, heat-related issues. When it's summer here, those things are commonplace and I don't give them a second glance... but when it's summer there and winter here, I notice every bead of sweat. I notice sweating water bottles, for Pete’s sake.

When the announcers say “we're expecting 100-degree temperatures today,” or “heat exhaustion will be a problem,” or share other summery weather alerts, like keeping pets cool and staying in the shade.... well, that does two things. One, I get warmer just by hearing those alerts. Two, I get extremely aware of where I am. Cold, and in the dark. It's not like I'm a watcher on The Wall dressed in fur looking for white walkers and outsiders by any means... but there is snow on the ground outside my window, and it is below freezing. Maria Sharapova in a tennis outfit does wonders for morale.

Reason #3: The Olympics are coming.

Most of the good Winter Olympic events will take place at night in the United States next month. You'll be up anyway watching those, don't tell me you won't. You might as well get some practice sleeping on the couch. And besides, you'll feel even colder watching curling at two in the morning than you feel now. Might as well get the night sun while you can.

It's everything I like about the Open, in one picture

photos courtesy: 2013.australianopen.com, (twice), ausopen.com, (twice), 10sballs.com

BCS Title Game Wrapup. We Got Shanghaied, And It Was Good.

Your bowl predicting, er, experts? Bob of Arabia and The Sports Dude

So guest predictor Bob of Arabia (aka, BOA) and the special guest predictor who didn't make any predictions and I decided that we should go watch the final BCS title game somewhere. Being near San Francisco, it was decided to meet there. So after that, we had to decide on a place, and we thought we found a good one. Then BOA discovered it didn't serve food, so that was out. So we got recommendations for a place that has been around at least 50 years. That BOA and the other guy looked up on Yelp only to find the kind of reviews you'd expect for a Burger King in India. (reminder: cows are sacred there.) So that was out. So then BOA found another place that sounded good. So the other guy and I wandered over to that place, only to find that nobody was there and it only had two teevees in the whole place, one of which appeared to be of the tube variety made in approximately 1985. So while I looked to see how close we were to the place of the stellar reviews, the other guy Google searched for Florida State and Auburn bars... only to find a Florida State bar three blocks away. So we went to check that place out.

We got there about a half an hour before kickoff, to find that several FSU fans had already taken seats about three feet away from the giant teevee in the main room. So that was good enough for us. And good thing we got there when we did, it filled up pretty good by kickoff. Now, you may recall that both BOA and I picked Auburn to win said contest, so being in an FSU bar was perhaps not the super wisest choice we could have made, but it's not like we were wearing Red Sox gear in the Bronx. We were neutral observers who had selected the other guys to win. You know, like Swiss Bankers who invested in Deutschmarks in 1938. It seemed like a good idea at the time. Kind of like coming up with that analogy.

As neutral observers, we got to watch the ebb and flow of FSU fans. Cheering when Bobby Bowden was introduced and booing Bo Jackson (the first time I've ever heard anyone boo Bo Jackson. I bet they would change their mind in a hurry if he was in the same room as they were). As Auburn built their 21-3 lead the room got progressively quieter and quieter, and we wondered when someone would buy shots for the whole bar to drown their sorrows in. And even though we were technically neutral observers, I bet even Swiss Bankers accept goldschlager without resistance when it's put in front of them.

I love to watch games with people that are heavily invested in the outcome while I could really give less than a damn what happens. When a touchdown or turnover happened I swiveled on my chair to watch the reaction. I heard people yelling at the refs for calls/no calls while I said to myself “yeah, that's not/that is a flag.” It's amazing how unbiased the refs seem when you're not convinced they're against you. I always end up thinking, wow, why are these people going so crazy? It's only a game. Then I remember that I probably look like that watching KU basketball games in March, so I try not to pass too much judgement. That said, it's always fun to watch people not care what anybody else thinks, especially if the people going nuts are stone-cold sober.

Jane Fonda, Ted Turner, and Jimmy Carter doing the Tomahawk Chop, early 1990's

The counter to enjoying situations like this is the part where the entire crowd is chanting things that I've never heard in your life. And it's clearly things that they have tried to learn and spent years chanting, and I have no idea these chants even exist. It makes me feel like I'm in an different country and I don't know the customs. “Does this mean something? Why is this happening? Should I be worried here?” Then the FSU fans did the Tomahawk Chop and I thought, “Oh yeah, they're the team that does that,” even though it made me think of the Atlanta Braves, Ted Turner and Jane Fonda doing that during the early '90's Braves playoff games.

(Side note: are you aware that there are people who really hate Jane Fonda? She went to North Vietnam during the '60's and got nicknamed “Hanoi Jane.” Whenever she comes up certain of my parents friends do everything but spit on the ground and curse her name. If you actually look at what she did, then you have to admit they have a point.)

Anyway, the name of the place? Uh, the name of the place is... Bob's Country Bunker... uh, I mean, Sydney Town. It's on Commercial Street. It's kind of hidden, which adds to the weirdness of finding a Florida State bar in San Francisco. I wonder what it's like when there's not a Florida State game going on.

Barbary Coast in SF, circa 1909

If you're confused why “Sydney Town” is the name of a bar in Ess Eff, well, these people clearly know their Bay Area history. “Sydney Town” was the original name of San Francisco's famed Barbary Coast district. You see, in the beginning it was originally inhabited by Australian immigrants who to the upstanding American immigrants who stole the Mexicans/Indians land for San Francisco and the Gold Rush, were the bad guys. And it's true that the Aussies did account for most of the crimes in early 1850's SF.... or at least most of the arrests. So the name “Sydney Town” is a throwback to those days. In addition, the Barbary Coast/Sydney Town was where plenty of people got shanghaied. Captains needed crews for their ships to the Far East, so patrons of Barbary Coast/Sydney Town establishments were occasionally drugged, which would cause them to pass out. Then they would be dropped through trapdoors to tenders underneath the saloons (since the saloons were conveniently built on piers over the Bay) and rowed out to the ships... and when they woke up the next day, they were out on the open sea, on the way to the Far East, quite often Shanghai. Thus the phrase, “shanghaied.” When I mentioned that the original name of the Barbary Coast was Sydney Town to Bob of Arabia he said, “We should watch for trapdoors in the place.”

Well, we found no trapdoors, and I had a swell time in Sydney Town. Finding a place that's partial to the outcome always makes the game more entertaining. The best experience I had watching a soccer game was the 2008 UEFA Cup Finalbetween Man U and Chelsea... at another bar in San Francisco, also with BOA and the guy who never made any predictions. But that's another story. The moral of this story is when you don't care who wins, really take some time to go watch the game with people who do. You'll be glad you did. Watching that comeback with a lot of people who wanted the comeback to happen made that game a lot more memorable than had we just watched it in a living room, or worse yet, a bar where nobody really cared. We got shanghaied by a Florida State bar, and it worked out just fine.

Guest picker Bob of Arabia:

F-L-O-R-I-D-A, S-T-A-T-E, Floridastate-Floridastate-Floridastate, WHOOO!!!  And with that cheer, which was repeated like a needle stuck on a scratched record at the bar where me, The Sports Dude, and the elusive third member of the defunct sports monkeys watched the BCS Championship game, my final tally for this bowl season fell to 20-15.  My initial thought was to recap by revisiting each pick to see what I did wrong / right.  But then I realized those picks were made over a 5 week period, and I am up against Sports Dude deadline here, so bullocks to that idea. (Also, BOA, nobody cares but you. Sorry.)  Instead, let's talk about Monday night.

F-L-O-R-I-D-A, S-T-A-T-E, Floridastate-Floridastate-Floridastate, WHOOO!!!  Even though that is one of the worst cheers I've ever heard, every red blooded 20-something should have Florida State on the short list of potential colleges to attend.  It's no secret that Florida has an abundance of sun drenched beauty.  If colleges were a mirror, the Sun State would check its hair in the reflection that is Florida State University.  Any guy who is honest enough to admit it will own up to losing hours of class time to, um, distractions.  If the Sydney Town Tavern (an unapologetic "Florida State bar" in the middle of San Francisco's Financial District) is any indication, I now understand why FSU doesn't exactly have a stellar academic reputation.  Distractions.  Lots and lots of distractions.  With ever-so-slight Southern drawls.  Distractions that are so distracting they have an actual representative (Google registered trademark "the florida state girl" for reference)  And, we get free shoes too?  Sign me up!!

F-L-O-R-I-D-A, S-T-A-T-E, Floridastate-Floridastate-Floridastate, WHOOO!!!  When the bar blared the Florida State Fight Song over the P.A. system at halftime, that made sense to me.  When the entire population at the bar chimed in with the aforementioned cheer during said fight song, that made sense to me.  Then, right after Auburn had regained the lead in the 4th quarter, some new age 'Last of the Mohicans' crystal shop ambient music started coming through the P.A. system.  That made no sense to me.  I turned to my partners in crime and bluntly asked "WTF is this, some sort of Daniel Day Lewis (crap)?".  I can only guess it was some sort of FSU insider rain dance thing because immediately afterwards, dude ran that kickoff back.  So, distractions, free shoes, AND musical magic spells?  Sign me up!!

F-L-O-R-I-D-A, S-T-A-T-E, Floridastate-Floridastate-Floridastate, WHOOO!!!  Something jumped out to a couple of us during the game.  Jameis Winston, for all of his incredible athletic attributes, is slow.  Really slow.  Bengie Molina slow.  And, aside from that last game winning drive (which, by the way, what the hell was that Auburn?), Winston struggled.  Then, something else jumped out at us.....is Winston going to be yet another in a long line of tremendous Seminole quarterbacks incapable of making a difference on Sundays?  Dude is only a freshman, so I'll slow that roll....for now.  However, Charlie Ward, Chris Weinke, Chris Rix, Danny Kanell anyone?  Wait, Lee Corso played quarterback for the Seminoles.  Sweet.  So, distractions, free shoes, musical magic spells AND head gear predictions.  Sign me up!!!

F-L-O-R-I-D-A, S-T-A-T-E, Floridastate-Floridastate-Floridastate, WHOOO!!!  Dadgum, I reckon that is going to be stuck in my head for a while.

photos courtesy: cripessuzette.wordpress.com, foundsf.org, floridastatestuff.com, demotivationalposters.org

Bowl preview 12: The Final One

34 down and one to play. It hardly seems possible. There were times I thought bowl season would never end. And then there were the times that I wished it was over. Mostly while watching the Weed Eater Independence Bowl and thinking, “Great Googly Moogly, why am I even watching this game? Why did I spend any time thinking about this game? I didn't even put any money on it!”

By paying attention to each game without gambling, it makes it possible to come at it objectively. Or kind of. Bowl games have to prove to me that they're worthy, not the other way around. This is why the Queen City Bowl and the New Orleans Bowl can be deemed ridiculous jokes even before the coin toss. It's why I can look at the Cotton Bowl and see not tradition, which is what the bowl committee wants me to see, but out-and-out corporate greed. The Cotton Bowl needs to be played in the Cotton Bowl. It also means that I look at a certain bowl played on New Year's Day through Rose-colored glasses, which is convenient. But it also means that I see while that game in Pasadena claims everything they do is in the name of tradition, I realize that committee only claims “tradition” when it happens to make a dollar for them. Or a lot. Because the Rose Bowl is the biggest money-making Bowl of them all. It out-dollars the BCS title game, every year. Which brings me back to the point, which is that Bowl games are money grabs. You know it and I know it, but we keep going back because the alternative is having the season end completely the week before Thanksgiving. Who wants that? Nobody who's actually a football fan. So, in the words of the Festrunk Brothers, “I blame-a myself!” But don't worry, I also blame you. 

Monday, January 6^th
5:30 pm, PT
Bowl #35: BCS National Title Game. #1 Florida State (13-0) vs #2 Auburn (12-1)

Is this the matchup that everyone really wanted to see? Because it's the last title game of the BCS as we know it (THANK YOU), people have been justifying this matchup as between two teams that “everyone wanted to see.” Uh, no, not everybody. If you wanted to match up Florida State against a one-loss conference champion, you could have gotten Michigan State. Sparty looked pretty good closing down Stanford, don't you think? Of course, Stanford brought this upon themselves by continuing to run up the middle over and over and over and over. Of course, they could also have taken Baylor, who got run over by a team that nobody outside of Central Florida thought had a ghost of a chance to win. And the Alabama and Ohio State losses certainly implied that it was a good idea that they did not get picked for the title game over Auburn. As much as bowl games are all about gate receipts and teevee ratings, sometimes they do deliver good matchups in spite of themselves.

Because that was fun.

I certainly hope that someday the BCS championship game is remembered the same way everybody remembers driving with a learners permit. You were driving, yeah, and that's a big deal... but there had to be somebody else in the car with you who already knew how to drive, and that person had to be eighteen. So if you didn't have an cooperative older sibling or cousin (and few 15 year-olds do), you had to have mom or dad in the car. So while yes, you were driving and you got to tell everyone you knew that you were driving... it wasn't driving how you'd envisioned it. You're just 15, you have to drive with adult supervision. The BCS stand-alone title game is driving with a learners permit. We all know it can get so much better, it's just a matter of passing the test that lets us do it on our own.... or actually get a playoff system going. Next year, college football actually starts driving.

But that still means we have to sit through this mess one more time. And after watching at least part of the other 34 bowl games this season, I don't have a lot of hope left for the final game of the season. To go back to the learners permit analogy, let's just go to the DMV and get it over with. We're not any more mature on our 16^th birthday than we were when we were 15 years and 364 days old. You could also make a pretty good argument that most people aren't more mature when they're 40 than when they were 15 years and 364 days old either, but that's something to get into on a different day.

"Trust me, it'll totally go as planned."

Once they decided they were going to a playoff, it just should have happened. I have a very good friend in the military, he's what you'd call a lifer. He just got told he's going to be promoted... in 18 months. Why would you tell someone they're getting promoted, but it's not going to take place for another year and a half? It's like when Jay Leno announced Conan was going to take over the Tonight Show... eventually. If you're going to retire, then just retire. The longer it's going to take to happen, the more chance there is for something to gum up the works, and for the person doing the promoting to change their mind. Like Leno and Conan. But at least that made things entertaining for those on the sidelines.

Sidelines. Gee, that sounds familiar... oh, right, the football game. In a lot of ways, this Florida State team seems like the Auburn team of 2010. Came out of nowhere, dynamic Heisman trophy-winning quarterback that should have been suspended for the season.... you know, things like that. My Florida Gator friends continuously call the Seminoles the “Criminoles,” and I still think of them as “Free Shoes University,” to borrow one of the best lines ever from Steve Spurrier.

The pundits out there tell you FSU should beat Auburn rather handily. If they played a week after the conference championship games, then yes, I'd say the Criminoles should win that matchup. But what the professional prognosticators seem to always forget is that they have an entire month or more to prepare for these games. An entire month to prepare for one team is quite a long time. That's how Oklahoma was able to beat Alabama, and how UCF was able to beat Baylor. The time in-between games allowed those teams to really break down how the opponent played ball.

I'm not going to buy this whole "miracle season" in order to think that Auburn has a chance to win this thing. Yes, the Prayer at Jordan Hare was luck. But let's not forget that if the Kick Six doesn't happen in the Iron Bowl, then there's still overtime to play. If Nick Saban had done what any coach with no faith in his kicker usually does in those situations- you know, let your top Heisman candidate senior quarterback fling one into the end zone and see what happens- then it's a matter of who blinks first in overtime. I was settling in for a record-setting overtime (mentally calculating how much beer and snacks I had left) when Saban sent the kicker out. When something doesn't make sense to me I tend to angle my head like a confused dog. Even when he was sending the kicker out I started looking at the teevee like that.

Let's look at this without becoming a confused dog. Florida State's closest margin of victory this year was 14 points. Auburn? Well, they could have lost to Washington State in the first game of the year, (remember that?) they needed a touchdown in the final ten seconds to beat Mississippi State, and you know about the other two close games they played. So they know how to win when it's not a blowout. Florida State doesn't.

I point to two very telling numbers in the ESPN preview of this game: Three other BCS title games have featured an undefeated team versus a one-loss team. The one-loss team has won every time... by at least 20 points. And Free Shoes University's strength of schedule is the worst for any team in the title game in the last ten years. Yes, even Notre Dame last year. The other three teams lost by at least 14 points in the title game... to SEC teams.

I need no more. Auburn makes it eight SEC BCS titles in a row. Now let's get that driver's license and take the playoffs for a spin.

Guest picker Bob of Arabia:

Phew!  After 34 exhibition games, many of which were fake (or MSC games), we finally get to the one real game of the college post-season.  It is also the last BCS game ever as the new playoff format begins next year.  There are scores of college football fans that have only known the BCS format (i.e young'ins).  A majority of those people, along with a multitude of others, have bemoaned the BCS during its entire existence.  While I too had my problems with the BCS (slight SEC bias anyone?), it was the best solution at the time and was a thousand times better than what we had before.  Before the BCS, it was all decided by a jury of opinion with no checks and balances like strength of schedule.  The sole focus of the football season was going undefeated.  You almost never got big inter-conference match ups before the BCS.  Instead, all the contenders would start the season by scheduling directional schools or the local arts and culinary academies under the guise of "we're helping out your recruiting by giving you a game against a big time program in our house".  This was how the first 2 or 3 games went until the conference schedule kicked in.  Does anyone really need to see UCLA play Long Beach State?  No.  Trust me on this one.  I did.  You don't.

"Uh, it was my understanding that there would be no math."

In addition to the pre-conference scrimmages, pre-BCS college football defied physics.  The Pauli Exclusion Principle states that two objects cannot occupy the same space at the same time.  However, the NCAA (a "scholastic" organization, mind you) disagreed and found it possible to have 2 concurrent National Champions...multiple times.  Hey San Francisco 49ers, remember how you didn't quite get in to the end zone to win last year's Super Bowl?  The committee has decided that your effort was commendable, so you are the Super Bowl Champs too.  You should expect a shipment from Baltimore with your half of the Lombardi Trophy in the next week or so.  The BCS wasn't perfect (reference the 2011 Alabama / LSU rematch Championship Game) but it did put an end to some of the more shameful scheduling tactics, gave us exciting match ups before October, and restored scientific logic to how the National Championship was awarded.

After this game, a 4 team playoff format ensues.  I think it has to be an 8 team format for a team to confidently lay claim to a true championship, but it's a start.  I am already prepared for the contentious post-game comments from the coaches whose teams are ranked 5 and 6.  In a way, the playoff format will be one step forward ("we need a playoff" has been the rally cry for decades) and two steps back (rankings will once again be a jury of human opinion with no computer rankings / there are no more automatic conference qualifier berths meaning you can expect post-selection squawking, especially from the Big East....errrr....American Athletic Conference).  The Sports Dude has much more insight to this whole mess than I do, but what I can tell you is that we will have to endure the 4 team format for quite a while before it ever expands (games in the current format are already scheduled through the 2025-26 season).  So, like it or not, the playoffs are upon us.  Perhaps we should have been more careful of what we asked for, because the NCAA sure gave it to us.

As for the final BCS game, closure is tidy, if not downright poetic.  In the very first BCS Championship game, Florida State lost to an SEC team (Tennessee).  In the very last BCS Championship game, Florida State will lose to an SEC team. 

War Eagle!

photos courtesy: faughnfamily.com, yfnjman.com, latimes.com, dogtreatkitchen.com, authentichistory.com, livefromthe205.com

Bowl Preview 11: Hernando De Soto and Punxsutawney Phil

I don't know why they are playing these bowls now. They're not top tier bowls and don't deserve to be played on this weekend before the championship Monday. You could argue that they're here to make sure we don't forget that the championship game is Monday... but that would be a really horrible argument. How are two bowls in Alabama between mediocre teams going to serve as a proper reminder that the national title game is happening in Southern California? I don't know. 

Saturday, January 4^th
10 am PT, ESPN
Bowl #33: Birmingham Bowl. Vanderbilt (8-4) vs Houston (8-4)

Hernando de Soto. Where else do you see him in bowl previews?

Here's how bad this bowl's title sponsor is: I thought that Compass Bowl was the actual name of the bowl. You know, like it has an explorer for a mascot, like Hernando de Soto (not coincidentally, the first European explorer of Alabama). But nope. And neither is it a company that makes, you know, compasses. It's a bank, or kind of is. Now you understand why they're not sponsoring the bowl after this edition.

But, let's digress. Why shouldn't there be a history bowl? They already kind of are anyway. Why wouldn't that be fund to watch and a teaching tool of something besides football at the same time? There have been every other kind of bowl, why not an Educational Bowl?

Vanderbilt and Houston should be playing a bowl on December 23^rd, not January 4^th. You're not going to watch this unless you're a serious fan of either team. Looks like Houston should win, but because I have a buddy who covers Vanderbilt sports, I'll go with the Commodores, in hopes that even though he's got to cover a 5^th rate bowl, they at least win the thing.

Guest picker Bob of Arabia:

I didn't realize compass companies made so much money that they could afford to make up a bowl that was the only college football game played that day.  What?  It's a bank?  Is it an overseas bank?  American?  Get out, really?  Damn, just when I thought we were ditching all these confounded smart phones for a return to old school technology.  So, this is a crap ass bowl.  Had it been played a week and a half earlier like it is supposed to, it wouldn't be so much of a crap ass game.  But it wasn't, so it is.  Alabama loves their college football, so it makes sense they host a bowl game.  But not in January.  Not AFTER the Rose, Sugar and Orange Bowls.  Not on the same day as the friggin' NFL playoffs.  Question:  If a bowl game is played, and nobody watches it, does it still have a winner?  For some delusional reason, Vanderbilt seems to think so.

Sunday, January 5th
6pm PT, ESPN
Bowl #34: Mobile Bowl. Arkansas State (7-5) vs Ball State (10-2)

I can't even justify writing about this bowl. Dave Letterman University wins. Sure, why not?

Guest picker Bob of Arabia: 

Can we skip the game and just watch the girly commercials?  I don't see Bill Murray or Punxsutawney Phil anywhere, and I haven't rekindled my love for tequila since returning from Anaheim, but I would swear I just reviewed this game.  Eh, maybe I fell and hit my head on New Year's Eve, so I'll just fughetabowdit and move on.  Alabama loves their college football, so it makes sense they host a bowl game.  But not in January.  Not AFTER the Rose, Sugar and Orange Bowls.  Not on the same day as the friggin' NFL playoffs.  Question:  If a bowl game is played, and nobody watches it, does it still have a winner?  For some delusional reason, Ball State seems to think so.  Man, that seems so familiar.

Don't drive angry! Better yet, don't drive me to any of these bowl games.

photos courtesy: nps.gov, 123rf.com, columbusunderground.com