seriously.
i just bought into the ebbsfleet united football club through MyFootballClub.co.uk, which means that i am one of the 27,000 that owns 51% control.
that gets me one vote on everything - from lineups all the way through merchandising - and it gives me some rooting interest in the world's most popular sport. and, if we make all the right moves, maybe, just one day, we can make it into the premiership.
all because of me.
currently, we rank 10th out of the 24 teams in the english conference, with 16 wins, 12 losses and 8 draws. and we play york on saturday.
i'm not making any of this up.
oy!
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Monday, March 24, 2008
how i just couldn't stop myself, part XVCVIIILI
i promised myself that i would stop buying t-shirts.
but i never promised that i would stop buying brilliantly ironic and socially hilarious t-shirts that mock an entire nation of stupid college students.
so there.
but i never promised that i would stop buying brilliantly ironic and socially hilarious t-shirts that mock an entire nation of stupid college students.
so there.
how it took 91 entries, but we finally made it
Sunday, March 23, 2008
how tahoe has given me the madness, and i blame it on march
i just spent my entire weekend being completely amazed by how accurate vegas bookmakers are with their spreads and lines - and i spent the rest of the time being suckered by them again and again.
thank god i don't live anywhere near nevada.
and, oh yeah, nothing beats college hoops.
---thursday's games---
it's amazing to see and hear how much everybody hates duke. i can't believe that many people took belmont and 19 points. but as they neared the upset, the whole sportsbook was clearly on their side. i didn't have any money on the game, but i was with everyone in total support.
it's been a long time since the days of dawkins, amaker, alarie, hurley, hill, brand and jason williams, now replaced with obnoxious douchebags like redick and mcroberts and now paulus and scheyer. they've become completely unrootable. where has my love gone?
speaking of love, i was repaid with none of it by the teams i bet money on. for the 1.5 points i got for wagering on kent, they repaid me with just 10 points in the first half. for the 9 points i got for wagering on winthrop, they gave me just 11 second half points in return. and, to top it all off, the 32 points i got for mississippi valley state was 3 more than the team scored in the entire game.
good job, asswipes.
but that's not the worst of it. i watched stanford put 21 on cornell in the first half, using the astounding athleticism of 7'0" brook lopez, being quicker in the backcourt and just being a much better overall team.
the spread for the second half came out: 4.5 points.
okay, let's think about this. stanford's a much better team. they're bigger and faster and stronger. lopez can score whenever he wants. and, although their starters were not going to play the entire second half, i've got to believe that the rest of the team is 4.5 points better than an outclassed ivy league team during 20 minutes, right?
seems like easy money, i thought. gotta be a mistake by vegas. what's 4.5 points when you just went up by 21? cornell can't do anything to stop them, right?
wrong. stanford was just 4 points better.
i still can't figure it out.
and i can't figure out why i took cal state fullerton and 11 points over wisconsin without knowing that the titans didn't have a starter over 6'5". that would have meant more to me than the badgers' deliberate style of play. yes, this is how people lose money - even those who watch endless amounts of basketball.
---friday---
we set up two tvs in the house to keep us away from the sportsbook and their devilish halftime spreads. seriously. that 4.5 line in the stanford game is still freaking me out.
i went into the tournament in love with drake. i saw them twice and just went nuts over their style of play. it was everything that was right and fun with college hoops. composed, smart and ballsy basketball.
that being said, the team i saw play this year was not the the team that lost to western kentucky. throwing up 30 footers with 20 left on the shot clock is not composed basketball. steadfastly refusing to go backdoor or post up is not smart basketball. playing predictably and exclusively from the outside is not ballsy.
they blew it.
i took 'nova and the points to beat clemson - just because clemson can't hit free throws, and that makes games closer. but it wasn't close anyhow and it was nova hitting free throws to end it. jay wright's a good coach. it's smart to bet on good coaches.
and i got points for taking davidson and siena, even though i didn't need them. add that to giving up six to take notre dame on friday and still winning, and i can tell you that it was a good first round for staten island basketball alumni, both on the court and in the sportsbook.
---saturday---
i took notre dame again with points against wazzu. not only did i think they'd win going away, i thought that wazzu wouldn't have an answer to the irish's firepower.
and how did notre dame repay me? you got it, a season-low 41 points.
seriously, how does this happen?
in other news, the only thing better than watching duke lose is watching them lose while also getting five points.
i did take marquette and 1.5 over stanford, and got very lucky. first off, trent johnson's ejection gave marquette four extra points that evened out the score in regulation. and truth be told, brook lopez got fouled on his game winning baseline jumper. it should've been an "and one", but wasn't. stanford wins by one. marquette wins by .5 with the spread.
the lines were dead on. an amateur would say that vegas is fortunate, but that was the sixth or so line they hit directly on the spot. i'm not naive, but figuring out how they do that is gonna make me want to do math.
---sunday---
i took texas and gave up 6.5 to a weak miami team. i didn't watch the game (we were driving back), but i did watch rick barnes coach last year, and now, in retrospect, i regret the pick. and yes, a much more talented longhorn team barely squeaked by with only 3 points to spare. damn. my bad.
note: anyone who thinks that a rick barnes coached texas team will beat a john calipari coached memphis team, even with the game being played in houston, is clinically insane.
speaking of, i bet against jay wright and took siena. yes, i bet against a good coach. you can figure out how that turned out. i am an idiot.
i also took the over on siena/villanova (174) and san diego/western kentucky (134). i won both by 2 and 1 points respectively. again, i want to do the math to figure out how.
i never thought i would repeatedly say those words.
all in all, i think i broke even in tahoe. but, when you consider all the thrills that the first weekend of march madness gave me, there's no doubt who came out ahead.
and, you heard it here: go davidson.
thank god i don't live anywhere near nevada.
and, oh yeah, nothing beats college hoops.
---thursday's games---
it's amazing to see and hear how much everybody hates duke. i can't believe that many people took belmont and 19 points. but as they neared the upset, the whole sportsbook was clearly on their side. i didn't have any money on the game, but i was with everyone in total support.
it's been a long time since the days of dawkins, amaker, alarie, hurley, hill, brand and jason williams, now replaced with obnoxious douchebags like redick and mcroberts and now paulus and scheyer. they've become completely unrootable. where has my love gone?
speaking of love, i was repaid with none of it by the teams i bet money on. for the 1.5 points i got for wagering on kent, they repaid me with just 10 points in the first half. for the 9 points i got for wagering on winthrop, they gave me just 11 second half points in return. and, to top it all off, the 32 points i got for mississippi valley state was 3 more than the team scored in the entire game.
good job, asswipes.
but that's not the worst of it. i watched stanford put 21 on cornell in the first half, using the astounding athleticism of 7'0" brook lopez, being quicker in the backcourt and just being a much better overall team.
the spread for the second half came out: 4.5 points.
okay, let's think about this. stanford's a much better team. they're bigger and faster and stronger. lopez can score whenever he wants. and, although their starters were not going to play the entire second half, i've got to believe that the rest of the team is 4.5 points better than an outclassed ivy league team during 20 minutes, right?
seems like easy money, i thought. gotta be a mistake by vegas. what's 4.5 points when you just went up by 21? cornell can't do anything to stop them, right?
wrong. stanford was just 4 points better.
i still can't figure it out.
and i can't figure out why i took cal state fullerton and 11 points over wisconsin without knowing that the titans didn't have a starter over 6'5". that would have meant more to me than the badgers' deliberate style of play. yes, this is how people lose money - even those who watch endless amounts of basketball.
---friday---
we set up two tvs in the house to keep us away from the sportsbook and their devilish halftime spreads. seriously. that 4.5 line in the stanford game is still freaking me out.
i went into the tournament in love with drake. i saw them twice and just went nuts over their style of play. it was everything that was right and fun with college hoops. composed, smart and ballsy basketball.
that being said, the team i saw play this year was not the the team that lost to western kentucky. throwing up 30 footers with 20 left on the shot clock is not composed basketball. steadfastly refusing to go backdoor or post up is not smart basketball. playing predictably and exclusively from the outside is not ballsy.
they blew it.
i took 'nova and the points to beat clemson - just because clemson can't hit free throws, and that makes games closer. but it wasn't close anyhow and it was nova hitting free throws to end it. jay wright's a good coach. it's smart to bet on good coaches.
and i got points for taking davidson and siena, even though i didn't need them. add that to giving up six to take notre dame on friday and still winning, and i can tell you that it was a good first round for staten island basketball alumni, both on the court and in the sportsbook.
---saturday---
i took notre dame again with points against wazzu. not only did i think they'd win going away, i thought that wazzu wouldn't have an answer to the irish's firepower.
and how did notre dame repay me? you got it, a season-low 41 points.
seriously, how does this happen?
in other news, the only thing better than watching duke lose is watching them lose while also getting five points.
i did take marquette and 1.5 over stanford, and got very lucky. first off, trent johnson's ejection gave marquette four extra points that evened out the score in regulation. and truth be told, brook lopez got fouled on his game winning baseline jumper. it should've been an "and one", but wasn't. stanford wins by one. marquette wins by .5 with the spread.
the lines were dead on. an amateur would say that vegas is fortunate, but that was the sixth or so line they hit directly on the spot. i'm not naive, but figuring out how they do that is gonna make me want to do math.
---sunday---
i took texas and gave up 6.5 to a weak miami team. i didn't watch the game (we were driving back), but i did watch rick barnes coach last year, and now, in retrospect, i regret the pick. and yes, a much more talented longhorn team barely squeaked by with only 3 points to spare. damn. my bad.
note: anyone who thinks that a rick barnes coached texas team will beat a john calipari coached memphis team, even with the game being played in houston, is clinically insane.
speaking of, i bet against jay wright and took siena. yes, i bet against a good coach. you can figure out how that turned out. i am an idiot.
i also took the over on siena/villanova (174) and san diego/western kentucky (134). i won both by 2 and 1 points respectively. again, i want to do the math to figure out how.
i never thought i would repeatedly say those words.
all in all, i think i broke even in tahoe. but, when you consider all the thrills that the first weekend of march madness gave me, there's no doubt who came out ahead.
and, you heard it here: go davidson.
Sunday, March 16, 2008
how all these espn barkers are arguing the wrong things
i love listening to the espn guys whine about the who should have been in the tournament without talking about who should be taken out. i think dicky v wants an 86 team bracket, jay bilas clearly wants a 74 team bracket with the remaining 9 teams taken only from power conferences, and bobby knight literally wants a 128 team tournament - which makes even less sense, considering that they'd be arguing over who's #129, 130 and 131.
calm down. we're debating between arizona state, syracuse and ole miss. they weren't gonna beat anyone anyways.
what i think is the biggest deal is that the seeding committee (headed by the big power conferences) has figured out a foolproof way to protect their teams from getting beaten by the little teams, and that's to have the dangerous mid-majors play each other in the first round.
they tried it out last year (butler vs. old dominion, nevada vs. creighton) and they expanded upon it this year (butler vs. south alabama, gonzaga vs. davidson, drake vs. western kentucky). hell, kent state is matched up with unlv, and this isn't your father's running rebels. so that limits the live mid-majors to just four advancing to the next round instead of the seven possible (and probable) upsets.
and that's the beauty of this tournament, watching the little guys finally get their chances at the big guys, and seeing the upsets happen. that's the magic. that's what we generally remember.
so it's quite devious by the big money majors and their seeding committee, really. if you can't keep them out, then at least save yourself. and it's just so ironic, you know, how the mid-majors can't get the big guys to play them in the regular season, and now they can't even get a shot at them in the tournament.
i guess they're tired of the valpos and winthrops taking headlines. then again, winthrop is taking on wazzu this year, although that's a team that played just like a low mid-major until two years ago.
anyways, as usual, the guys from espn have it all wrong. the committee's obvious decision to keep the bug guys safe is what needs to be talked about, not inconsequential teams that were "slighted" or "snubbed".
then again, power conferences pay for their salaries.
nobody said that a news channel should be expected to be fair.
calm down. we're debating between arizona state, syracuse and ole miss. they weren't gonna beat anyone anyways.
what i think is the biggest deal is that the seeding committee (headed by the big power conferences) has figured out a foolproof way to protect their teams from getting beaten by the little teams, and that's to have the dangerous mid-majors play each other in the first round.
they tried it out last year (butler vs. old dominion, nevada vs. creighton) and they expanded upon it this year (butler vs. south alabama, gonzaga vs. davidson, drake vs. western kentucky). hell, kent state is matched up with unlv, and this isn't your father's running rebels. so that limits the live mid-majors to just four advancing to the next round instead of the seven possible (and probable) upsets.
and that's the beauty of this tournament, watching the little guys finally get their chances at the big guys, and seeing the upsets happen. that's the magic. that's what we generally remember.
so it's quite devious by the big money majors and their seeding committee, really. if you can't keep them out, then at least save yourself. and it's just so ironic, you know, how the mid-majors can't get the big guys to play them in the regular season, and now they can't even get a shot at them in the tournament.
i guess they're tired of the valpos and winthrops taking headlines. then again, winthrop is taking on wazzu this year, although that's a team that played just like a low mid-major until two years ago.
anyways, as usual, the guys from espn have it all wrong. the committee's obvious decision to keep the bug guys safe is what needs to be talked about, not inconsequential teams that were "slighted" or "snubbed".
then again, power conferences pay for their salaries.
nobody said that a news channel should be expected to be fair.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
how i wish i thought of human pinatas
i think that something as stupid and sophomoric and silly and hilarious as this deserves every award ever created.
Friday, March 14, 2008
how oprah is making me sick right now
don't ask my why i'm watching "oprah", but she's got a panel of "other women" - that is, women who date married men and are disappointed when they don't leave their wives.
yes, these are women who are trying to break up marriages that may or may not be ending anyways. let me repeat this: they knowingly and willingly breaking up marriages.
and oprah is sympathetic to them, finding every reason and excuse to exonerate them from their actions. and the crowd isn't getting on them at all. it's just a big hug fest because it's the guy's fault. he's scum. all of them.
one of them, named sarah, has had multiple affairs with multiple husbands and even wrote a guidebook about it. what a hero!
but still, i'm wrong, i guess. after all, i have a penis.
all i'm saying is that this guy would handle this so differently. that's why i think he's great.
yes, these are women who are trying to break up marriages that may or may not be ending anyways. let me repeat this: they knowingly and willingly breaking up marriages.
and oprah is sympathetic to them, finding every reason and excuse to exonerate them from their actions. and the crowd isn't getting on them at all. it's just a big hug fest because it's the guy's fault. he's scum. all of them.
one of them, named sarah, has had multiple affairs with multiple husbands and even wrote a guidebook about it. what a hero!
but still, i'm wrong, i guess. after all, i have a penis.
all i'm saying is that this guy would handle this so differently. that's why i think he's great.
Saturday, March 08, 2008
how i got hit by a car
i know it's been awhile since i last blogged - even moreso than my usual weeklong sojourns. but i've been beyond busy in the past two weeks. to wit:
1. i sparred ten rounds for the first time
2. i underwent a successful liver biopsy
3. i had a great weekend with my parents where we talked about my future plans with the first lady of steveohville
4. i worked with the amazingly sincere maria sharapova, who is two and a half inches taller than me
5. i spent two days directing a nike shoot that went about as great as could have been expected by anyone involved
6. i adjacently had dinner at giorgio baldi's with nicole kidman, kevin connolly, tobey maguire, danny masterson and brooklyn decker
7. i bought some sweet new kicks
8. i turned 34
and, oh yeah, i got hit by a car.
i'll repeat and bold that: i got hit by a car.
here's what happened: i was crossing the street on 24th and valencia on the way to the 24th street BART station in the mission. i waited for the light to turn green. it did. i began to cross. i stepped over the double yellow line and heard a motor approaching me. i saw some people scatter in front of me. i turned, and saw a blue jeep just a couple yards away from me.
i thought to myself, "holy shit! i can't believe that i'm about to get hit by a car!" and yes, those are exclamation points. i only use them when my life is on the line.
i quickly put my hands up to do, i dunno, something. luckily, it was a jeep so the hood is higher up, and i was able to put my hands up and make first contact as it hit me. i didn't exactly catapult away, but i did push myself off of it.
i jolted to the side, landing on my feet, thankful that there was no oncoming traffic.
i heard some people yell and scream. i heard a screech of a car. i felt everyone looking at me.
i quickly took stock of myself. incredibly, i didn't get hit that hard - only in my hands, and slightly on my shins - and even more amazingly, i didn't land awkwardly, causing yet another ACL. i just got myself to the sidewalk and quickly thought about what just happened. the only thing flashing through my mind like a teleticker was "goddamn, i just got hit by a car".
the guy at the corner deli asked me if i was okay. i said, yeah, i think. i feel fine. and then he told me that the guy that hit me just pulled over.
he came out of the blue jeep, looking about as sad and excited as a human can seem at once. he asked me if i was okay. i said i was. he said that he just got the call at work that his wife just went into labor and he's two blocks away from the hospital (which he was) and, well, he got tunnel visioned and just didn't see me. he offered and insisted to take me to the hospital. again, i felt fine and just wanted to walk away from this harrowing experience. he shook my hand. i shook back. we wished each other luck.
it's a day and a half later, and i still can't get over the fact that i got hit by a car and there's nothing physically wrong with me. i'm thankful that i was able to face up to the jeep and brace myself instead of being blindsided, which would have been beyond awful. and i'm thankful that it was a truck and not a normal car, which would have caused me to roll over the hood or have broken my legs.
which would have been the least of my worries.
and more than anything else, i'm thankful that the first lady of steveohville wasn't there, because if she got hit, i don't know what i would have done with myself.
so i'm a lucky dude, i guess. on many levels.
happy birthday to me.
1. i sparred ten rounds for the first time
2. i underwent a successful liver biopsy
3. i had a great weekend with my parents where we talked about my future plans with the first lady of steveohville
4. i worked with the amazingly sincere maria sharapova, who is two and a half inches taller than me
5. i spent two days directing a nike shoot that went about as great as could have been expected by anyone involved
6. i adjacently had dinner at giorgio baldi's with nicole kidman, kevin connolly, tobey maguire, danny masterson and brooklyn decker
7. i bought some sweet new kicks
8. i turned 34
and, oh yeah, i got hit by a car.
i'll repeat and bold that: i got hit by a car.
here's what happened: i was crossing the street on 24th and valencia on the way to the 24th street BART station in the mission. i waited for the light to turn green. it did. i began to cross. i stepped over the double yellow line and heard a motor approaching me. i saw some people scatter in front of me. i turned, and saw a blue jeep just a couple yards away from me.
i thought to myself, "holy shit! i can't believe that i'm about to get hit by a car!" and yes, those are exclamation points. i only use them when my life is on the line.
i quickly put my hands up to do, i dunno, something. luckily, it was a jeep so the hood is higher up, and i was able to put my hands up and make first contact as it hit me. i didn't exactly catapult away, but i did push myself off of it.
i jolted to the side, landing on my feet, thankful that there was no oncoming traffic.
i heard some people yell and scream. i heard a screech of a car. i felt everyone looking at me.
i quickly took stock of myself. incredibly, i didn't get hit that hard - only in my hands, and slightly on my shins - and even more amazingly, i didn't land awkwardly, causing yet another ACL. i just got myself to the sidewalk and quickly thought about what just happened. the only thing flashing through my mind like a teleticker was "goddamn, i just got hit by a car".
the guy at the corner deli asked me if i was okay. i said, yeah, i think. i feel fine. and then he told me that the guy that hit me just pulled over.
he came out of the blue jeep, looking about as sad and excited as a human can seem at once. he asked me if i was okay. i said i was. he said that he just got the call at work that his wife just went into labor and he's two blocks away from the hospital (which he was) and, well, he got tunnel visioned and just didn't see me. he offered and insisted to take me to the hospital. again, i felt fine and just wanted to walk away from this harrowing experience. he shook my hand. i shook back. we wished each other luck.
it's a day and a half later, and i still can't get over the fact that i got hit by a car and there's nothing physically wrong with me. i'm thankful that i was able to face up to the jeep and brace myself instead of being blindsided, which would have been beyond awful. and i'm thankful that it was a truck and not a normal car, which would have caused me to roll over the hood or have broken my legs.
which would have been the least of my worries.
and more than anything else, i'm thankful that the first lady of steveohville wasn't there, because if she got hit, i don't know what i would have done with myself.
so i'm a lucky dude, i guess. on many levels.
happy birthday to me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)