Trust the Process

We've clearly reached the "Trust the Process" phase of the Bills rebuild. After Sunday's 47-3 beatdown by the Ravens, what else could you surmise?

Head Coach Sean McDermott has consistently shipped talent out of town - including Marcel Darius, Sammy Watkins, and Tryod Taylor and brought in his own players. The result is a roster without a lot of proven talent, aside from LeSean McCoy, Tre'Davious White and maybe Jerry Hughes, Kyle Williams, and a few others (I guess the safeties) and a bunch of McDermott's guys.

Yeah, we made the playoffs last year, but three players that are now gone - Tyrod, Eric Wood, and Richie Incognito - had a lot to do with making the offense competent at times - at least enough times to finish 9-7. The defense was fairly decent last year and didn't seem to lose too many players, so, I'm not sure what happened yesterday vs. Ravens, maybe it was an anomaly. But, I don't think I'm expecting the playoffs this year. We do play the Dolphins and Jets twice each, so maybe 5-11 would be an optimistic outlook.

On top of that, you have to trust that McDermott is really building something from the ground up. I like Josh Allen (have wanted him for the Bills since I first heard about him after his outstanding junior year), and guess the idea is to fill in some pieces in around him. In his first game yesterday, rookie Tremaine Edwards looked like a stud from all reports, and last year's first round pick, White, has also looked like a winner. But the o'line seems to be devoid of talent and something obviously gave on the defense....So, we'll see if McDermott gets this right, but unfortunately, it appears like we may have to suffer through at least one miserable year. I'm willing to do that, if there is light at the end of the tunnel. The Bills did go back-to-back 2-14s in the mid-'80s before emerging as a championship contender a few years later. So, there is some precedent.

For now, I guess we can always take heart in the success of our castoffs like Ryan Fitzpatrick, who passed for 417 yards and 4 TDs yesterday while leading the Buccaneers to a 48-40 win over the Saints. Yeah right, while our quarterbacks threw for 70 yards with no TDs and two interceptions. Hopefully in another five years, when we are celebrating our latest AFC championship, this will all be a bad, distant memory. Either that or we'll be gnashing our teeth through yet another rebuild.

Ringer Ranks Bills Number 32

Yes, that's last in their pre-season NFL power rankings. The good news is there is nowhere to go but up. The bad news is that I might agree with that ranking. The only reason I say "might" is that I really don't know how good any of the other 31 teams are, only really closely following the Bills in pre-season. Okay, I might think that the Patriots could no way be worse than the Bills, but as for the Jets and Dolphins - our two other divisional foes, as far as I know we might be better.

Yes, the Bills o-line has looked like shit in the preseason and we seem to be starting the season with a quarterback who threw five interceptions in a half in his only NFL start that I remember last year - it does seem he also started the Snow Bowl win - but we couldn't see who was playing. My feeling is that Peterman inspires a lot more confidence in the Bills coaches and Pitt alumni (who all tell me he is good) than he does in me. But, I thought we would absolutely stink last year and a strong defense and running game actually led us into the playoffs, where we were at least competitive with Jacksonville - til Peterman through an interception of course.

So, what are we looking at this year? I am going to maintain my pessimism in spite of last year's performance (maybe it will pay off again) and go with 4-12 with at least half those wins coming in the division.

Opposing views on ruling in the Underworld

As I may have mentioned, I am currently re-reading The Odyssey - one of the pillars on which Western literature is built. In Book 11, Odysseus (our hero) makes a trip to Hades, at the direction of the witch Circe, to get directions to help him return home to Ithaca. He can only get these directions from some dead seer. Circe instructs him on how to manage the dead, and it involves slaying an animal and allowing its blood to drain into a trench. The dead can then drink from this trench and communicate with Odysseus.

He talks to the seer and gets his directions but then he wants to catch up with some of his old comrades from the Trojan War, who have since passed. He catches up with Agamemnon who was ambushed and slain by his wife and her lover upon his return to Greece. He also sees Achilles, the great hero of The Iliad who killed Hector. Early on in the Iliad, Achilles was famously offered the choice between a long and forgotten existence and a much shorter heroic one, after which his name would be remembered forever. It's obvious which path he chose.

When he sees Achilles, Odysseus suggests, "I see, you lord it over the dead in all your power. So grieve no more at dying, great Achilles."

To which, Achilles responds, "No winning words about death to me, shining Odysseus! By god, I'd rather slave on earth for another man - some dirt-poor tenant farmer who scrapes to keep alive - than rule down here over all the breathless dead."

Contrast that to Milton's famous quote from Lucifer in Paradise Lost: "Better to reign in Hell, then serve in Heaven."

I prefer Achilles zest for life, but what do you expect out of the Devil?

How Babe Ruth's Rise Mirrored a Change in American Culture

I am currently reading a recently published book highlighting Mickey Mantle's 1956 season - the first in which he won the MVP (Mantle would win two more, including 1957). The book is entitled A Season in the Sun, the Rise of Mickey Mantle. It's fairly interesting, but people have cited some inaccuracies as troublesome. The one thing I noticed is that the authors (who I believe have history background moreso than sports) refer to runs batted in as RBIs, when I believe is technically supposed to be expressed as "RBI" - as runs in the plural, not "in."

Anyhow, I found an interesting description in the book that applies not to Mantle, but to one of his Yankee-great predecessors: Babe Ruth. This apparently comes from an article entitled "The Babe on Balance," which appeared in a 1975 issue of the journal American Scholar. Here's the quote as it appears in the Mantle book (the bolding is mine):

"He challenged Ty Cobb's small-ball notions of scientific baseball, a strategy that emphasized getting on base, sacrificing the runner to second, executing hit-and-run plays, and protecting a one- or two-run lead. But his impact transcended the sport. Ruth's approach dovetailed with the instant gratification peddled by the nascent advertising industry. Swing for the fences, buy now and pay later, the world is at your fingertips - it all became part of the same consumer-driven culture. In Yankee pinstripes he was more than a baseball player; he was a prophet whose mighty swings made spectators gasp in wonder at the potentialities of man. He was the Great Gatsby of baseball. It seemed as if nothing was beyond his reach."

I think that does a great job of summing up the evolution of America to a consumer-driven society, which started in the 1920s and continues to this day, at least the way I have learned it.

Trash Talk from the Odyssey

This type of stuff apparently dates back all the way to the 8th Century B.C.

“Oh I knew it!”  

Broadsea broke in, mocking him (Odysseus) to his face.

“I never took you for someone skilled in games,

the kind that real men play throughout the world.

Not a chance. You’re some skipper of profiteers,

roving the the high seas in his scudding craft,

reckoning up his freight with a keen eye out

for home-cargo, grabbling the gold he can!

You’re not athlete. I see that.”

The Odyssey by Homer

Chapter 8, verses 183-89

Translated by Robert Fagles

Odysseus, of course, foils this upstart by heaving a discus apparently over everyone's heads (as they cringe) and he receives a nice jewel studded sword as reparation, but still....

According to AI, We are Doomed to Mass Extinction

Is all human intelligence just pattern recognition and should it be telling us that we are doomed to mass extinction?

As part of my job, I study trends in the artificial intelligence industry. I have done briefings discussing AI and how it works. From what I can I tell, it is based primarily on nothing more than advanced pattern recognition. If given enough examples and truth sets, AI-driven computers ( the machines in machine learning) are able to determine patterns, and then when they are given new stuff, they are able to match it with  these patterns, and we are calling that learning.

So, is that all that people do to? Do we make judgments based on patterns that we think we recognize? Isn’t that how one predicts the outcome of a future event?

I have also read a few writings on the idea of mass extinctions. Related to pattern recognition, one of the points of studying history seems to be to try and prevent the mistakes of/learn from the past.

There was an article in The Atlantic recently that discussed different theories for the extinction of the dinosaurs. The specifics are not really important, aside from that the bottom line is climate change - and climate change is also possibly responsible for all the other mass extinctions the earth has gone through, and we are possibly going through another climate change that could lead to the next mass extinction which would take out humans.

The ironic part to me is that we think we have the power to stop this climate change. But, shouldn't our intelligence tell us that this is not the case?

Let’s go back and say there have been like five mass extinctions so far. And each one  was caused by a change in climate/atmospheric conditions. What makes us think we can halt the sixth one? The popular reasoning is that we are to blame for the changing climate this time around, so we should be able to make a decision and act to stop it. That’s nice, but who or what is to blame for the five previous mass extinctions? In the case of the dinosaurs, we like to blame an asteroid (The Atlantic piece puts forward a volcano theory, but either way). Could that have been stopped? Probably not by the dinosaurs.

From my view, it seems that these mass extinctions are merely a result of evolution, and we (humans) are just part of all that takes place in these giant patterns that include mass extinctions. Can we help ourselves from ruining the environment? The answer would seem to be “no,” that we are just a vehicle, like an asteroid (or volcanic) eruption that is the agent for this change.

That said, if you believe in the "divine spark" and that some divine power indeed makes humans different than all else in creation, it's possibly to argue that things could turn out differently. I am not saying that this type of belief is wrong, it just doesn't seem to fit in with logic-based scientific models.

So, where does that leave us? There is always hope that the God-based, divine spark model is true, so we should continue to work to reverse/slow the pace of climate change. But, based on our intellect, we also shouldn't be surprised if we fail. On a positive note, if you apply technology adoption curves I typically see in the market to climate change, it will take a lot longer for it to really gain steam that we are initially anticipating. Of course, once it does...is it possible to prepare for a mass extinction?

If we Only had a QB

AJ McCarron seems like a good enough guy. And I like the contract we signed him to. It's basically a fairly decent back-up QB contract that has incentive clauses that will pay him like a starter should he earn the job. And he says the right things about how he's not going to be outworked when competing with whoever else the Bills bring in. And despite all the nice things everyone keeps saying about Nathan Peterman, we know he's not going to be the starter.

Now, I know it's the Browns, but it makes me suspicious that their powers-that-be, after reportedly being ready to trade second- and third-round picks to the Bengals for McCarron late last season, seemed to abandon going after him in the offseason and instead opted to trade the Bills a high third-round pick for the right to pay Tyrod Taylor $15 million for one-year of service. Basically, the Browns very affirmatively chose Tyrod over McCarron, and now we are stuck with McCarron.

Unless, of course, we plan to draft a quarterback, which I kind of assumed was the plan, but that prospect is starting to look a little dicey. There are basically three to four quarterbacks (depending what you think of Baker Mayfield) that scouts seem to think worthy of being high first round picks this year and it seems like they will be gone in the first five picks of the draft. The Browns and Jets have two of those picks. The Bills have the 12th pick. Granted, we have plenty of draft "capital" to trade up, but after what the Jets paid the Colts for #3, I'm not sure how much I want to give up for #2 or #4. Brandon Beane may be having some of these same questions. After all, the Bills seem to be quite a bit more than a QB away from being a true contending team.

Yes, we made the playoffs last year, but how much of that was flukey? At minimum, we need a WR, an offensive lineman, and a linebacker, in addition to a QB. If we could draft one player at each of those positions with our first and second round picks, and leverage that first pick of the third round (from the Browns) as well, I think I'd feel better than spending it all on a QB.

 Or would I?

And if we do trade up and take a QB, who is that QB? Josh Allen? Lot of questions around him. Indications are Browns are taking Darnold. Is Rosen a good fit? Do we sit at 12 and take Lamar Jackson, or is that the type of QB play we were trying to get away from by trading Tyrod, a very dynamic runner with some questionable throwing, but Jackson has a better passing game that Tyrod, doesn't he?

This is confusing. We'll see where it ends up. But I am not comfortable with A.J. McCarron being our top QB going into next year. Or should I be? The Browns have been wrong before haven't they?

McDermott: Genius or Madman?

Is Sean McDermott drunk with power? I have to ask this, after reading that he is considering starting Nate Peterman at QB against the Chiefs on Sunday. I think this is what Tom Mitchell was insinuating when he wrote the article calling McDermott "full of crap."

We all know McDermott's fully in charge in Buffalo after ousting Whaley and getting his own GM installed. And here's a very brief list of some of the against-the-grain moves he's made since he got here, clearly putting his stamp on the team:

1. Trading Sammy and Darby
2. Trading Dareus
3. Benching Tyrod
4. Some of OL decisions
5. Trading Ragland

I'll admit I was upset when the Bills traded Sammy, a move which looks like it might work out for the best, and looked especially that way after the Bills got off to a 5-2 start while Watkins has hardly been setting the world on fire with the Rams. But, then....well, then came the last three games, when all that talent McDermott traded away, well, maybe it would have helped the Bills, you know, not get outscored, 50-150, or whatever.

And then the Peterman thing. I mean anyone could see that after two drives at the end of a blowout loss to the Saints Peterman was clearly superior to Tryod. This despite the fact that he didn't blow anyone away at camp or during the preseason. But, McDermott had apparently seen something in Peterman at practice as the season progressed. 

But, Peterman looked awful on Sunday. There are no two ways about it. He was overmatched. He was asked to do something he was not ready to do. And then Tyrod came in, and aside from the maddening fumble (when, guess what? he held the ball too long!), he looked way better than Peterman, for almost a half a game - not two series. So, what's the question? Why is Peterman still being considered to start? After all, didn't Peterman's performance make it look like Tyrod may possibly be an All-Pro quality quarterback, getting what he has so far out of that bunch?

But, does McDermott see things this way? Apparently not. He has a vision, and apparently that vision includes Peterman, or someone like him, and not Tyrod playing quarterback. The question is, is it the vision of genius or a madman? 

I think there are many people out there who thought Belichick was mad after his stint with the Browns and some of his early lack of success with the Patriots. He has always been a great one for unpopular autocratic moves and still is, and it's worked out great for him. On the flip side, however, is Chip Kelly. I guess it comes down to this: Is McDermott the next Belichick of the next Kelly (not Jim)?

It's only weird if it doesn't work

True story...where do I start? Saturday was a beautiful day so I pulled my TV outside to watch the Yankees game. It was a 3 pm start. My neighbor Mike, who I didn't realize was Yankees fan, sees me and comes over to watch the game on the patio. The Yankees lose a tough one 2-1.

Tonight, the Yankees started at 5 pm. They had battled back after losing the first two games of series and were looking to even things up at 2 apiece in best of 7 A.L. Championship. The game is scoreless through 5 when Mike shows up. "You're wife told me you were watching the game. "
Now I love Mike, he's as good a neighbor as a neighbor can be....but as soon as he got there, Sonny Gray walked the leadoff batter. Then the catcher's interference. Then we started making jokes/comments about Mike being a jinx. Then the Astros scored three runs, then another in the top of the 7th. Then Mike left with me practically nudging him out the door.
Then Judge led off the next inning with a 450 foot HR. Then Yankees rallied for 5 more and won 6-4.
I found Mike in his garage cutting some wood for a job in the morning. He doesn't get the cable channel the game was on. I handed him a beer I happened to have in my fridge called Jinx and invited him over tomorrow but only until the 7th. Friendship is nice but the Yankees winning...
Well, I'm trying to keep both in tact.

Watkins Trade a Misread

Yes, there is a lot of talk about how this Sammy Watkins, and the Ronald Darby trade for that matter, help set up the Bills for success in the future. But, what about this year? The now matters in football, especially when there are only 16 games in a year.

Here's an interesting/great question that was brought up in this excellent piece by the Ringer's Chris Ryan? Is it better to suck for a few years so you can really contend for a title, or just be good consistently, but never great. I think in some cities like New York, Los Angeles, Boston, and other large markets where there are other things to do, it might be okay to suck for a few years with the aim of a championship. But in Bill Country, we ain't got much else. I mean, the Bills represent our autumn/winter sports season (unless the Sabres finally turn it around I guess) and forfeiting a whole season with the goal of striking in rich in the draft and being good a few years down the road, I don't think that cuts it with the Bills fan base.

Here's the thing: Sammy Watkins may not have been consistent due to injuries - but he is a stud. I would pay to watch him play. How many other players on the Bills can you say that about? LeSean McCoy? That's about it I think, and he is likely going to miss at least a couple games - based on his injury history.

I just get the feeling the Bills' current management is playing big city ball in a small city town and it's not going to work. Where I live there is a team equidistant called the Browns and I at least have always felt fortunate that I am not one of their fans (most people around here like the Steelers and are lucky for that). But, now I feel like we have adopted the Browns' game plan. Maybe in a couple-three years, it will be the Bills-Browns meeting in the playoffs and I'll be ecstatic and will go back and read this and think about what a dumbass I was. But it seems more than likely, based on Bills history, that we are now guaranteed to suck this year and me be able to rebuild back to mediocrity before it all falls apart again. Do I need to say that Sammy Watkins was stud again? And Darby wasn't bad either. And Jordan Matthews is hurt...

Erie's Role in Micracle on Ice Flag Story

So, I think this is what happened: Swedish goalie Pelle Lindbergh and USA goalie Jim Craig met and became friends at the 1980 Olympics. According to the show Sport Detectives, which I watched last night on the Smithsonian Channel, the two apparently played a lot of video games in the Olympic Village in Lake Placid. After the Olympics ended, Craig, an Olympic hero, went to the Flames for the end of the 1979-80 season before playing for the Bruins in 1980-81 season. He wasn't very effective at either stop, and for the 1981-82 season, Craig found himself playing for the Bruins top minor league affiliate—the Erie Blades, in their only year competing in the AHL (a step higher than where the team had traditionally competed and had much success).

In the meantime, Lindbergh, who would go on to have mercurial success with the Philadelphia Flyers, before being tragically killed in a car crash, was toiling for the AHL's Main Mariners on his way up the latter. The story goes, at least according to Sports Detectives, that during the 1981-82 season, Lindbergh and Craig got together at the Ramada Inn bar in Erie, where Craig give Lindbergh what he thought was the iconic flag that had been draped around him after the gold medal clinching game vs. Finland:

The Sports Detective episode was about the search for that flag, and the flag the Craig gave to Lindbergh did not end up being that flag, although Craig thought it was at the time. Apparently the real flag is now up for sale.

Anyhow, it kinda floored me to hear Erie mentioned in the context of all this, first by a former Philadelphia trainer, who was at the Ramada with Lindbergh and Craig and witnessed their discussion; he also remained friends with Lindbergh and his fiance, who inherited the flag after his death. Craig, of course, did have to make some comment about the meeting in Erie like, "We were like, 'How did we end up here after the Olympics?" But, oh well.

At least I think I got the story straight. I was kinda dozing off and distracted until I heard Erie mentioned.

NFL: Truly a quarterback league

I spent the good part of the late afternoon and evening watching NFL football yesterday. Maggie wasn't too excited about it, but my youngest son, Andrew, who is 10, wasn't feeling too great and he was really looking forward to watching the games, so, being the great father that I am, I sacrificed my time and sat and watched football for seven hours.

My biggest observation - when they say the NFL is a quarterback league, the are not kidding. After Sunday's action, the four quarterbacks left include three Super Bowl Champions with seven titles among them, as well as the guy who is favored to the win the NFL MVP this year.

This does not bode well for the Bills and their pending decision on whether or not to keep Tyrod Taylor. Taylor certainly is not in the class of Brady, Roethlisberger, Rodgers, or Matty Ice, and likely never will be. He's just not a great, classic dropback quarterback like those four - although Rodgers takes it to a different level with his scrambling ability. I don't know that Taylor can even be as good as poor Alex Smith, who is now seemingly to Andy Reid in a just-not-good-enough-to-win-in-the-playoffs chain that can't be broken. Also, in contrast to Taylor, it's important to note that Rodgers does a great job keeping his eyes downfield while scrambling and then resetting his feet to throw. Taylor is a great runner, but based on what we've seen in the playoffs so far this year, that doesn't seem to be an ingredient for winning an NFL championship.

The questions comes down to, who-the-fuck-do-you replace Taylor with? I guess you can continue drafting quarterbacks and hope you get it right. After all, didn't we miss on Roethlisberger by one pick? And Brady was a sixth round pick, while Rodgers came off the board near the end of round one. Russell Wilson, another guy who's won a championship, was a third-round pick and neither Derek Carr or Dak Prescott, two emerging star quarterbacks, was a first-round pick. So, there is apparently talent out there to be had.

Of course, your scouting department has to find it, and then your coaches have to develop it, and the Bills, although they have done a  nice job developing Tryod, haven't proven capable of putting those two things together since the great Jim Kelly pick of more than 30 years ago.

I guess for now, it seems the Bills are fucked. But things change in the Not for Long League, and at some point, we have to hit gold, don't we? Chad Kelly anyone?
, 

Samsung Support, Part II

Okay, I go through all the machinations mentioned in my last post, and finally, five days after I post, a very nice woman from Samsung Executive level support contacts me and facilitates my refund. But, I still have to wait 10-15 business days before I will get an e-mail form I have to complete to enable Samsung  to process the refund directly into my account, as well as another return shipping label. So, finally, yesterday, I get a call from Samsung that tells me those items are on the way. I receive them and fill out the form to get my refund. Then I start shopping online for a new Chromebook.

This time, I decide to read some reviews first, and, of course, many of then are pretty bad, because, well, Chromebooks are inexpensive for a reason. However, I come across one where the reviewer was having the same problem I was - with the device crashing - only it was from a different vendor's device. The reviewer went on to explain how they fixed the problem by going on to Chrome as a guest, then logging in and updating the Chrome OS from there. They said the machine was running beautifully after that. I figured, WTF, why not give it a try? Doesn't it work just like they described.

So, basically, I've had a Chromebook sitting in my house for the past month that I could have been using had Samsung's support dept. been able to tell me how to fix it.

Then I did something really stupid. I proceeded to cancel my refund (not that straightforward, as you'd expect. It took talking to four different people, two calls, and two e-mails) and keep the Samsung Chromebook. Why did I do this?

1. As I mentioned, the reviews of other Chromebooks weren't that inspiring.
2. I already spent $20 on a protective case for this particular model that I wasn't going to be able to recover.
3. I already had the device in my house.

So, here goes....will keep you posted when next issue arises. Hopefully never.

Samsung Executive-Level Support - WTF?

This is silly. It's almost like double-secret probation.

So, here's the issue:
1. I bought this Samsung Chromebook from Best Buy.
2. It was a replacement for this a previous generation Samsung model, which worked great. The kids eventually fucked that one up, but we had it for like two years and everybody loved it.
3. When I went into Best Buy, they had the newer Samsung model, with better/updated specs, for the same price as the previous-gen model, which they were still selling. I said to the sales associate, "Why wouldn't I buy the newer model?" He shook his head and said he didn't know.
4. The store was out of stock of the model I wanted, so I had it shipped to my house. Received the computer in a few days, started running it, and immediately started receiving complaints that it was slower than other model.
5. Then about three weeks later, the cursor stopped working.
6. Spent about an hour on the phone with Samsung support, and tried everything including reloading OS. Nothing worked. They e-mailed me a shipping ticket. I put the computer back in its box, which thankfully I had saved, and sent it in for them to fix.
7. It was returned relatively promptly, I think within a week. Worked fine for a couple weeks and then cursor disappeared again. Called Samsung support, and they were very obliging. Skipped whole software reload thing and just sent me ticket to send computer back in.
8. It was returned in another week, except now every time I launched Chrome or another application, the computer  crashed and reset itself. Maddening.
9. I called Samsung and they sent me another return-for-support ticket. These tickets cover shipping. I just have to box up the computer and run it down to UPS store, whose clerks I am now becoming familiar with. I send my wife in this time, and UPS guy tries to sell her expensive extra packaging. I had to go in myself.
10. There is a bit of a hassle as Samsung sends me an e-mail saying they didn't receive unit. On top of that, UPS store screwed up its record keeping. This gets sorted out, and I get my unit back.
11. Problem not fixed. Everything still crashing.
12. Now things get fucked up. I'm pissed. I call and support offers to send me another ticket, if that's okay. I say, that's not okay. So they offer to escalate my case to "executive-level" support. Executive-level support will be calling me directly.
13. I don't hear from "executive-level" support for like five days, so I call back regular support. I'm told I need to be ready for call from executive support, and I shouldn't miss it. There is no number I can contact them at directly.
14. A bit later, a woman from executive level support calls me and tells me that they are considering my request for a refund or a new unit, but that they need my receipt. She gives me an e-fax number to send it to.
15. At same time, I get an e-mail requesting my receipt and one of the options for sending it is that e-fax number. I e-fax the receipt. This is Tuesday, Dec. 13. I am told that they will be back in touch.
16. By Friday, Dec. 16, I have not heard anything. I call regular support. They tell me if I don't hear from executive support in three hours to call them back.
17. I don't hear from executive support and call back and am transferred to someone in executive support. (It sounds like a regular support person except that he is breathing heavily into the phone as he talks, which sound less "executive" if anything, but what do I know?) He says the receipt has not been transferred yet from the dept. that was supposed to receive it. He then said he has escalated the case, and that someone from executive support will be calling me back later today or Monday. If not, I am supposed to call back the general support number and give them the new service ticket number-which he issues me.

On a positive note, all the people I've talked to at Samsung have been nice and accommodating. Based on my phone number, they also are automatically provided with a record of my support history. This is nice touch compared to previous customer support experiences. As for actually getting a computer that works....stay tuned!

Baseball playoff predictions, Part 1

Wild Card games:

Baltimore over Toronto
San Fran over the Mets

We'll see.

Is Sam Bradford today's Jim Plunkett?

Is anyone else on board with the Sam Bradford is the next Jim Plunkett narrative?

Does Rex Get It?

This kills me, from an ESPN report on what the big story is for all 32 NFL teams: "Ryan has already dropped hints that he wants the ball in wide receiver Sammy Watkins' hands more often." I'm not sure what good it does for him to advertise this. Also, it seems like a bit of a clueless strategy. Have you ever heard Bill Belichick, for instance, talk about basing his gameplan around the talents of a single player? I'm sure he does that, but part of professional football also has to do with planning to exploit you opponents weaknesses. Basically, I don't think you can win in today's NFL with a star-focused mentality. I think it requires more of a systematic approach - and Ryan and the Bills just fired the guy who developed their whole offensive system.

We'll see how this all works out, I did read somewhere that new OC Anthony Lynn is "highly regarded" but I thought the deposed Greg Roman was too - if not a bit unconventional. Lynn certainly has his work cut out for him, especially now that Rex seems to be taking an interest in the offense, because obviously the defense, which he is so well known for, is running so smoothly.

Amazing Work by U.S. Swim Team

First off, let's congratulate them for winning 33 medals at these 2016 Rio Olympics 16 of them Gold. Michael Phelps himself, of course, after coming out of retirement no less, has one five golds and one sliver, bringing his career total to 28 medals over four Olympics, including 23 golds. Yes, the results in the pool for the U.S. swimmers are pretty awesome.

But, let's talk for a minute about the results out of the pool. Did you realize Phelps had two DUIs? Even though he doesn't seem to be hiding it, I guess I didn't. I did know about the infamous bong photo. And when people expressed disbelief, I always harkened back to the swimmers I knew in high school, who we used to joke had "swimmers lung" and thus could take the biggest hits. I other words it was no real surprise to me that Phelps was smoking pot. It obviously doesn't seem to have negatively affected his ability to swim really fast.

Of course, this whole Ryan Lochte posse thing at the Rio Games sheds new light on the US Swim Team's partying. Unfortunately, it really makes the guys involved come off like assholes. In their defense, it seems they were truly drunk after attending a part at the French Olympic house. Yes, those damn French. Who could expect a bunch of naive American swimmers to keep up with them? Then again, Lochte seems to have a bit of a party history: There is this Las Vegas race with Prince Harry. Then, there was this failed reality show, ominously titled, "What would Ryan Lochte Do?" Apparently just about anything.

Then, there is this guy: 35-year old Anthony Ervin who won gold at the 2000 Olympics and then again this year. In between he apparently smoked cigarettes, took acid, and rode a motorcycle really fast in an apparent attempt to kill himself.

So, there you have it - what could possibly be the most successful swim team in Olympic history, punctuated by a least a few individuals who are not afraid to color outside the lines at times. Not sure what this says. Does partying and being an elite swimmer go hand in hand? Are the U.S. training methods so great that our swimmers can win despite their out-of-the-pool forays? Is all this irrelevant? I don't know, but I know I like to swim, especially in open water and it's been a great summer for that. And that Usain Bolt can really run - and he's from Jamaica...

Make A-Rod the Yankees Manager

If the scene between A-Rod and Sterling Castro really played out like this piece on Deadspin says it did, why not fire Girardi and hire A-Rod to manage the Yankees? I have been a big Girardi defender for the past few years, as he seems like a pretty good guy who tries hard at his job and isn't totally incompetent. By all accounts, he did a great job before getting fired by the Marlins, due to an apparent rift with the owners. And, stuck with multiple aging players and bad contracts, I think Girari has done a  decent job coaxing the Yankees into the playoffs most years and even winning a World Series.

That said, there seems to be something missing in his managerial style. I think this blog post by Wallace Matthews sums it up pretty well. In criticizing Girardi for not playing A-Rod down this veritable home stretch (okay, maybe "tail end" is better) of his career, he calls the manager "the rigid, joyless man who writes out the Yankees' lineup card each day." Right there is Girardi's problem: he's joyless. Perhaps his dour personality is what has dragged the strength out of our luckless veterans. (Apparently there was no love lost between Ichiro and Girardi.)

So, what about offering A-Rod the ultimate comeuppance on his current adversary and firing Girardi to make A-Rod the manager? Look, everyone says A-Rod has a very high baseball I-Q. And he certainly will bring more joy, at least on the exterior, to the Yankees dugout. And, then there is the aforementioned Castro story from yesterday:

"I asked [A-Rod] about the pitcher and he said, ‘Be ready for a curveball on the first pitch,’” Castro said. “He was so happy in the dugout when I looked in there after the double. He told me to be ready for the first-pitch curve and I was. If he didn’t tell me that, I would have taken that pitch because I would have been looking for something harder.”

Okay, maybe A-Rod would be better suited to be a batting coach, like Barry Bonds, but, fuck it, the opportunity to turn the tables on Girardi seems too good here. I know A-Rod said emphatically during his press conference that he would not be a coach, but could he really turn down this opportunity?

I am currently reading a book about baseball in the 1920s called "Big Sticks" (insert favorite porno joke here) and during that time, it was very common for star players like Rogers Hornsby, Ty Cobb, and Tris Speaker to manage. (Babe Ruth apparently thought he was qualified as well, but the Yankees did not.) I think A-Rod ranks right up there with those guys - in terms of baseball acumen, as well as being a jerk, so why not give him a chance? Kind of a throwback choice if you will. What's the worst that could happen? And, what if he did manage to lead them to a World Series win at some point? What a redemption story that would be!

The Fix Is In

I came across this website the other day and I wondered what you thought of the premise, Ralph. It's called The Fix Is In and it's written by Brian Tuohy.

The author essentially claims that five major sports are fixed (NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL and NASCAR). I think he's mostly trying to sell books, and conspiracy theories can generate big money, and even though, from time to time, critics are able to point to individual instances of shady dealings in sports, such as the Black Sox Scandal and the Tim Donaghy fiasco, overall, the outcomes of these sports are not regularly manipulated by a few select parties.

Here's my take: Like most conspiracy theories, much needs to be ignored for the assertion of "the fix" to work. In other words, Tuohy's position essentially ignores the fact that a lot of money (billions) can be generated by having the greatest athletes in the world complete against one another.

In that fact alone there is not much need to manipulate outcomes. Set up a system where the athletes compete for a championship and sell the rights to television. Not a complicated scenario.

I certainly don't believe that Roger Goodell is telling NFL referees to manipulate outcomes. Do you know how many eyes are on the NFL each week? Millions. We collectively review every single play from six different angles in slow motion. If there was a pattern of manipulation, we would surely have seen it by now.

As it stands, the refs get most calls right. You may believe that they could have let an action stand or that they should have called it differently, but the pattern, in my nearly 50 years of watching football, has been that they do a pretty good job and that there is no widespread pattern of game manipulation.

Further, I do not believe players are manipulating outcomes. Most players have performance bonuses built into their contracts, so they're not going to "take a dive" in order to win a bet from a Las Vegas bookie. Those days are long gone. Peyton Manning, for example, had a $2 million bonus for winning the AFC Championship game and another $2 million for winning the Super Bowl. He's trying to win. And what bookie is ever going to pay out that kind of money? They'd sooner kill you and bury you in the desert than pay out that kind of bet. So the rules are mostly "fixed" to promote the players to strive for excellence.

Finally, I'm a big believer in Occam's Razor. Essentially, that means that the simplest explanation is typically the best explanation. So, we can choose to believe that there is a grand manipulation of the outcomes of these various sports by very powerful men in order to make money for themselves and hold the rest of us as gullible dupes while only writers like Brian Tuohy know about it...or it could be that the sports are essentially above board and limited to only occasional manipulation which is almost always discovered in the long run.

I'll go with the latter.