You know, I look through photos people have taken during their visits to the United States, and it occurred to me...
Life here in Australia, it's just too simple, y'know? Too realistic? I live a quiet life of mediocrity, much like everyone around me.
I should appreciate what I have here in Australia. I'm safe, I'm surrounded by good people and I live in a peaceful country where I could live comfortably for the rest of my life.
But that's not for me, y'know? I need the free-wheeling lifestyle, the glitz and glamour. I can't thrive on the simplicity of my life.
That was one of the things that struck me most about New York City. That somehow, it didn't seem real. This was a place of fiction, the city you see in Law & Order and the like. It's a setting where wild things happen, a city of celebrities and grandeur.
To go from that back into reality? It leaves me feeling cold, like I'm sitting in an empty bath tub once full of hot, steamy water. Strange analogy, but it sprung to mind so I went with it.
Why is it that a guy like myself with such a disdain for people seeks a crowded, fake environment? Who knows. All I know is that I need to shed this lifestyle, and fast...
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Back in the land of Oz...
My three-month sabbatical is over, and yesterday Jess and I returned home to Australia.
And I beg the question - where the sun at? Who gave permission for winter to be happening? And what is with all of this green grass?? I don't remember that from before I left.
All I know is that Australia has become a weird, scary place in the time that I've been gone... And it looks like Tony's got some fixin' to do.
And I beg the question - where the sun at? Who gave permission for winter to be happening? And what is with all of this green grass?? I don't remember that from before I left.
All I know is that Australia has become a weird, scary place in the time that I've been gone... And it looks like Tony's got some fixin' to do.
Sunday, August 15, 2010
Jimmie Johnson's penis
Alright, follow me on this one. I'm in a condo in Hawai'i. I've had some beers, I've got a beautiful view of Waikiki out the window and a balcony to sit back on and cackle about the wonders of my life.
...But all I can think about is how upset I am over Jimmie Johnson's ExtenZe ad. In it, he claims that, despite his success as a coach and a broadcaster, the question he gets asked most often is if ExtenZe (a sexual stimulant) really works. I call balls on that one. If I saw Jimmie Johnson walking down the street, I would not enthusiastically approach him with the sole intention of asking him if his medicine gives him an erection. Really. I mean, where does the conversation go from there? It'd be like meeting Arnold Schwarzenegger and grilling him solely on an age-old nude photo I found one unfortunate, blustery night while flipping through the pages of an old Playboy mag.
Not to mention, now I can't stop thinking about Jimmie Johnson's unit. With a black and white Arnie standing nearby, proudly flexing. What a horrible, unusual problem to be having while on holiday in Hawai'i.
...And now, I'm thinking about how Arnie follows me on Twitter. And I feel guilty for every crass thing I say on Twitter - every swear, every bold statement, every snide remark... And now, the naked, monotone Arnold is shaking his head in disapproval. But still, Jimmie Johnson seems unfazed, giving away his apparently redundant Super Bowl rings, standing proud and tall in more ways than one.
Blogs like this are unfortunate. But I can make them, because nobody reads it. Tonight, Jimmie Johnson's penis. Tomorrow... who knows?
...But all I can think about is how upset I am over Jimmie Johnson's ExtenZe ad. In it, he claims that, despite his success as a coach and a broadcaster, the question he gets asked most often is if ExtenZe (a sexual stimulant) really works. I call balls on that one. If I saw Jimmie Johnson walking down the street, I would not enthusiastically approach him with the sole intention of asking him if his medicine gives him an erection. Really. I mean, where does the conversation go from there? It'd be like meeting Arnold Schwarzenegger and grilling him solely on an age-old nude photo I found one unfortunate, blustery night while flipping through the pages of an old Playboy mag.
Not to mention, now I can't stop thinking about Jimmie Johnson's unit. With a black and white Arnie standing nearby, proudly flexing. What a horrible, unusual problem to be having while on holiday in Hawai'i.
...And now, I'm thinking about how Arnie follows me on Twitter. And I feel guilty for every crass thing I say on Twitter - every swear, every bold statement, every snide remark... And now, the naked, monotone Arnold is shaking his head in disapproval. But still, Jimmie Johnson seems unfazed, giving away his apparently redundant Super Bowl rings, standing proud and tall in more ways than one.
Blogs like this are unfortunate. But I can make them, because nobody reads it. Tonight, Jimmie Johnson's penis. Tomorrow... who knows?
Monday, August 2, 2010
...What about that Guy?
Call me crazy for spending my last day here in Courtenay making a blog entry, and call me crazy for making a blog entry about the Pro Football Hall of Fame in August, but there's a growing concern I have for parity in the selection process of the HOF.
It's a well-known fact that, if you want to be a contender
for the Hall, your best bet is to play quarterback or offensive line. In the modern era alone, there are 23 HOF QBs, ranging from Y.A. Tittle and his career QB rating of 73.6 to Terry Bradshaw, career QB rating of 70.9. We'll forgive the former considering the age he played in, and we'll chalk up the latter's career success to the strength of the Steelers of the 70s. I know, I know... You'll fault me for taking shots at a man whose strength lied in his grit and ability to win when it counted. But what I'm saying is, as long as you win as a QB, all the rest will be forgotten.
Success, or even statistics, does not however, mean that everyone is viewed as equal in the selection process. How many offensive players are there in the HOF? 160. Defensive? 68. Special teamers? 1.
Jan Stenerud is the only 'pure' kicker to be in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Only two kickers were nominated in the preliminary round of Hall of Famers for 2010. Neither of them made it to the semifinals. One of them, Gary Anderson, had 2,434 career points scored - second-most of all time, and 432 more points than hall of famer George Blanda.
But I'm not here to argue who's the better kicker. ...It's obviously Anderson - Blanda was only 335 for 641 attempts, but Blanda was the better everything else. Right. Sorry.
If the Pro Football Hall of Fame is about enshrining the best players, there is one glaring omission. Because there was one man who truly dominated his position like no other, one man who epitomised the prototypical player of the position, and one who, had he played on offence, would have been the equivalent to Jerry Rice and Emmitt Smith this year - a HOF lock.
That man is Ray Guy.
Drafted in the first round of the 1973 draft, Ray Guy would go on to have arguably the most prolific career for a pure punter. His pedigree (as per the ocassionally reliable Wikipedia) includes:
Played in 207 consecutive games
Punted 1,049 times for 44,493 yards, averaging 42.4 yards per punt, with a 33.8 net yards average
Had 210 punts inside the 20 yard line (not counting his first 3 seasons, when the NFL did not keep track of this stat), with just 128 touchbacks
Led the NFL in punting three times
Had a streak of 619 consecutive punts before having one blocked
Has a record of 111 career punts in post season games
Had five punts of over 60 yards during the 1981 season
Never had a punt returned for a touchdown
Statistically, the man is rock solid. And as for success? You best believe he had it. As Wikipedia claims:
7× Pro Bowl selection (1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1980)
6× First-team All-Pro selection (1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978)
2× Second-team All-Pro Selection (1979, 1980)
3× Super Bowl champion (XI, XV, XVIII)
NFL's 75th Anniversary Team
NFL 1970s All-Decade Team
Mississippi Sports Hall of Fame
Georgia Sports Hall of Fame
College Football Hall of Fame
If this league is all about rings, Guy's got his. He's also been honoured on nearly every other level of recognition. Put simply, if I had to pick one pure punter from league history, it would be Ray Guy.
Are punters as important as any other position in the game of football? No. I can't claim that they are; they're arguably the most expendable of the positions (except perhaps fullback, and I hate that fact too!). Can they win games for you? Why yes, they can, actually. Field position is recognised as a crucial aspect of the game, though somehow it's the return men who get the kudos for this most of the time.
Pro Football Hall of Fame historian Joe Horrigan said of Guy, "He's the first punter you could look at and say, 'He won games'."
It's a crying shame. Ray Guy has been eligible for 19 years, and he doesn't seem any closer now than he did any other year. It's also an unfortunate foretelling of what will likely happen to fellow Oakland Raider Shane Lechler when his time comes, and a damning confirmation that my boy Craig Hentrich will most likely never come close to Canton.
There are many factors to blame. Sammy Baugh, for one, had great statistical success as a punter, but would he have ever been enshrined had he not been the multi-position threat that he was, ala Blanda? Probably not. But the thing is, because of guys like Blanda and Baugh, who played multiple positions; in the minds of selectors, kickers and punters have their representatives in the HOF.
To others, though, sometimes we wonder how much of the selection process lies in simple starry-eyed adoration, as opposed to credentials and genuine superiority at what they do? It's for these reasons that I celebrate Desmond Howard's Super Bowl XXXI MVP all those years ago, and still attest, and will do until my death, that the MVP of Super Bowl XLI should not have been Peyton Manning, but oft-forgotten Dominic Rhodes (21 carries for 113 yards and a TD). He may not be a special teamer, but he's a little guy who made it happen.
...And speaking of little guys who made it happen, there's another fellow who will be eligible for the Pro Football Hall of Fame next year. At the professional level, he had three championships, 369 touchdowns (three more than Peyton Manning), 58,179 passing yards (6,704 more than John Elway) and an unheralded six MVP awards.
You may say this means jack all in the NFL, but last I checked, it was called the Pro Football Hall of Fame.
Stay tuned...
It's a well-known fact that, if you want to be a contender
for the Hall, your best bet is to play quarterback or offensive line. In the modern era alone, there are 23 HOF QBs, ranging from Y.A. Tittle and his career QB rating of 73.6 to Terry Bradshaw, career QB rating of 70.9. We'll forgive the former considering the age he played in, and we'll chalk up the latter's career success to the strength of the Steelers of the 70s. I know, I know... You'll fault me for taking shots at a man whose strength lied in his grit and ability to win when it counted. But what I'm saying is, as long as you win as a QB, all the rest will be forgotten.Success, or even statistics, does not however, mean that everyone is viewed as equal in the selection process. How many offensive players are there in the HOF? 160. Defensive? 68. Special teamers? 1.
Jan Stenerud is the only 'pure' kicker to be in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Only two kickers were nominated in the preliminary round of Hall of Famers for 2010. Neither of them made it to the semifinals. One of them, Gary Anderson, had 2,434 career points scored - second-most of all time, and 432 more points than hall of famer George Blanda.
But I'm not here to argue who's the better kicker. ...It's obviously Anderson - Blanda was only 335 for 641 attempts, but Blanda was the better everything else. Right. Sorry.
If the Pro Football Hall of Fame is about enshrining the best players, there is one glaring omission. Because there was one man who truly dominated his position like no other, one man who epitomised the prototypical player of the position, and one who, had he played on offence, would have been the equivalent to Jerry Rice and Emmitt Smith this year - a HOF lock.
That man is Ray Guy.
Drafted in the first round of the 1973 draft, Ray Guy would go on to have arguably the most prolific career for a pure punter. His pedigree (as per the ocassionally reliable Wikipedia) includes:
Played in 207 consecutive games
Punted 1,049 times for 44,493 yards, averaging 42.4 yards per punt, with a 33.8 net yards average
Had 210 punts inside the 20 yard line (not counting his first 3 seasons, when the NFL did not keep track of this stat), with just 128 touchbacks
Led the NFL in punting three times
Had a streak of 619 consecutive punts before having one blocked
Has a record of 111 career punts in post season games
Had five punts of over 60 yards during the 1981 season
Never had a punt returned for a touchdown
Statistically, the man is rock solid. And as for success? You best believe he had it. As Wikipedia claims:
7× Pro Bowl selection (1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1980)6× First-team All-Pro selection (1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978)
2× Second-team All-Pro Selection (1979, 1980)
3× Super Bowl champion (XI, XV, XVIII)
NFL's 75th Anniversary Team
NFL 1970s All-Decade Team
Mississippi Sports Hall of Fame
Georgia Sports Hall of Fame
College Football Hall of Fame
If this league is all about rings, Guy's got his. He's also been honoured on nearly every other level of recognition. Put simply, if I had to pick one pure punter from league history, it would be Ray Guy.
Are punters as important as any other position in the game of football? No. I can't claim that they are; they're arguably the most expendable of the positions (except perhaps fullback, and I hate that fact too!). Can they win games for you? Why yes, they can, actually. Field position is recognised as a crucial aspect of the game, though somehow it's the return men who get the kudos for this most of the time.
Pro Football Hall of Fame historian Joe Horrigan said of Guy, "He's the first punter you could look at and say, 'He won games'."
It's a crying shame. Ray Guy has been eligible for 19 years, and he doesn't seem any closer now than he did any other year. It's also an unfortunate foretelling of what will likely happen to fellow Oakland Raider Shane Lechler when his time comes, and a damning confirmation that my boy Craig Hentrich will most likely never come close to Canton.
There are many factors to blame. Sammy Baugh, for one, had great statistical success as a punter, but would he have ever been enshrined had he not been the multi-position threat that he was, ala Blanda? Probably not. But the thing is, because of guys like Blanda and Baugh, who played multiple positions; in the minds of selectors, kickers and punters have their representatives in the HOF.To others, though, sometimes we wonder how much of the selection process lies in simple starry-eyed adoration, as opposed to credentials and genuine superiority at what they do? It's for these reasons that I celebrate Desmond Howard's Super Bowl XXXI MVP all those years ago, and still attest, and will do until my death, that the MVP of Super Bowl XLI should not have been Peyton Manning, but oft-forgotten Dominic Rhodes (21 carries for 113 yards and a TD). He may not be a special teamer, but he's a little guy who made it happen.
...And speaking of little guys who made it happen, there's another fellow who will be eligible for the Pro Football Hall of Fame next year. At the professional level, he had three championships, 369 touchdowns (three more than Peyton Manning), 58,179 passing yards (6,704 more than John Elway) and an unheralded six MVP awards.
You may say this means jack all in the NFL, but last I checked, it was called the Pro Football Hall of Fame.
Stay tuned...
Monday, July 19, 2010
1990's
Consider it an insipid thing to consider (hehe, that sentence was fun), but the main thing I've been thinking about for the last few hours was the fantastic things of my childhood - namely, video games. And I was thinking about making retro reviews and crap, but of course those things are a dime a dozen.
Like the website X-Entertainment. Doesn't get updated that much these days, but that website was awesome. Anyway...
Maybe when I get back from my trip, I'll chuck in the reviews and stuff. Yeah, isn't it amazing that I should be on holiday and this is what I've been thinking about, but whatever. Jess is yelling at me now. Perhaps I'll go.
Like the website X-Entertainment. Doesn't get updated that much these days, but that website was awesome. Anyway...
Maybe when I get back from my trip, I'll chuck in the reviews and stuff. Yeah, isn't it amazing that I should be on holiday and this is what I've been thinking about, but whatever. Jess is yelling at me now. Perhaps I'll go.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Metro 'Punctuality'
I know I bitch about trains a lot, but when you have to catch multiple trains on nearly a daily basis, you begin to observe things. Besides, it's my blog and I'll cry if I want to. I'm fairly sure I'm the only person who reads it anyway, peering at the words I typed months ago and giggling to myself in the dark recesses of my lair (or, in today's case, the dreary yet sunny light of day from within a train, funnily enough).
Today, I bring to you my first offer of discontent against Metro, the new big wigs behind the metropolitan train system. In actuality, I have really preferred Metro to the detestable Connex. Primarily, because I've noticed more ticket inspectors on more services, and they don't seem to be on a power trip like the Connex scum of old. I'm aware that some Connex staff were in fact held over in the change to Metro, so in all honesty, it may even be the same group of ticket inspectors, but I feel as though Metro has instilled in them a philosophy of treating passengers like human beings, with courtesy and politeness. A far cry from Connex's infrequent, useless and rude customer service team - I was assaulted on a Connex service and they did nothing. They later charged me $200 for being without my concession card.
Metro have been under fire for poor train reliability, and when you look at the figures, in plain sight at the very train stations they service, the numbers are staggering. As near as I recall, the punctuality rate for Metro trains in March was 80.7%. Good lord!
I don't recall seeing a figure that low since the Black Saturday period.
This number is possibly misleading, because the figures for train replacement bus services is hidden - they include bus services in the 'services delivered' section, yet I'm unsure whether they consider the extra time a bus service adds in the 'punctuality' department. So in effect, punctuality could be even lower than advertised.
Rather than reflect too much on that though, I pose to you a thought, and it really shows what kind of inefficiency we have accepted in our public transport system. According to Metro, for a service to run 'on time', it must be within five minutes of its advertised time of arrival. Five minutes in public transport can be a very long time, you know. Five minutes can mean the difference between whether you miss a connecting train, tram or bus, and arrive 20 minutes late for work. Yet, statistically for all to see, Metro's five minute wiggle room service gets the gold stamp of 'punctuality'.
Tell me, in your job or at your school, is five minutes late considered on time? No. Five minutes is just that. Late. And if you were late by greater than five minutes 80.7% of the time, you would be looking for another job.
The authority figures in your world don't accept such transgressions on your part. Don't accept it from your public transport system.
Today, I bring to you my first offer of discontent against Metro, the new big wigs behind the metropolitan train system. In actuality, I have really preferred Metro to the detestable Connex. Primarily, because I've noticed more ticket inspectors on more services, and they don't seem to be on a power trip like the Connex scum of old. I'm aware that some Connex staff were in fact held over in the change to Metro, so in all honesty, it may even be the same group of ticket inspectors, but I feel as though Metro has instilled in them a philosophy of treating passengers like human beings, with courtesy and politeness. A far cry from Connex's infrequent, useless and rude customer service team - I was assaulted on a Connex service and they did nothing. They later charged me $200 for being without my concession card.
Metro have been under fire for poor train reliability, and when you look at the figures, in plain sight at the very train stations they service, the numbers are staggering. As near as I recall, the punctuality rate for Metro trains in March was 80.7%. Good lord!
I don't recall seeing a figure that low since the Black Saturday period.
This number is possibly misleading, because the figures for train replacement bus services is hidden - they include bus services in the 'services delivered' section, yet I'm unsure whether they consider the extra time a bus service adds in the 'punctuality' department. So in effect, punctuality could be even lower than advertised.
Rather than reflect too much on that though, I pose to you a thought, and it really shows what kind of inefficiency we have accepted in our public transport system. According to Metro, for a service to run 'on time', it must be within five minutes of its advertised time of arrival. Five minutes in public transport can be a very long time, you know. Five minutes can mean the difference between whether you miss a connecting train, tram or bus, and arrive 20 minutes late for work. Yet, statistically for all to see, Metro's five minute wiggle room service gets the gold stamp of 'punctuality'.
Tell me, in your job or at your school, is five minutes late considered on time? No. Five minutes is just that. Late. And if you were late by greater than five minutes 80.7% of the time, you would be looking for another job.
The authority figures in your world don't accept such transgressions on your part. Don't accept it from your public transport system.
Friday, February 26, 2010
Tony's Picnic
Alrighty, since my mind is full of fewer witticisms and more unnecessary verbiage, I'll keep this brief. After all, the fact that in the first sentence I've already used 'witticisms' and 'verbiage' suggests that I'm only trying to show off.
SO!
It seems as though I may finally have my first bit of national exposure. It's not much, but it's a definite stepping stone in what was once a non-existent career.
You know those 'It's no Picnic' ads, where you have some sod trying to down a Picnic bar in 30 seconds? I fondly remember tense moments of the Super Bowl being brought to a relaxed calm by the futile efforts of some curly haired dude trying to down hisself a Picnic.
Anyhow, it seems that your old chum Tony had a crack at it, and they've seen fit to broadcast it on the telly. Isn't that something magical?
So I ask - nay, DEMAND - that y'all be watching Your Generation on the 28th of February (2 days away!!) on Channel 10, 19:30-20:30. I don't know if this is outside of Melbourne, but any distant fans I may have (I'm sure there's at least one lonely soul out there, stroking the hair of a scalp he acquired one dark chilly night as he bellows for a terrified young lady to 'put the lotion on its skin') might as well tune in anyway in the vague attempt at seeing my ad as well.
What happens from here? Who knows. I'm already in the schmoozing process with a few different people here and there, though admittedly I'm not very good at it and likely the only impression I leave is one of utter ineptitude. In any event, I'm excited to finally get my mug on TV, chomping furiously away at a Picnic bar. ...Do I achieve the unbelievable, and actually down the chocolate bar within the space of the ad break?
Well I suppose you'll have to watch yourself and find out...
...
...
!
SO!
It seems as though I may finally have my first bit of national exposure. It's not much, but it's a definite stepping stone in what was once a non-existent career.
You know those 'It's no Picnic' ads, where you have some sod trying to down a Picnic bar in 30 seconds? I fondly remember tense moments of the Super Bowl being brought to a relaxed calm by the futile efforts of some curly haired dude trying to down hisself a Picnic.
Anyhow, it seems that your old chum Tony had a crack at it, and they've seen fit to broadcast it on the telly. Isn't that something magical?
So I ask - nay, DEMAND - that y'all be watching Your Generation on the 28th of February (2 days away!!) on Channel 10, 19:30-20:30. I don't know if this is outside of Melbourne, but any distant fans I may have (I'm sure there's at least one lonely soul out there, stroking the hair of a scalp he acquired one dark chilly night as he bellows for a terrified young lady to 'put the lotion on its skin') might as well tune in anyway in the vague attempt at seeing my ad as well.
What happens from here? Who knows. I'm already in the schmoozing process with a few different people here and there, though admittedly I'm not very good at it and likely the only impression I leave is one of utter ineptitude. In any event, I'm excited to finally get my mug on TV, chomping furiously away at a Picnic bar. ...Do I achieve the unbelievable, and actually down the chocolate bar within the space of the ad break?
Well I suppose you'll have to watch yourself and find out...
...
...
!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)