So for today, and maybe heading forward depending on how well I do here, I am going to throw out the NBA lines for the day and pick my winners against the spread. Let's take a look:
Memphis -13 @ Charlotte
- Memphis -13
Boston +6.5 @ Atlanta
- Boston +6.5 (LOCK of the day)
New York -8.5 @ Cleveland
- Cleveland +8.5
Dallas -12 @ Golden State
- Golden State +12
L.A. Lakers +6 @ San Antonio
- San Antonio -6
Oklahoma City -9.5 @ Sacramento
- OKC -9.5
Alright, let's see how we do. If I go 6-0, I'll chug a gallon of milk or some other ridiculous act. If I go 0-6, I'll shut this blog down or some other viable punishment. Annnd, break.
Friday, April 20, 2012
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
Favorite Directors
This may be a bit off of the usual path of sports opinions, but this is my blog and I have no qualms with shaking things up as I see fit. And the only other topic of discussion that I can keep up with aside from sports would be movies. And so with no further ado, I give you who I believe are the 10 best directors in Hollywood currently. This way, if you have no concept of general entertainment culture, you can just try to recognize these names in the future and go see their films. They will more often than not be completely bad-ass and worth the price you are paying for it. Counting down...
10. James Cameron (Avatar, Titanic, Terminator(s), True Lies) - I have to include the highest grossing movie director ever, as he makes the most entertaining and visually stunning movies known to man. You go into a Cameron movie, and you are sure to enjoy yourself and get the most out of your movie-going experience. He has remade the genre of the action and sci-fi film, and if he made more movies than once every 10 years, he may be higher on my list. It will be interesting to see what he does with Avatar 2 due out in two years.
9. Gus Van Sant (Milk, Good Will Hunting) - Although his track record is fairly minimal, and he has worked on many projects that have gone unrecognized; he can take a story line and completely exploit its true meaning. He has the ability to keep an artistic quality to each film while also having the viewer stay completely intrigued by the story and entertained by the acting. Whenever Gus makes a new film, it is always a very admirable project that is usually very close to him personally. Respect.
8. Robert Zemekis (Back to the Future(s), Forrest Gump, Cast Away) - Although Zemekis has not been as relevant in recent years, he has created some of my all-time favorite movies from the 80s and 90s. Aside from the movies mentioned, he has covered artistically challenging projects in Polar Express and Who Framed Roger Rabbit?. He has transformed the Comedy/Adventure genre into an appealing experience for the whole family. I love his movies and have possibly rewatched his more than any other on this list.
7. Jason Reitman (Juno, Up In The Air, Thank You For Smoking) - Jason is a younger up-and-coming director who has yet to cave-in for the larger studio picture. Each movie he has made has initially been regarded as an indie hit, and each has shown all the aspects of re-inventing the dramedy. He gets the absolute most out of his actors and each movie keeps me thoroughly entertained throughout. I have yet to see his newest project 'Young Adult', but I am always anxious at the choices he makes, as they have been nothing short of fantastic.
6. Steven Spielberg (Indiana Jones(s), Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List, Jaws, Jurassic Park) - I know it may seem difficult to place one of the most renound directors of my time in the 6th slot on this list, but that is primarily due to the lackluster movies he has made since the new millennium. 'Catch Me If You Can' would be his one exception on that point, and his track record in the 90s set a new standard for how a movie should be made. He has gone from the Holocaust to dinosaurs to World War II in the blink of an eye making box office hits and Oscar shoe-ins. Do not get me wrong, I love this man behind a camera, but I would like to see the Spielberg of old at the turn of this next decade.
5. Matthew Vaughn (Kick-Ass, Layer Cake, Stardust, X-Men: First Class) - This man is the next best director in Hollywood. You heard it here first. If you have not seen all four of his previously released projects, you should do so immediately. The way he writes and directs a story completely encompasses you and leaves you wanting more and more after the movie is long over. The structure in his stories are always so enticing and he has consistently proved people wrong with the projects he creates. I cannot wait for the X-Men sequel and every other movie he comes out with for years to come.
4. Quentin Tarantino (Pulp Fiction, Inglourious Basterds, Kill Bill(s), Reservoir Dogs) - There is only one Tarantino. When you watch one of his films, you do not have to ask who directed it. He has created his own style with movies, and constantly takes aspects that are deemed a complete mistake in film making, and turned it into a masterpiece. I understand he is a love him/hate him type of director, but for any true American male, his movies are the cornerstone for what movies should be. Raw, uncensored, violent, brutal.
3. Martin Scorcese (Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, Goodfellas, The Departed) - Scorcese can tell a story like no other. He is meticulous in his craft and has changed/made the careers of the most famous actors of our time (DeNiro, DiCaprio). He pumps out gem after gem and has not slowed down with age. He has arguably made a top movie in each decade since the 70s and although I was not the biggest fan of 'Hugo', I am sure he has something up his sleeve in the coming decade.
2. David Fincher (Seven, Fight Club, Social Network, The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo) - Underrated by most when comparing the rest of the field of directors around his age, He has created some of the most dramatic, exciting movies since I have known to care about movies. He has only gotten better with age as his last two attempts are my favorite of his entire resume. When he wants you to cringe, you cringe. He spares no expense in every scene, and is relentless in his attention to detail. Unbelievable.
1. Christopher Nolan (The Dark Knight, Batman Begins, Inception, The Prestige, Memento) - How to start. Where to start. Nolan is so much more than a director. He gets you so lost in every world he creates, that you feel as if you are a character yourself, entwined in the story, never wanting the credits to roll. He has never made a remotely bad movie (although Insomnia was indeed sub Nolan-esque), and every new film he makes deserves every bit of hype it receives. And on July 20th, 2012, you know I will be front and center in the IMAX for the ending to the greatest superhero trilogy of all time.
10. James Cameron (Avatar, Titanic, Terminator(s), True Lies) - I have to include the highest grossing movie director ever, as he makes the most entertaining and visually stunning movies known to man. You go into a Cameron movie, and you are sure to enjoy yourself and get the most out of your movie-going experience. He has remade the genre of the action and sci-fi film, and if he made more movies than once every 10 years, he may be higher on my list. It will be interesting to see what he does with Avatar 2 due out in two years.
9. Gus Van Sant (Milk, Good Will Hunting) - Although his track record is fairly minimal, and he has worked on many projects that have gone unrecognized; he can take a story line and completely exploit its true meaning. He has the ability to keep an artistic quality to each film while also having the viewer stay completely intrigued by the story and entertained by the acting. Whenever Gus makes a new film, it is always a very admirable project that is usually very close to him personally. Respect.
8. Robert Zemekis (Back to the Future(s), Forrest Gump, Cast Away) - Although Zemekis has not been as relevant in recent years, he has created some of my all-time favorite movies from the 80s and 90s. Aside from the movies mentioned, he has covered artistically challenging projects in Polar Express and Who Framed Roger Rabbit?. He has transformed the Comedy/Adventure genre into an appealing experience for the whole family. I love his movies and have possibly rewatched his more than any other on this list.
7. Jason Reitman (Juno, Up In The Air, Thank You For Smoking) - Jason is a younger up-and-coming director who has yet to cave-in for the larger studio picture. Each movie he has made has initially been regarded as an indie hit, and each has shown all the aspects of re-inventing the dramedy. He gets the absolute most out of his actors and each movie keeps me thoroughly entertained throughout. I have yet to see his newest project 'Young Adult', but I am always anxious at the choices he makes, as they have been nothing short of fantastic.
6. Steven Spielberg (Indiana Jones(s), Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List, Jaws, Jurassic Park) - I know it may seem difficult to place one of the most renound directors of my time in the 6th slot on this list, but that is primarily due to the lackluster movies he has made since the new millennium. 'Catch Me If You Can' would be his one exception on that point, and his track record in the 90s set a new standard for how a movie should be made. He has gone from the Holocaust to dinosaurs to World War II in the blink of an eye making box office hits and Oscar shoe-ins. Do not get me wrong, I love this man behind a camera, but I would like to see the Spielberg of old at the turn of this next decade.
5. Matthew Vaughn (Kick-Ass, Layer Cake, Stardust, X-Men: First Class) - This man is the next best director in Hollywood. You heard it here first. If you have not seen all four of his previously released projects, you should do so immediately. The way he writes and directs a story completely encompasses you and leaves you wanting more and more after the movie is long over. The structure in his stories are always so enticing and he has consistently proved people wrong with the projects he creates. I cannot wait for the X-Men sequel and every other movie he comes out with for years to come.
4. Quentin Tarantino (Pulp Fiction, Inglourious Basterds, Kill Bill(s), Reservoir Dogs) - There is only one Tarantino. When you watch one of his films, you do not have to ask who directed it. He has created his own style with movies, and constantly takes aspects that are deemed a complete mistake in film making, and turned it into a masterpiece. I understand he is a love him/hate him type of director, but for any true American male, his movies are the cornerstone for what movies should be. Raw, uncensored, violent, brutal.
3. Martin Scorcese (Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, Goodfellas, The Departed) - Scorcese can tell a story like no other. He is meticulous in his craft and has changed/made the careers of the most famous actors of our time (DeNiro, DiCaprio). He pumps out gem after gem and has not slowed down with age. He has arguably made a top movie in each decade since the 70s and although I was not the biggest fan of 'Hugo', I am sure he has something up his sleeve in the coming decade.
2. David Fincher (Seven, Fight Club, Social Network, The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo) - Underrated by most when comparing the rest of the field of directors around his age, He has created some of the most dramatic, exciting movies since I have known to care about movies. He has only gotten better with age as his last two attempts are my favorite of his entire resume. When he wants you to cringe, you cringe. He spares no expense in every scene, and is relentless in his attention to detail. Unbelievable.
1. Christopher Nolan (The Dark Knight, Batman Begins, Inception, The Prestige, Memento) - How to start. Where to start. Nolan is so much more than a director. He gets you so lost in every world he creates, that you feel as if you are a character yourself, entwined in the story, never wanting the credits to roll. He has never made a remotely bad movie (although Insomnia was indeed sub Nolan-esque), and every new film he makes deserves every bit of hype it receives. And on July 20th, 2012, you know I will be front and center in the IMAX for the ending to the greatest superhero trilogy of all time.
Monday, April 16, 2012
Weekly Round Up
So two weeks into the MLB regular season, what do we know?
The Dodgers are good. Matt Kemp is good. Beware.
David Freese is more than a cinderella story from last October.
The Giants are kind of screwed without Brian Wilson.
The NL East has completely inverted itself from preseason predictions.
Stephen Strasburg is the real deal, and opposing teams should be scared.
Albert Pujols former team is 7-3, while his current team is 3-6.
Maybe Josh Willingham didn't have a fluke season last year.
No one will care about Josh Willingham because he plays in Minnesota.
David Ortiz and Carlos Pena can still hit... very well. Surprisingly.
LONGSHOT: If Roy Halladay stays at this pace and can play consistently through his 40th birthday, he will win 300 games.
The Dodgers are good. Matt Kemp is good. Beware.
David Freese is more than a cinderella story from last October.
The Giants are kind of screwed without Brian Wilson.
The NL East has completely inverted itself from preseason predictions.
Stephen Strasburg is the real deal, and opposing teams should be scared.
Albert Pujols former team is 7-3, while his current team is 3-6.
Maybe Josh Willingham didn't have a fluke season last year.
No one will care about Josh Willingham because he plays in Minnesota.
David Ortiz and Carlos Pena can still hit... very well. Surprisingly.
LONGSHOT: If Roy Halladay stays at this pace and can play consistently through his 40th birthday, he will win 300 games.
Thursday, April 12, 2012
White Sox Have A Chance, Kind Of...
Let's talk White Sox.
Let's talk about the team that is not supposed to do anything substantial this year from the standpoint of earning a trip to the playoffs, or even having a winning record. There is a first year head coach, a slew of young, unproven players mixed with a group of older can-they-still-be-good players. The pitching staff is questionable and the bullpen is raw, especially in the closer role. Yet, they find themselves with a solid 3-2 record, which essentially means nothing at this point. But I would rather that than the 1-5 Red Sox who are still seen as a team with potential of a postseason appearance. As early as it may be, this question will continue to linger: Can the White Sox keep this up?
The Tigers are a clearly superior team on paper. They have the big boppers, and a stellar batting average to compliment the reigning MVP Cy Young winner on the mound. However, Jose Valverde has blown two saves, their #2 starter has a 23.60 ERA, and their 4-5 starters are completely unproven in their roles. Granted, they will score a lot of runs this year, but they do have flaws, and the White Sox have a team that can exploit them.
Maybe this is the homer in me, but after five games, the offense is not nearly as bad as everyone had initally anticipated. The major holes are the lack of production from Brent Morel and Gordon Beckham who are trading time in the 2 spot currently. De Aza is playing better than his potential, and Rios and Dunn are showing signs of life after they were dead and buried from the previous season. Then veterans Paul Konerko and AJ Pierzynski round out the lineup with the heaviest, most consistent bats. This trend will not continue throughout the season on all aspects, but if they can get timely hitting, stay calm under large deficits, and render a rotation that can keep them in each game, there is a chance they can finish the season above .500 and even make a run at an outside playoff spot. Granted, the odds are still not in their favor, but baseball is strange game.
Let's see how everything pans out after their first true test this weekend as the division-favored Tigers cruise in town for three games at the Cell. If the Sox can take two out of three, they may gain a few more believers.
Let's talk about the team that is not supposed to do anything substantial this year from the standpoint of earning a trip to the playoffs, or even having a winning record. There is a first year head coach, a slew of young, unproven players mixed with a group of older can-they-still-be-good players. The pitching staff is questionable and the bullpen is raw, especially in the closer role. Yet, they find themselves with a solid 3-2 record, which essentially means nothing at this point. But I would rather that than the 1-5 Red Sox who are still seen as a team with potential of a postseason appearance. As early as it may be, this question will continue to linger: Can the White Sox keep this up?
The Tigers are a clearly superior team on paper. They have the big boppers, and a stellar batting average to compliment the reigning MVP Cy Young winner on the mound. However, Jose Valverde has blown two saves, their #2 starter has a 23.60 ERA, and their 4-5 starters are completely unproven in their roles. Granted, they will score a lot of runs this year, but they do have flaws, and the White Sox have a team that can exploit them.
Maybe this is the homer in me, but after five games, the offense is not nearly as bad as everyone had initally anticipated. The major holes are the lack of production from Brent Morel and Gordon Beckham who are trading time in the 2 spot currently. De Aza is playing better than his potential, and Rios and Dunn are showing signs of life after they were dead and buried from the previous season. Then veterans Paul Konerko and AJ Pierzynski round out the lineup with the heaviest, most consistent bats. This trend will not continue throughout the season on all aspects, but if they can get timely hitting, stay calm under large deficits, and render a rotation that can keep them in each game, there is a chance they can finish the season above .500 and even make a run at an outside playoff spot. Granted, the odds are still not in their favor, but baseball is strange game.
Let's see how everything pans out after their first true test this weekend as the division-favored Tigers cruise in town for three games at the Cell. If the Sox can take two out of three, they may gain a few more believers.
Thursday, March 8, 2012
The Manning Miami Mayhem
I am sure that this headline will be the title of many sports papers in Florida and Indiana, maybe even on the daily SportsCenter sidebar in the mornings ahead. However, I am here to tell everyone to SLOW DOWN. Peyton Manning has been working out in Miami in the offseason for many years, far before he needed to worry about becoming a free agent. So don't go placing that turquoise jersey and comparing him to Dan Marino just yet. Sure, it would be fitting since Miami does need a quarterback, and ESPN could show a Manning-Brady showdown twice a year. But I keep coming back to these questions about why stars love that city so much. And why doesn't the rest of America hate it yet?
Lets assume, for a second, that Peyton does sign to play alongside Brandon Marshall and Reggie Bush. Should they become a lovable team because they had been bad to average last year, and could potentially be a playoff contender this upcoming one? NO. This team and city needs to be despised. They are in the process of taking over the three most popular sports in America all within five years. First, the Big Three sign with heat, throwing the NBA in a frantic frenzy and claiming them the greatest talent since the dawn of time. Then, the Marlins change their name and logo, get a new stadium, and go all "Yankees" on everyone's ass this offseason by outspending nearly every team in baseball. Now, the idea of a first ballot hall of fame quarterback could be gracing that city with his presence, garnering yet another team to make a run deep in the playoffs for their respective sport. If I were a fan in that town, I'd be going bonkers. Hell, every fan that dedicates themselves to the teams in their hometown constantly pray for the kind of work that the city of Miami has pulled lately.
Now, because this is all speculation, and Peyton has been linked to close to half of the teams in the NFL, I will not concede and accept the fact that he is to become a Dolphin just yet. I am only here to say that every fan of conventional sports outside of Florida should be hoping Mr. Manning goes anywhere else. Even if it is not your precious city has QB's with the likes of Jackson, Kolb, or Grossman. For the sake of keeping the sports world at an even keel, just hope that he takes his talents somewhere other than South Beach.
Lets assume, for a second, that Peyton does sign to play alongside Brandon Marshall and Reggie Bush. Should they become a lovable team because they had been bad to average last year, and could potentially be a playoff contender this upcoming one? NO. This team and city needs to be despised. They are in the process of taking over the three most popular sports in America all within five years. First, the Big Three sign with heat, throwing the NBA in a frantic frenzy and claiming them the greatest talent since the dawn of time. Then, the Marlins change their name and logo, get a new stadium, and go all "Yankees" on everyone's ass this offseason by outspending nearly every team in baseball. Now, the idea of a first ballot hall of fame quarterback could be gracing that city with his presence, garnering yet another team to make a run deep in the playoffs for their respective sport. If I were a fan in that town, I'd be going bonkers. Hell, every fan that dedicates themselves to the teams in their hometown constantly pray for the kind of work that the city of Miami has pulled lately.
Now, because this is all speculation, and Peyton has been linked to close to half of the teams in the NFL, I will not concede and accept the fact that he is to become a Dolphin just yet. I am only here to say that every fan of conventional sports outside of Florida should be hoping Mr. Manning goes anywhere else. Even if it is not your precious city has QB's with the likes of Jackson, Kolb, or Grossman. For the sake of keeping the sports world at an even keel, just hope that he takes his talents somewhere other than South Beach.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
'Tis The Most Wonderful Time Of The Year
From the time football season ends, to the time baseball season begins, there tends to be a lull in the major sports world. ESPN starts chasing stories like LINsanity and the Saints bounty scandal, and there are still NBA and NHL games being played. However, in the midst of it all, the greatest time to be a die-hard or fair-weather fan of sports comes to fruition for three weeks, making for some of the most glorious few weekends of the entire year. This is March Madness.
The beauty of March Madness is the fact that you do not need to have been following the NCAA basketball season at all to find this entertaining. People of all sports and non-sports backgrounds fill out their brackets, some with immense precision, and some blindly out of a hat. Nonetheless, once that opening tip of the first game begins, every bracket has a chance to succeed. And even if you have no plans to fill out a bracket, there are still upsets and underdogs, buzzer beaters and cinderella stories, for people of all kinds to enjoy. Men and women, old and young come together to see which team can inch out a victory on a neutral court in the most fun-filled, unpredictable tournament known to man.
But really, one of the best parts about this whole event is that ESPN can't get it right. Oh, they'll try. And they'll cover. And they'll bring experts and clipboards and coaches to break down each and every aspect to a teams' offensive and defensive strategy to prove who can pull out as the victor. But every year, none of that matters. That's what is so hard to get through their skulls. Four #1 seeds have been in the Final Four once in the history of this great tournament, and yet every year, Dicky V and Digger Phelps have all the #1's back there for the glory. Get some balls. Take a risk. Last year, VCU (#11 seed) and Butler (#9 seed) were in the Final Four fighting for a chance to go to the national championship, and you know what, it was fucking awesome to watch. And only two people out of two million predicted those schools to be in that position together. Does that make them experts? No. But they are just as likely to get these teams right as those who live and die by guessing which team has the most high flying talent every night.
This year, when those brackets come out, I will fill mine out with the same routine as always, in hopes of getting every game right. And even when my bracket has gone to shit, I will still be sitting on my couch, smiling and cheering for some team I have never watched or cared about before that game, because that is just the amazement that is March Madness.
The beauty of March Madness is the fact that you do not need to have been following the NCAA basketball season at all to find this entertaining. People of all sports and non-sports backgrounds fill out their brackets, some with immense precision, and some blindly out of a hat. Nonetheless, once that opening tip of the first game begins, every bracket has a chance to succeed. And even if you have no plans to fill out a bracket, there are still upsets and underdogs, buzzer beaters and cinderella stories, for people of all kinds to enjoy. Men and women, old and young come together to see which team can inch out a victory on a neutral court in the most fun-filled, unpredictable tournament known to man.
But really, one of the best parts about this whole event is that ESPN can't get it right. Oh, they'll try. And they'll cover. And they'll bring experts and clipboards and coaches to break down each and every aspect to a teams' offensive and defensive strategy to prove who can pull out as the victor. But every year, none of that matters. That's what is so hard to get through their skulls. Four #1 seeds have been in the Final Four once in the history of this great tournament, and yet every year, Dicky V and Digger Phelps have all the #1's back there for the glory. Get some balls. Take a risk. Last year, VCU (#11 seed) and Butler (#9 seed) were in the Final Four fighting for a chance to go to the national championship, and you know what, it was fucking awesome to watch. And only two people out of two million predicted those schools to be in that position together. Does that make them experts? No. But they are just as likely to get these teams right as those who live and die by guessing which team has the most high flying talent every night.
This year, when those brackets come out, I will fill mine out with the same routine as always, in hopes of getting every game right. And even when my bracket has gone to shit, I will still be sitting on my couch, smiling and cheering for some team I have never watched or cared about before that game, because that is just the amazement that is March Madness.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
ESPN is ruining sports
This morning, along with every morning for past week, I have turned on ESPN to watch the highlights from sports around the country that I might have missed out on. Whether that be a nail-biting NCAA basketball game, or an overtime shootout win in hockey, I was just looking for my daily fix. Low and behold, this morning has followed suit in disappointing me from these game summaries to talk about the Super Bowl... again.
I get it, I get it. The Super Bowl is the largest single game sporting event in the world every year, and it is ESPN's duty to show its diligence in providing thorough detail about the game. But how can there be enough enticing information to take up 45% (ACTUAL STAT) of SportsCenter's hourly coverage? That is absurd! For two whole weeks, there is nothing but dissecting plays, injury reports, live press conferences, Tony Dungy, Trent Dilfer, predictions, coincidences, David Tyree montages, etc. I have had enough! I don't care to know Bill Belicheck's thought process on where he would play Julian Edelman when he drafted him out of Kent State as a quarterback. And yes, that is the entirety of the SportsCenter coverage I saw this very morning. It doesn't help that I already do not care about the two teams playing, especially considering the fact that Boston and New York fans are the ones relishing in this, but ESPN could not wait to jump on this bandwagon of city rivalries and beat the issues of this game to a bloody pulp.
I would say that I am excited for this to finally be over, but we all know that the week after the Super Bowl will have even more coverage of the game summary, tied with commercials about buying the memorable DVD collection for the victors. If this is the case (and we know it will be), I think I would rather opt to watch re-runs of whatever sitcom is playing on TBS these days. Thanks ESPN, for diluting my competitive spirit.
I get it, I get it. The Super Bowl is the largest single game sporting event in the world every year, and it is ESPN's duty to show its diligence in providing thorough detail about the game. But how can there be enough enticing information to take up 45% (ACTUAL STAT) of SportsCenter's hourly coverage? That is absurd! For two whole weeks, there is nothing but dissecting plays, injury reports, live press conferences, Tony Dungy, Trent Dilfer, predictions, coincidences, David Tyree montages, etc. I have had enough! I don't care to know Bill Belicheck's thought process on where he would play Julian Edelman when he drafted him out of Kent State as a quarterback. And yes, that is the entirety of the SportsCenter coverage I saw this very morning. It doesn't help that I already do not care about the two teams playing, especially considering the fact that Boston and New York fans are the ones relishing in this, but ESPN could not wait to jump on this bandwagon of city rivalries and beat the issues of this game to a bloody pulp.
I would say that I am excited for this to finally be over, but we all know that the week after the Super Bowl will have even more coverage of the game summary, tied with commercials about buying the memorable DVD collection for the victors. If this is the case (and we know it will be), I think I would rather opt to watch re-runs of whatever sitcom is playing on TBS these days. Thanks ESPN, for diluting my competitive spirit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)