1. Twilight.  All of them.  I know, these movies are new, and were made using a cruise-liner full of cash, and made even more, but from what I understand the books are actually fairly entertaining.  I mean, for that many people to go nuts – something in them had to appeal to someone…  That being said – those movies were awful.  I mean, from top to bottom, that was some of the worst film I’ve ever seen.  The acting was horrendous, the production values at times looked like something from the SyFy channel, and the lines they chose to adapt from the books play like they were chose by a 12 year old monkey.  So, wouldn’t it be cool if in 10 years someone came back and actually made these right?  Made them so that they’d appeal to everyone, instead of just the crowd that would scream and “awwwwww” anytime they saw the actors in paleface kissing from 13 camera angles?

2. Backdraft.  I really liked this movie – a lot of people did.  In ’91, though, they just weren’t able to make every scene inside of the fires realistic enough.  I definitely think this one could use a reboot with modern CGI and stuntwork.

3.  Weird Science.  Okay, so, this movie was really campy.  And, I don’t really think that should be changed in a remake.  But there are so many things that this movie could do now with CGI.  (Getting rid of so many puppets, for one.)  Plus…let’s bump this one down to say, “R”, instead of that all-so-frustrating “PG-13?”

4. Outland.  Sean Connery was in this old-school sci-fi flick that had a bit of a Firefly feel to it.  I really think this one should be revisited – definitely with a darker feel.  What can I say?  I just can’t get enough of the deep space western genre…

5. Logan’s Run.  This movie had everything going for it.  A solid script.  Decent acting.  Underlying dark premise.  The Future as we thought it would be from the 70s.  Unfortunately…it also had the 70s.  This movie has everything that makes a great sci-fi movie – it just needs that modern kick in the pants!

Honorable Mentions:  Kelly’s Heroes, The Great Escape, Maximum Overdrive.

Some people think the problem lies with the advent of the non-leather helmet.  They think, and they may be correct, that when you wear it, you feel invincible, and it causes you to recklessly throw yourself through the air at an opponent like a semi-retarded, suicidal duck.  The problem is, if they went BACK to a less-safe helmet, the players, (well at least those have pretty much replaced the entirety of their brain cells with a deer antler, goose-urine, and battery-shavings cocktail,) will likely keep going kamikaze on each other just to prove a point.  Once they’ve effectively killed each other off, we may start to see some change.  Until then, CBS is going to have to air games after 10pm so that they can show the games with a rating of TV-MA V.

Here’s what I think the problem is:  for the most part, hurting each other doesn’t affect the players at that exact moment in time.  Meaning, they will get fined – but tomorrow.  They may get suspended, but next week.  They may go brain-simple, but in 10 years.  Sure, a 15-yard penalty can, and has, changed the course of a game – but for the most part, it’s just one play in a game with hundreds.  There is one sport, though, that I think has done it right – and  this may surprise some of you: hockey.  Now, you may be thinking that I’m also messed up on the goose-urine, but just here me out.  For those of you that watch hockey, you know exactly what I’m talking about here.  You see, in hockey, you get penalized instantly, and instantly give your opponent a fairly major advantage for however long your penalty lasts.  A fairly minor penalty?  (Think false start in football.)  2 minutes in the penalty box, giving the other team a 5-4 advantage of skaters on the ice.  A bit more major?  (Think holding, pass interference, etc.)  5 minutes.  But what’s also nice, is that penalties can “stack” on each other – meaning, if a player instigates a fight, and fights, he gets a short penalty for instigating, and a longer one for fighting.  So, two penalties enforced together.  There are also different levels of penalty depending on if there is injury/blood, etc.

Now, think about how this could all work for football:  Say you’ve got a 2nd down and 9 yards to go.  The ball is on your own 30 yard line.  Your QB goes back to pass, and after he lets go of the ball, the defender drills him in the head late.  Penalty.  Now, normally, this would be a 15 yard penalty, and you would be on your own 45 yard line.  Not much of a penalty – especially if your QB gets hurt.  Now let’s put some hockey-logic into the same play.  Instead of just the 15 yard penalty – what if we put that player in the penalty box for 3 minutes – which is a LONG time in football, especially if the offense is pass-heavy.  So, now, you are a man short on the field (11 vs 10) for 3-6 plays, possibly even the remainder of the series, depending on how the offense plays it.  For lesser penalties, like false starts, I don’t see any reason to pull a player.  I think only 10+ yard penalties should get this treatment.

So, now, let’s look at the injury issue.  Let’s use the Detroit Lion’s Ndamukong Suh as an example.  Suh makes roughly $9.25 million a year – not counting endorsements, bonuses, etc.  That means, that per game, Suh makes $578,125.  In 2012, Suh kicked the opposing quarterback in the wedding tackle.  He was not penalized on the field, but was later penalized $30,000 by the league.  It takes Suh roughly 3 minutes of game-time to pay that fine.  3 minutes.  (These numbers are all squirrelly because of his base salaries, etc. – but it’s more to prove a point, not necessarily single him out.)  That game, incidentally, went into overtime, with the opposing team eventually winning by 3.  Now – step one is taking care of it on the field.  The TV people saw it right away, so, the refs in the replay booth did, too.  (With personal fouls, refs should be able to flag the field-refs and stop play, whether or not another play has been run should not matter in PFs.)  Secondly, Suh needs to be punished RIGHT AWAY.  It’s like training a dog.  If you come home, and your dog has torn up the carpet, you can’t really yell at him then – he has forgotten all about it.  So, RIGHT AWAY, a 15 yard penalty is assessed, and Suh is put in the penalty box.  It’s up to the refs to decide the penalty minutes.  In a case like this, he did it on purpose, and it was a personal foul.  Let’s say 1 minute for intent, and 4 minutes for the action.  a 5 minute penalty.  That’s a LONG time to not have your best defensive player and be down a player on the field…  That could easily sway a close game – especially late

Besides penalties, hockey players also do a pretty amazing job of policing themselves.  You may/may not know this, but most fights in the NHL are fairly staged.  Both players usually agree ahead of time to fight, everyone in the arena knows they are going to fight, and the fights are pretty much just motions – not emotions.  On some occasions, though, the fights are DEFINITELY real.  These are usually the result of an opposing player taking a cheap shot at one of the other’s players.  When that happens – there’s always retribution.  For example, in the Blackhawks v. Canucks hockey game the other night, one of the Canucks took a cheap, head-shot on one of the ‘Hawks players.  About 3 seconds later, the captain of the ‘Hawks started a fight with the Canucks player.  Not really to hurt him, but to let him know that he can’t get away with doing that to one of his guys.  They fought for a bit, then a ref jumped in and pulled them apart.  Both players were then sent to the penalty box.  (You can’t allow fighting without penalty, of course.)  Statement made.  As a result, you don’t see guys in the NHL purposely hurting each other NEAR as often as you see it in the NFL.  (That may also be because they don’t get paid near the amount of money – and don’t want to jeopardize their livelihoods…which is something else the NFL has going against it…)

One last thing.  Why not make financial penalties increase each time with a “history-modifier” – instead of just basing it off of the crime committed?  So, for example, a rookie comes in and spears a defenseless player.  $10k fine.  Then, in two weeks, he punches someone.  Instead of giving him the fine for punching someone, it should be the standard fine for punching someone PLUS a modifier depending on their history.  So, say it’s 1% of the players salary for each fine-able offense committed.  So, $20k for punching the guy + $40,196 (Which is 1% of the rookie salary cap.)  In three weeks, say he hits someone in the head.  $10k for the hit on the head + $80,392 (2%).  Maybe cap it at 6% or something.  Sound harsh?  You bet.  But I bet you’d see the offenses go down…  Then, maybe if a guy goes, say 8 games without a fine, 1% is subtracted from his history.  If players get 3,4, 5 fines a year, a hit on the head all the sudden becomes a $700k fine, and now their wallet is actually taking a hit.  So, instead of a $30,000 fine for Suh, he would have actually paid around $400,000, assuming he has 4 fine-able offenses on his record.  (That’s what I can find.)

All in all, here’s what would make the injury issue, at least the head to head stuff really decline:  long-ish loss of player in personal foul situations, short loss of player in other circumstances, players allowed to “respectfully” police their own, and bring the salaries down so that financial penalties and injury affects them like it affects the rest of the world.  (That last one will NEVER happen, I know, but it’s a good point.)  I know  these all seem extreme, but what is happening to football is extreme.  Right now, there is absolutely NO way I let my son play football.  These kids watch the NFL players play, and hit each other, and they turn around and do the same thing on the Jr. High/High School fields.  If the pro game changes, the little leagues will follow suit.  If my son wants to play a contact sport – I’m running out and buying him some skates.

In the early 2000s, Food Network was “Come for the Emeril, stay for the Alton.” Alton Brown, of course.  Brown’s show Good Eats was one of the only shows on Food Network that was able to combine the entertainment value of a normal cooking show (watching someone cook and make interesting comments about what they are cooking and why,) and actually learning about why foods do what.  Why does this matter?  Well – on today’s Food Network, you get the opportunity to see Rachael Ray for 22 hours throwing random ingredients and spices that she’s never heard of into $380 cookware, and then pretending like A. she’s actually eating it, and B. if she were eating it, that it would taste better than low-grade dog food.  The other 2 hours are filled by loud, obnoxious 30-somethings that are certified to teach the culinary arts due to their tab at the local foodie-supply kiosk in the mall.  Oh, and throw in Sandra Lee, who may actually be a modern-day, real-life culinary siren.  If you happen to dwell on the channel too long, and her rabid raccoon-inspired eyes happen to catch your gaze, you might as well forget your common sense, because by the end of the first segment, she’ll have you believing that you can throw cookie dough, pot roast, shallots, and toothpaste in a pressure cooker and serve 10 of your closest metro-sexual friends.

So, you see, what Alton was doing was important.  It changed the way millions of people, myself included, cooked.  I no longer miss out on a dish because I’m missing a base ingredient – Alton has taught me why I would use flour there, and how corn starch is a viable replacement.  Raytard Rachael Ray would just tell you that it’s no problem if you don’t have any flour, cocoa powder kinda looks like flour’s hip neighbor…so it should be fine.

So, after suffering through Alton’s new role on all-thing-foodie-TV for so long…I can’t even begin to describe my utter elation when he popped up (literally) on Mythbusters this Sunday.  Now, someone tell me why this relationship wasn’t created/exploited a long, long, long, looong time ago?  When he popped up, (again, literally,) I bet 4 million people sat back in there chair and said “Huh.  Yep.  This makes PERFECT sense.”  In fact, when he and the Savage began talking, I realized that Alton Brown is THE perfect guest for the Mythbusters.  He instantly brings the geeky, fun, inquisitive, and inventive mind that perfectly matches Adam’s, but at the same time, he brings the brilliance, thoroughness, and analytics that mesh so well with Jamie.  It’s almost like Alton Brown instantly became the gel that takes Adam and Jamie to the next level of legit.  (I know…legitimacy would probably be grammatically correct there…but read that sentence aloud that way I wrote it.  Huh?  Sounds kind of better…more hipster, doesn’t it?)

So, hooray for Mythbusters, hooray for AB, and hooray for us viewers that were able to get the first Christmas (or Hanukkah…if that’s your persuasion,) present of the year.

(If this article seems a bid dis-jointed…well…deal with it.  I was actually watching the end of the Mythbusters episode as I wrote this…and I enjoyed it so much…that I often forgot my thought.  I often forgot my thought.  I often….crap.

-Daniel

I’ve already expressed my dislike of The New Normal.  But, with it pulling in 4.5 million viewers last week, I doubt it’s going anywhere anytime soon.  (It beat out Fox’s 9:30 offering by almost a million viewers.)  Speaking of Fox’s 9:30 offering, the Mindy Project is just not good.  But, again, 3.68 million people watched it last week, so apparently someone likes it.

Let’s move on to the other new shows this week.  ABC finally trotted out Nashville, it’s musi-drama starring Connie Britton and the no-longer-the-little-girl-from-RemembertheTitans Hayden Panettiere.  Britton plays the reigning-but-aging queen of country music (think Reba) and Panettiere plays the young, reckless starlet without much reverence for the way things “used to be”,  (think Taylor Swift combined with Lindsay Lohan.)  I wasn’t sure what to expect from this show when it was first promo’d.  I knew one thing:  after what seemed like the billionth season of Friday Night Lights, I was just about tired of Britton’s fake Texan accent.  (And she was the best part of that series…)  So, I didn’t exactly have high hopes for Britton’s revival of said accent…  Panettiere on the other hand is kind of a wild-card.  She was great in Heroes, but this is kind of a different role for her – and one that she will have to nail weekly in order to pull off a starring role.  The bit characters are what you’d expect from a show like this – plenty of good looking, countrified man-meat for the woman to watch so that they don’t feel threatened by Britton and Panettiere.  (Let’s not fool ourselves – just like life’s equation of good and evil balancing out – in order for an hour-long drama to work, hot women must always be balanced out by hot men.  Unless you’re making a show on Spike or an animated series on Fox.  In those cases, you only have 14 female viewers, so no one is going to argue when the sweaty fatso gets the 95lb model.)  Both ladies, however, did exceptionally well in the Pilot episode.  The men…well…we’ll see.  There was definitely some iffiness there that will take some time to determine just how much of an anchor they will be.  (And not anchor in the “solid-as-an-anchor” sense, rather anchor in the “this-boat-cannot-move-forward-because-your-acting-is-a-400lb-anchor-dragging-the-bottom-of-the-lake” sense.)  But, the true test of any Pilot episode, is whether or not you would be willing to watch hour 2 (episode 2) immediately, or if you went to bed satisfied, but not hungry.  I can safely say that I would have watched at least another hour of Nashville.  Had I been at Golden Corral, there would have most definitely been another trip to the hot bar in my immediate future.  (That analogy is kind of weak, I apologize.  It’s been a while since I wrote anything.)  I give Nashville a 4/5.

Nashville wasn’t the only big ticket item for viewers to watch on Wednesday.  NBC brought it’s big hour-long drama hammer with Chicago Fire.  How can I explain Chicago Fire?  It’s kind of Rescue Me meets ER, with a little bit of Trauma thrown in for seasoning.  If you like action – the Pilot delivered.  If you like story, well, there wasn’t much in the Pilot.  I can only assume that the story will ramp up as the season progresses.  (If not…well, I like fire trucks as much as the next guy, that’s why I became a firefighter…but it’s probably not enough to make me devote an hour to watching them run up and down the streets of Chicago each week…)  Fire wasn’t exactly an opening-day hit with the audience, either.  The pilot was watched by 6.61 million viewers.  That doesn’t sound bad when you compare it with some sitcoms, but when the other two shows in its timeslot, Nashville and CSI, get 8.93 and 10.7 million viewers respectively, you’re in an early hole.  As far as reviewing the show…well…there is a lot of action, there was some medical stuff, there was a rivalry, a love interest, a death, and a new guy.  Seriously…substance just didn’t floweth over in episode 1.  I will say, though, that just as I said with Nashville, I was ready to watch more right away.  I really wanted to see where we were going with this, and I honestly have quite high hopes for week 2.  The question is, will the viewership go up enough from the pilot to keep this series alive for NBC?  That will be the big question.  I  give Chicago Fire a 3.5/5.

Revolution began its bid to be the next show vying for the affection, and blind, puppy-dog love of the aimlessly wandering Lost fanbase Monday on NBC. (When the Season 1 DVD is released…do you think that will be one of the quotes on the back of the box? Should be.) Let me summarize the plot the best I can. No real “spoilers” here, unless you’ve been living under a rock, and missed the 2.3 million previews pushed by NBC throughout the last 6 months.  Plot:  In modern times (aka: now,) something happens to completely suspend certain laws of physics. In other words…Physics becomes only a good idea – not the law. So – the primary effect of this is that electricity no longer works – nor does the internal combustion engine, apparently. Flash-forward (hmmm…Flash Forward…that phrase reminds me of another show like this….) a few years, and here we are in a post-apocalyptic-like America. (After all, without the engine and electricity, apparently all hell breaks loose.) While this show was mostly entertaining – I have some SERIOUS problems with the fundamental plot. And, because I’m a nice guy, I’m going to lay them all out here in a very easy to use bullet-point list. If at any time you get the urge to reply “It’s only a TV show”, I’m looking at you Sparky, I refuse to acknowledge that as an excuse here. Guys being able to take a bullet in the chest, and continuing to jump from building to building? Sure. But not when the entire premise of a show is as stable as Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign…

• Some sort of crazy thing occurs that causes electricity to no longer be possible.  Are they going to explain more about the science of this?
  • What exactly no longer works?  If an EMP blast is set off – all currently assembled electronic devices will fail to operate.  (See War of the Worlds.)  So, obviously this isn’t what happened here, because it wouldn’t be hard to reconstruct some basic circuits to create a photo-voltaic system or a thousand.
• The internal combustion engine no longer works, but guns do.  Fire is also unaffected.
  • So – things still burn.  Heat is obviously still possible.  Water still boils.  Gunpowder still ignites.  What exactly happened then to the internal combustion engine?  Just the electronics?  Too weak.  Even if they couldn’t construct an old-school combustion engine with a Lenoir-style 2-stroke engine, (is spark not at all possible?) they could most certainly be running around on steam.  In the time that passes in the Pilot episode – you’re telling me that there isn’t a steam-railroad in operation?  And that each town doesn’t have at least 1 or 2 steam powered vehicles, with another 10 under construction?
  • Part two of this complaint:  Why did chaos suddenly reign?  The military has a command structure that is designed to be able to operate without direct communication.  (It may not be fully prepared for something of this magnitude…but it would have been enough to maintain military control.)  After all – apparently guns still work.  Was the National Guard unable to maintain control of their region using an arsenal of M16s, grenade launchers, mines, rocket launchers, grenades, and other “dumb” munitions?  Why, all the sudden, were these militias able to take control of the US using nothing but machetes and, what appear to be, a random assortment of Civil War-era muskets?  I’m sorry – but I simply cannot suspend common sense to this level.  I’d be able to believe that the military went crazy and turned everything in a Police State before I can believe that one dude , with an army of couriers, horses and wagons, and some inept hilljacks with machetes could take complete control from a government simply because the government’s Humvees wouldn’t move.
• These problems can only be answered by one thing: magic.  And, if magic is going to be present here, then just go for it.  Go all Merlin-style on us – and have the first show end with someone conjuring some ice or something.  But, alas, it’s not going to be magic.  It’s going to be:
  • A. Aliens.  This will be annoying – because alien shows just don’t work on network television. Or…
  • B. The Future: This will be annoying – because time travel’s been done. And done.  And done. Or…
  • C. The Government:  This could be a cool answer – but it’s probably the most unlikely.  Or…
  • D. Terrorists:  Weak-sauce.  What a tired, and unbelievable premise. Or…
  • E. None of this is actually happening.  (see: Lost or The Matrix or The Village.)  Sigh.

I will most certainly be giving Revolution a watch. After-all, as I’ve said over and over, It’s not a reality show, or a courtroom drama, so it deserves a shot. But, until it answers some more questions, and proves that it’s not just a Lost – in other words, it’s not just a show that’s throwing you a twist at the end of each episode, without any plan or way to resolve them all at the end – it won’t be very high on my list. The Pilot episode gets a 3/5 – but it’s just barely holding on to that 3…

Before I go, I want to offer up this quote by Verne Gay of Newsday:

“There’s an almost overwhelming been-there-seen-that feel to the pilot, which doesn’t really offer any suggestion of ‘well, you haven’t seen this.”

Okay, that isn’t exactly fair – but believe me when I say that neither premiere was worth a bump in your DVR scheduling.  I will say that the result of watching these episodes wasn’t without surprise, however.  If you had asked me 2 months ago what my tone would be in this review, I’d have been completely wrong.  (In fact…I think the last podcast reflects this.)  If I was a betting man.  If I had enough money to bet with – I’d have taken great odds that Matthew Perry and Go On would follow the footsteps of his former Friends castmates’ offerings, and be a total disaster.  I would have also surmised that The New Normal would quickly move it’s way into the exclusive club that is my DVR top 15 – joining the likes of Modern Family, Sons of Anarchy, and Parenthood.  But alas, neither were to be true.

Go On is a sitcom that follows Perry’s Ryan King, a sports talk-radio host, as he attempts to deal with the recent passing of his wife by attending mandatory group-therapy.  Let’s be honest, this show has the makings of just about every other early-release sitcom in past 5 years:  it’s got a “big” name, a few “hey, look, it’s that guy!” minor movie/TV actors looking to get a steady paycheck, and a huge supporting cast of nobodies.  While this may work for a show on HBO, or Showtime (see The Newsroom, Game of Thrones,)  it just doesn’t usually work on television.  (Ask Aaron Sorkin – he seems to run around Hollywood pulling every resume off of street corners for his massive productions.  Studio 60, anyone?)  Here’s the interesting part:  it really isn’t terrible.  DVR15?  No way…but top 30?  High enough to record over Thomas the Tank Engine, and Wordworld?  Sure.  But not enough to compete with any of the big boys.  (See – if you switch over to the NY Times, or the Indianapolis Star to get your review of this show…I guarantee that you will not get DVR-placement advice.  I mean..they won’t even MENTION quality children’s programming in their reviews.  It’s a shame, really.)  Perry’s relatively harmless – if not a bit unbelievable as a grieving widower.  Sure – they throw in the dramatic 8 second scene every once in a while – but I’m sure they learned in their early screen tests that Perry just doesn’t have the chops to be pulling Shakespearean drama out of his hat.  The supporting cast is sufficient, if not forgettable – which will probably be the ultimate reason why this show gets cancelled.  There just isn’t enough interest to be found in them.  For shows like this to be successful, you need to come for the star – stay for the supporting cast.  I give Go On a surprising 3 out of 5.

The New Normal, however, is the shocker here.  (I’m looking forward to Kevin’s review of this one – because he totally disagrees with me.)  Let me start by saying that I never, ever understood how people enjoyed Raising Hope.  When I watch that show I see a handful of bad actors, reading mostly harmless (read: safe) dialog – that’s supposed to be shocking, with a plot that can only be fresh for about 6 episodes.  (Ask Jimmy Fallon in about a month how the baby-based comedy business is working for him.)  This show is Raising Hope with different people.  Now that you know that, digest this review accordingly.  At no point during the Pilot episode did I ever even enter the room that contained the thought: “hm…this could be okay.”  Okay.  Not good.  Okay.  I honestly thought that the Pilot was the worst television episode I have seen since making it through 2/3 of last year’s monumental disaster: Work It!  Enough with the Pilot, let’s move on to week 2 – after all, I’d be a hypocrite if I only judged on week 1.  Week 2, I must admit, was 100% better.  The reason?  The super-annoying, over-the-top, horribly acted/written/thought of/dressed/cast character of “Nana” played a much smaller role – and they instead focused on the likable characters of the series: the incredibly lovable gay couple played by Justin Bartha and Andrew Rannells, and the mother/daughter duo of Georgia King and Bebe Wood.  These characters are not only harmless – they are actually quite enjoyable, and may….may….end up being the saving grace here.  I wasn’t sold on Andrew Rannells at first, thinking that the writers had just jumped feet-first into the stereo-typical “super-gay”/”kinda gay” relationship scenario, with Rannells playing the “Jack” role (if we’d somehow switched to an analogy of Will & Grace.)  In Week 2, however, they showed that they are content having a prominent gay couple on television that is a bit more “real” than the standard television-issue gay couple consisting of a super-manly-male on one side and a bowl of Skittles on the other.  The problem is – I don’t think this will last.  Unfortunately, I think the frustrating “Nana” character is here to stay – as an integral part of the series.  Racism/Sexism/Ignorant-ism was topical/funny in the 70s.  Today?  It’s like a  toddler throwing himself on the floor in the grocery store.  You’re only doing it to get attention – but it’s more sad than funny.  I give The New Normal a very sad and un-funny 2 out of 5.

Until Tiger Woods began playing professional golf, I can honestly say that I had never *never* played/watched golf. After all, it was a sport for old, rich guys, right? An old, rich guy would step up, have a poorer guy hand him a club out of a bag that the rich guy was incapable of carrying himself, then he would approach the ball, wait for everyone to quietly revere him, then haul off and hit this ball as hard as possible. We, as viewers, would then assume we knew what happened next, because watching a 1.680″ white ball fly 200 yards through the air against a white sky backdrop on standard definition was as interesting as watching the Republican National Convention. The rich guy would then hand the poorer guy his club back, and the two would walk to the ball, where we would repeat – until the ball found its way to the hole.

After years and countless years of this, things changed. Tiger Woods showed up. Sure – he probably made 13.7 billion dollars per hole, so he, too, was a rich guy – but, he wasn’t old, and he wasn’t just hitting the ball around the course until it somehow dropped in the hole. No – this dude was the proverbial Golf Ball Whacker-Guy. (See: Happy Gilmore) He would haul off and SMACK the ball off the tee. Then, as if that wasn’t enough, he’d walk up to where the ball had fallen (or, more likely, surrendered,) and SMACK the ball again. Tree in the way? No problem – Woods would hit the ball hard enough that the ball would actually decompose down to particulate matter, go through said tree, and then re-constitute itself 5 feet from the hole. True story. After a couple of years of this…everyone was getting rich. I mean…seriously rich. According to some sites – Woods has created a greater than 1,000% inflation of winnings on Tour. For example, in 2007, the 125th money-earner in the PGA walked away with $785,180. The top guy took a Scrooge-like swim in almost $11 million (Woods). In 1987, #125: $69,094. #1: $925,941. Sure – they weren’t going to starve in ’87…but that’s a fairly healthy increase in 20 years… You think the PGA didn’t notice this? Of course they did – and even with his recent, transgressions, the PGA has done whatever it can to make sure that Woods shows up at their events, draws millions in ticket money and billions in sponsor money. Some sports, however, don’t realize what they’ve got…

In 1999, another boring-as-drying-mud sport, cycling, saw Lance Armstrong walk away with the prestigious win of the season, The Tour De France. This was the first of 7 such victories for Armstrong. All the sudden…cycling mattered. You see – this wasn’t just some random dude, no, this was a cancer surviving American, dominating the rest of the world! And, not only that, he seemed like a fairly nice guy. (How we decide that as fans from thousands of miles away…who knows.) After all – he was with Sheryl Crow, who was Sandra Bullock before Sandra managed to somehow become Cinderella, Jennifer Aniston, and a cuddly puppy to every housewife in America because she got divorced (along with 50% of every other woman in America…) So – Armstrong goes out – and destroys the competition. And people watched. I watched. I followed the stages from my computer at work. I learned about drafting, and team riding, and sprints, and hill-climbs, and yellow jerseys, and the French countryside, and how cyclists relieve themselves as they just roll down the road… US Cycling was a FORCE. People bought t-shirts, and bikes, and hats, and posters, and whatever else people buy.

Then, cycling became the professional wrestling of the real-sports world, and everyone from the athletes to the judges to the road-painters were ingesting steroids at an alarming rate. So, to counter this, the cycling organizations got together, and decided that they would basically take every bit of urine an athlete could produce (except that which had splattered on the roadside, I suppose,) and start testing like they were worried about a recurrence of the Black Plague. One by one, they dropped. Team after team was disqualified. Americans, French, Spaniards, Germans, and even the hated Dutch fell daily. But not Armstrong. In fact, according to some, they might as well have attached the meter directly to his bike seat as often as they were testing. But, no matter how often they tried, they couldn’t find any evidence that Armstrong was cheating. Well, much in the spirit of the Star of Indiana, after dominating for so long, Armstrong decided to move on, and see what else life had for him to dominate. After a few triathlons, and some more cycling, and several more unsuccessful attempts by the world to somehow explain how this man defeated all of their fully-intact cyclists, we arrive in 2012.

In 2012, the US Anti-Doping Agency decided that it had had ENOUGH! They were TIRED of this seemingly nice man, going through his retirement as if nothing had happened! They were tired of the thousands of American cancer survivors thinking that they, too, could heal and live a normal life – maybe even an above-average one! So, they went out and assembled a cast of character witnesses with the credibility of an 8 year old boy telling his parents that it was actually his 3 year old sister that had made the mess in the kitchen… With this cast of characters, the USADA announced that they were going to strip Armstrong of all of his titles, and permanently ban him from the sport. Armstrong, after having fought the same doping battle for over 10 years now – announced that he was done. He was tired of fighting. He was finally ready to be done. And, with that, one of the greatest athletes the world had ever seen – certainly the greatest cyclist to ever pee on a bike seat – was no longer. The USADA stripped a man who had never once failed a drug test of his titles. They considered this a victory.

They say that rulings like this one are carried out so that kids around the world can feel good about competing without doping. That the playing field will be “level.” You know what message this actually sends? You could do everything right. You could work, and work, and work, and almost die, and then start the work all over…only to have some fat, middle-aged politician tell you that “because this guy that you whipped on the road year after year, and who was, himself, caught doping, said he saw you shoot up once, you are no longer worthy of these titles.” “Oh, and these blood tests that actually don’t fail any doping tests? Well, we think they may have been tampered with. We can’t, in any way prove it – but it’s enough. Sorry.”

And now…cycling is back to where it was. Pre-Armstrong. Good luck cycling. Good luck American Sports authorities. Hope it was worth it.

September:

10
8pm: The Voice (NBC)

11
9pm: Go On (NBC)
9:30pm: The New Normal (NBC)
10pm: Parenthood (NBC)
10pm: Sons of Anarchy (FX)

12
8pm: The X Factor (Fox)
10pm: Guys With Kids (NBC)

13
9pm: Glee (Fox)
10pm: The Real Housewives of Miami (Bravo)

14
8pm: Shark Tank (ABC)
9pm: What Would You Do? (ABC)
10pm: 20/20 (ABC)

16
9pm: Boardwalk Empire (HBO)

17
8pm: Bones (Fox)
9pm: The Mob Factor (Fox)
10pm: Revolution (NBC)

19
8pm: Survivor: Philippines (CBS)

20
8:30pm: Up All Night (NBC)
9pm: The Office (NBC)
9:30pm: Parks and Recreation

21
9pm: Grimm (NBC)
10pm: Haven (SyFy)

23
10pm: Treme (HBO)

24
8pm: How I Met Your Mother (CBS)
8pm: Dancing With the Stars: All-Stars (ABC)
8:30pm: Partners (CBS)
9pm: 2 Broke Girls (CBS)
9:30pm: Mike & Molly (CBS)
10pm: Castle (ABC)
10pm: Hawaii Five-O (CBS)

25
8pm: NCIS (CBS)
8pm: New Girl (Fox)
8:30pm: Ben and Kate (Fox)
9pm: NCIS: Los Angeles (CBS)
9:30: The Mindy Project (Fox)
10pm: Private Practice (ABC)
10pm: Vegas (CBS)

26
8pm: The Middle (ABC)
8pm: Animal Practice (NBC)
8:30pm: Guys With Kids (NBC)
9pm: Modern Family (ABC)
9pm: Criminal Minds (CBS)
9pm: Law & Order: SVU (NBC)
10pm: The Neighbors (ABC)
10pm: CSI (CBS)

27
8pm: Last Resort (ABC)
8pm: The Big Bang Theory (CBS)
8:30pm: Two and a Half Men (CBS)
9pm: Grey’s Anatomy (ABC)
9pm: Person of Interest (CBS)
10pm: Scandal (ABC)
10pm: Elementary (CBS)

28
8pm: CSI:NY (CBS)
9pm: Made in Jersey (CBS)
9pm: Fringe (Fox)
10pm: Blue Bloods (CBS)

29
10pm: 48 Hours Mystery (CBS)

30
7pm: 60 Minutes (CBS)
8pm: Once Upon a Time (ABC)
8pm: The Amazing Race (CBS)
8pm: The Simpsons (Fox)
8:30pm: Bob’s Burgers (Fox)
9pm: Revenge (ABC)
9pm: The Good Wife (CBS)
9pm: Family Guy (Fox)
9pm: Dexter (Showtime)
9:30pm: American Dad (Fox)
10pm: 666 Park Avenue (ABC)
10pm: The Mentalist (CBS)
10pm: Homeland (Showtime)

The big boys of news aren’t shying away from these panic tactics, either.  Today, on CNN.com’s homepage, is the following teaser: Shrapnel hits Joint Chiefs chair’s plane.  Well…holy crap!  I mean, that’s a pretty big deal, right?  RIGHT?  I mean, this is the highest ranking military officer – this is serious!  Click.  Actually story:  ”Shrapnel from indirect rocket fire Tuesday damaged the plane that had carried the top U.S. military officer to Afghanistan, officials said.”  (Read here.)  WTH CNN?  I mean – this would be like me getting an e-mail from Delta saying that my friend’s plane had crashed, for more information, click here.  And after following the link, finding out that he wasn’t ON said plane…he’d just been on it at some point.  I mean…if you keep reading the CNN article, the only “troubling” part is that “Two base maintenance personnel were slightly injured, he said.”  Slightly injured?  That’s the outcome of a story announcing that the Joint Chief’s plane was hit by shrapnel?  Well done.

What I’d love to see is a news network coming forward and just saying this:  ”We are simply going to report the news.  It will be boring.  The headlines will just be a basic summary of the story.  That’s it.”  Wouldn’t that be great?  For example, how BNN (Boring News Network,) would have titled the above-mentioned story:  ”Parked military plane hit by shrapnel.”  That’s it.  Then, in the article, “Incidentally, this plane was used to transport the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs to the area.”  Not as sexy, huh?  But if you have NO care in the world about military matters – you probably didn’t waste your time on this story.