Tag: NFL 2009

Well, the thoughts probably aren’t all that super, but the game was called Super, even if it wasn’t all that super. Or something. Random thoughts on the Super Bowl:

:: I was rooting for the Colts, but not really rooting against the Saints — it was one of those games where I wanted one team to win but wasn’t bothered much that they didn’t. It is always nice to see teams that have historically sucked finally manage to put their shit together and win the Super Bowl.

:: Note to Buffalo Bills: see? See?! Teams that have historically sucked — even if for only ten years and not, well, forever, like the Saints did — actually can manage to put their shit together and win the Super Bowl!

:: A Super Bowl ring doesn’t make Gregg Williams less of an irritating ass. I predict he’ll fall flat again once he gets another crack at head coaching.

:: Jim Nance and Phil Simms were kind of annoying, I thought. And hey, Mr. Nance? Just because Phil Simms has two Super Bowl rings doesn’t mean that he won two Super Bowls.

:: Bill Cowher, before the game: “Nobody ever remembers who lost the Super Bowl.” Oh. Well, I suppose that explains the quizzical looks I get when I tell people from Albuquerque that I’m a Bills fan.

:: I’m always amused by the Ritual Presentation of the Super Special Coin, the one they use for the opening coin toss. The head ref says something like “Gentlemen, I have here the special coin we are using. This side, featuring a portrait of Vince Lombardi in a gladiator’s costume, is heads, while this side, featuring a picture of Joe Namath kissing Suzy Kolbert is tails.” I think it would be funny if the ref pulled out, say, a Nevada quarter: “Gentlemen, we’ll be flipping this Nevada quarter. This picture of some old dead white guy is heads, and on the other side? See the horsies? That’s tails!”

:: More NFL pageantry goofiness: the Ritual Presentation of the Vince Lombardi Trophy, where some Elder Statesman of the Game walks the trophy across the field to the big stage where they’re going to award it. That’s bad enough, but what makes the whole thing so laughable is the pseudo-majestic fanfare they blast over the stadium speakers as the trophy is carried out. Hey, NFL, you’re not placing the crown on the head of the new King of Gondor. It’s a trophy.

:: OK, the game itself was…well, look, it had a result that everyone loved and it wasn’t a blowout. But I gotta be honest: the game was boring. Really, it was just dullsville. For two weeks all we heard was that the Super Bowl might be the greatest offensive explosion in football history…and all we get is a standard 31-17 game in which the two biggest plays were a surprise onside kick and an interception return for a touchdown? No great offensive heroics, no big offensive plays — just a whole lot of dink-and-dunk, a ten-yard completion here, a twelve-yard completion there, ho hum, lather rinse repeat.

:: Super Bowl narratives I’m glad I don’t have to hear anymore: “Peyton Manning must win this game if he’s to be known as the greatest quarterback EVER!” and “The Saints deserve to win this game because of Hurricane Katrina!” Look: quarterback greatness isn’t necessarily determined by the number of rings he has, and as nice as the Saints’ win is, it doesn’t rebuild anything in New Orleans. It’s a football game.

:: I’m long on record as not really caring about Super Bowl commercials, so as usual I didn’t see a lot of them because I simply wasn’t paying attention. I suppose the best was the Google one, which I watched online this morning. A couple of the Doritos ones made me laugh. None of the movie trailers looked interesting (Robin Hood maybe, but the trailer made it look like what it probably is — a grim and violent medieval epic by Ridley Scott). And aren’t we about done with the various farm animals who bond with or somehow want to be around the Budweiser Clydesdales? Can’t they find a new way to feature those horses? I say they go for high weirdness next year. I wanna see the Budweiser Clydesdales have a precious and twee relationship with a giant squid! How cool would that be!

And maybe this is curmudgeonly of me, but I just can’t count myself among the apparent masses in this country who think things are automatically awesome if Betty White is somehow involved. Betty White getting tackled into the mud did nothing for me. Abe Vigoda, on the other hand — that’s comedy gold!

:: God in Heaven, the halftime show was painful. I like the Who as much as anyone, but Ye Gods, this was just awful.

:: During pregame, they had Queen Latifah sing America the Beautiful immediately before Carrie Underwood sang The Star-Spangled Banner. Underwood’s performance wasn’t that great, but Latifah’s was very nice, and it reinforced my belief that America the Beautiful should really be our anthem.

:: I read a little while ago that Peyton Manning exited the field immediately after the Colts’ last possession ended, even though it then fell to New Orleans to run out the clock. So Manning is the newest entry in the “losers skipping the handshakes after the game” thing that’s becoming more and more common. Peyton, it was jerky for Tom Brady and Bill Belichick to do it when you beat them four years ago, and it was jerky for you to do it when you lost yesterday. When you lose, man up and shake the hand of them that beat you. You did it in fourth grade peewee football, I’m sure you can handle it now.

:: I saw the Tim Tebow ad, and I note that today, everybody’s saying “Awww, shucks! It was a nice ad!” Sure, I suppose, given that it was designed to give a nice happy sheen to a grouped that’s anti-gay and in favor of forced pregnancy. And the question still remains as to why CBS would air their ad, but insist that they don’t do issue ads when the position being taken in the ad is a liberal one.

That’s about it. Another NFL season in the books. Next up, the Draft. Wheeeee!

Share This Post

UPDATE 2-7-10: You know, I was thinking about doing some research and creating a nice long Super Bowl trivia quiz this year, but I just never got around to doing the research, so I filed the notion away for next year. And now I’m getting a lot of hits from people looking for “Super Bowl Questions”, so I’m definitely doing it next year. These questions probably aren’t what you all are looking for, but thanks for dropping by, folks! Go Colts! (But I won’t be bothered if the Saints win.)

Roger asks some questions regarding the Super Bowl:

Do you watch the Super Bowl? (That’s American football, BTW.) If so, is it for the commercials, the game or the halftime entertainment? Do you have special food for the occasion?

Yes, I watch the Super Bowl. In fact, with one exception, I’ve watched every Super Bowl since I became a football fan in 1988. (That exception was Super Bowl XXIV — 49ers 55, Broncos 10 — because I had something going on that night at college.) I don’t pay attention to the commercials much; I tend to use them for their intended purpose (get more food, refill my glass, go to the bathroom, et cetera). In fact, every year when I hear people talking about their favorite commercials the next day, I’m always a bit clueless until I track them down online.

In terms of food, I just tend to get a bit of snack stuff, like chips and dip, if we’re at home. Over the years we’ve been to a couple of Super Bowl parties at other people’s homes. Lots of food is usually nice, but I prefer to be in the comfort of my own home.

And speaking of halftime, don’t you find it interesting that it is The Who performing when the game is on CBS, since The Who provide the theme songs for all those CSI shows on CBS, such as CSI: Las Vegas, CSI: Miami, CSI: New York, CSI: Kalamazoo, and CSI: Portland (both the Oregon AND the Maine shows).

Yeah, that occurred to me this past week. I’m hoping that since the game’s in Miami, the halftime show starts with David Caruso on stage, saying something goofy in that oddball delivery of his, and putting on his sunglasses as The Who smashes into “Won’t Get Fooled Again”.

By the way, I didn’t know that The Who was even doing this year’s halftime festivities until just last Monday, when I said to my main football-discussing friends at work, “Hey, who’s doing the halftime show this year?” And he said, “Yes.” Luckily I thought over his answer for ten seconds and realized what was going on, before we launched into some weird Abbott-and-Costello routine. (“So at haltime, Dan Marino and Shannon Sharpe talk about the first half and then they kick the attention over to who?” “Yes!”)

If you don’t watch the game, do you have a ritual for that? I had friends who always went to the movies on Super Bowl Sunday.

I watch the game. Sometimes I watch a movie earlier in the day.

And those of you outside the United States: can you even access the Suoer Bowl?

Obviously this is not applicable to me.

Do you know how to write 44 in Roman numerals?

XLIV. I think the Roman numerals thing is starting to look goofier each year — we’re six years out from the Super Bowl logo being a giant L. I think it would be funny if, when that year comes, the logo is simply a big cursive L like the one Laverne used to wear on all her sweaters on Laverne and Shirley. It would be funny to see all these big, hulking football players in the Super Bowl sporting nice, pretty, loopy, feminine L‘s on their jerseys.

Do you have a rooting interest?

I’m rooting for the Colts, but a Saints win wouldn’t bother me much at all, except that we’d then have to hear a lot of crap about Peyton Manning being a choker and Gregg Williams’s head would get bigger, and I’m sure the Super Dome has a hard time containing that guy’s noggin already.

What do think of the Pro Bowl, the All-star game of the NFL, being played the week before the Super Bowl (i.e., today), instead of the week after?

The Pro Bowl sucks no matter when they play it. It just sucks. It’s lame and boring and I never watch it because it’s lame and boring. Plus, I don’t like that lots of guys go because the guys actually voted to the thing don’t, so you end up with something like half the league being called “Pro Bowlers”. On the Bills, Marshawn Lynch is a “Pro Bowler”, even though the only reason he got to be in the game a year ago is because a bunch of running backs ahead of him didn’t play. Only the guys actually voted onto the roster should get to be called “Pro Bowlers”, and frankly, if they just did away with the game and treated being voted a Pro Bowler as baseball does being awarded a Golden Glove, I’d be fine with it.

So yeah, I don’t really care when they play the Pro Bowl. I do think that the NFL’s rigid adherence to rules, thus requiring the Colts and Saints players to be in attendance even if they don’t play — resulting in them literally having to fly back to Indianapolis and New Orleans respectively and then turn right back around to return to Miami, since by another NFL rule, all Super Bowl players must travel with their teams together — is just colossal idiocy.

Share This Post

I was right! And my final score picks were in the neighborhood, surprisingly enough. Huzzah!

I’m probably going to be rooting for the Colts, although a Saints win won’t bother me all that much if it happens. My general inclination is to pick the Colts on the basis of experience and the fact that the Saints combine awesome offense with a bend-but-don’t-break style of defense, which isn’t a combination that tends to serve teams well in the Super Bowl. (Just ask the Buffalo Bills.)

I didn’t watch the AFC Championship Game, figuring it would be the lesser of the two games (watched Attack of the Clones instead), but I watched most of the NFC Championship. For all the usual worship of Brett Favre, I thought he looked worse and worse as the game went on, which is usual for aging quarterbacks. His throws looked more and more forced, but even I thought that maybe he’d keep his unshakable faith in his own superhuman status under wraps by the time the Vikings had the ball in field goal range with the twenty seconds on the clock in a tied game. No dice; Favre made a move that is classic Favre, and not just from the NFC title game two years ago, either. He threw a pass that everybody on Planet Earth knew he shouldn’t even consider attempting, and it got intercepted. The Saints forced OT, and then drove for the winning field goal themselves. After the pick, Brett Favre never touched the ball again.

So now, the two weeks until the Super Bowl. Otherwise known as “Yawn Week” in the NFL. Not even the stunt of having the Pro Bowl next weekend can make this week interesting. But maybe we can get an early jump on the 2010 edition of “Will Favre play next year or not!”, which is always wild, whacky fun!

Share This Post

My predictions are: Colts 31, Jets 13 and Saints 38, Vikings 24. I’ve been wrong a lot during this year’s playoffs, so I see no reason that should end. I’m conflicted on the Vikings, actually; I’ve always liked the team and a lot of my best friends, dating from my college years, are Vikings fans, so seeing them get a Super Bowl win would be nice. But Brett Favre’s annual offseason antics about whether or not he’s retiring and whether or not he wants to play and blah blah blah have soured me on Favre to the point that I don’t want to see him get another shot at a ring.

In terms of rooting interest in the Super Bowl, I’d love to see the Saints get a win…but I’d also like to see the Colts win it all, if only to shut up the Jason Whitlocks of the world who still insist that Peyton Manning is a choker, even if he’s already got a ring. So maybe Jets-Saints, so I could root for Drew Brees in peace…but I just don’t see the Jets winning today. Mark Sanchez has to remember he’s a rookie sometime, right?

Ach, screw it. I have no idea who’s going to win.

Share This Post

The other day, the Buffalo Bills held a hastily-called news conference to announce the hiring of their new General Manager: a guy named Buddy Nix, who was promoted from national scout to GM for the team. After everyone in Buffalo — and I mean everyone — agreed that what the team needs first and foremost is a good football person to take over the reins of the never-ending rebuilding project, the selection of Nix was billed as just that. But the reaction in Bills-land has been a pretty resounding “Meh”. Jerry Sullivan’s column from the other day is pretty representative of the negative reaction, while positive reaction has generally been of the “Well, they could have done worse” variety. I haven’t heard anyone who is really excited by Nix’s hiring.

To me, the least interesting of the objections to Nix are the ones related to his age (he’s 70) and his experience until now. I tend to think that if we can generally think of men in their 70s as being qualified to be President of the United States, Supreme Court Justices, or United States Senators, then surely a man in his 70s can run an NFL team. (So can women in their 70s, for that matter.) Not interested in the age argument. Nor am I much convinced by its parallel argument, that hey, since he’s 70, shouldn’t he have become a GM way before this? If Nix had been toiling as a scout for three or four decades and was only now getting his shot at being GM, that would be one thing, but he’s only been in the NFL scouting scene since 1993, when he left a long college coaching career for an NFL scouting career. Seventeen years of scouting in the NFL, rising up the ranks of two organizations in the process, doesn’t strike me as an unreasonable amount of experience for a first-time General Manager. Just looking at one other notable example, Scott Pioli is finishing his first season as an NFL GM in Kansas City; his prior scouting and front-office career with several organizations (most notably the Patriots) started in 1992. So I’m fine with Nix’s level of experience.

I’m also fine with Nix’s resume. He worked in Buffalo through the mid and late 1990s, when the team was still good and was still drafting good players. Then he went to San Diego at the beginning of this decade, as the Chargers began to build into one of the NFL’s better teams. (I have a feeling the Chargers will end up as this era’s best team to not make the Super Bowl.) Now he’s back in Buffalo — actually, he was back last year as a National Scout. The first draft since his return, the 2009 draft, was actually not a bad draft at all and may turn out pretty good in the end, especially if Aaron Maybin develops over the offseason into a good player. Nix has the pedigree you want in a GM: he’s been with two organizations for a long time each, during their good years.

The more compelling argument against Nix is the nature of the apparent search the Bills made for their GM. They didn’t wait to interview candidates from other organizations (which you’re only allowed to do when the season is over); from all appearances, they interviewed exactly two people: Nix and current Bills Director of Pro Personnel John Guy, who “happens to be black”, thus satisfying the NFL’s requirement that all teams interview minority candidates when hiring. The argument is that the Bills didn’t cast a wide net at all; instead they went with someone in house, someone safe and comfortable. Maybe. We’ll see.

I do think that Nix represents an upgrade over the previous football regime here. Obviously the results will tell the tale and the results won’t be in for a few years, but as long as Nix isn’t the type of guy to keep John McCargo around (or trade back up into the first round to pick him), maybe the team will be on the rise soon. Let’s see what happens when he hires a coach.

Share This Post

The Buffalo Bills have, a short while ago, lost 17-10 to the New England Patriots. That’s their second loss to the Patriots this year and something like their 18th since 2000. Wow. Although they did break their usual pattern of playing the Pats tough the first time and then get blown out the second; they played tough in both games. Same result, though. Whee!!!

The loss today is notable in that it’s also the ninth of the season, which means that the Bills are officially playing a losing season. That will be their fifth consecutive losing season. It’s also the seventh losing season since their last playoff year (1999). It’s also the ninth non-winning season in the same period (since they have two 8-8 finishes, and .500 ball is neither winning nor losing).

Bad franchise, bad team, just plain bad.

(Also, I read yesterday that the way George Bush structured his big “tax cuts for rich people” bill back in 2001, there will be no estate tax in 2010. So if Ralph Wilson dies next year, does that mean he can leave the team to his kids and they would not have to sell the team in order to pay the inheritance tax? Hmmmm….)

Share This Post

Adam Schein of FOX Sports spends part of a regular column opining on the Buffalo Bills — specifically, just who is to blame for the fact that the team is a giant mess right now. Here’s the entirety of his take:

1. The Bills’ mess is Dick Jauron’s fault.

This is a bust.

Don’t get me wrong. The record proves that Jauron, a strong football mind, did a bad job. There were major issues with in-game strategy through the years, from the disasters against Cleveland, Dallas and New England on national television to this past Sunday in Tennessee. And Jauron didn’t surround himself with great offensive and defensive coordinators. Firing Turk Schonert right before the season was ill-timed and ill-advised. Promoting Alex Van Pelt, who had never called plays before, was even worse. Schonert should’ve been let go in the offseason and then the Bills should’ve had a new coordinator in place for the offseason workouts.

But there are other factors. The club needs to reshape the football department.

Ralph Wilson has a reputation of being impatient and, relatively speaking, cheap. That means any unemployed coach with Super Bowl rings will not even consider lovely Western New York. I saw our friend Adam Schefter reported the Bills have contacted Mike Shanahan. That would be great. But does Shanahan really want the Bills?

And Terrell Owens once again takes a major hit. I wrote on FOXSports.com that this was a ‘boom or bust’ move for the Bills, and they’d win either 6 or 10 games. It’s been a total bust. T.O., according to defensive coaches around the league, doesn’t bust it off the line of scrimmage every play. Those with and around the Bills scratch their heads as T.O. would get a day off from practice every week, often times on the crucial Friday before a game.

Sometimes, the coaching staff would actually be surprised when T.O. didn’t practice. T.O. is a club killer. And Owens’ play has fallen off. I don’t see a team taking a chance on him next year. He’s helped bring down the Bills. T.O. was jawing at assistants during the Tennessee game. Who would want him?

I find this whole bit rather odd. Schein has been a consistent defender of Jauron’s pretty much all along up until Jauron’s firing last week, insisting at various intervals that Jauron can, in fact, be a winning coach in the NFL. This point is rather dubious now, considering that Jauron’s had head-coaching stints in two different franchises in this decade that last longer than three seasons in each place and yet he managed to turn in exactly one winning season for all that. (I don’t count Jauron’s service as an interim coach with the Lions against him, because that was the Lions during the Matt Millen era. No coach in history could have won there.)

Schein’s partially correct here: the Bills’ problems go a lot farther than Dick Jauron. However, Jauron’s role in the craptacularity of the on-field product also can’t be undersold, either. Schein indicates some of Jauron’s errors, from questionable coaching staff hiring (and firing) to his on-field goofs. But Schein then says what everybody in Buffalo already knows: that the front office is just as big a problem here. The team’s talent level just isn’t good enough, and everybody knows it: draft picks that were outright busts, or picks that ignored more critical needs, or free agent signees that turned out poorly, and so on. But Jauron had his parts there, too: witness the release of Langston Walker right before this season started. That was a dumb move to make given the team’s intention of starting the least experienced offensive line in team history (and possibly in league history). The Bills’ habit in recent years of drafting handfuls of defensive backs every year, even in the face of critical holes on the roster everywhere else, is pure Jauron. But even with Jauron now gone, every Bills fan I’ve either talked to or heard on the radio call-in shows has said the same thing: if all that is changed is the head coach, then the Bills will almost certainly not improve much.

Schein’s third paragraph echoes a pretty odd sentiment that I find generally uncompelling: “Ralph Wilson is notoriously cheap, so no big-name coach would come to Buffalo.” Now, this is possible, but from the standpoint that Wilson may decline to spend the money necessary to bring a big-name coach here. But then, there is still the fact that Wilson is breaking his pattern with the Jauron firing, to some degree: he’s not trying to recoup the money he’s losing by paying Jauron to not coach here, and he’s already pledged that at season’s end there will be a large “re-evaluation” of the organization. Besides that, there’s the fact that Wilson’s recent history doesn’t so much bear out cheapness as his motivation rather than a tendency to try to do the opposite thing when the last thing doesn’t work out. That’s how you go from a fairly sedate coach like Wade Philips to a more fiery guy like Gregg Williams; and then from a defensive guy like Williams to an offensive guy like Mike Mularkey; and then from an inexperienced guy like Mularkey to an experienced and steady hand like Dick Jauron (who was selected by Marv Levy, anyway). Wilson has also in the past proven willing to spend money on players, so I don’t see that he’d be resolutely unwilling to ante up for a good coach. He has also, in the past, decided to hire what he saw as a “strong football guy” to take over just about all of the team operations, which is how Tom Donahoe arrived.

Wilson’s chief fault, in my view, is not so much cheapness as that he’s often unwilling to pull the trigger when the trigger needs to be pulled and that he’s frankly not that great a judge of whom he should hire. Now, maybe the latter doesn’t bode well for the next great rejiggering of the Bills franchise, but he’s already started pulling the trigger, so we’ll see what happens.

Color me unconvinced, also, by the various arguments I’ve seen thrown around this past week that a “big name” coach or GM wouldn’t want to come here, just by definition, because the Bills have been a mess for years. A big-name coach or GM is going to want two things: a dollar figure, and the authority to do things the way he wants. If Ralph Wilson agrees to those, then someone’s going to sign the dotted line. The Kansas City Chiefs were, after last year, a bigger mess than the Bills are now, but that didn’t stop Scott Pioli from going there. Somehow there’s always somebody willing to take on the coaching duties in Detroit, Oakland, Washington, and Cleveland.

Finally, the last two paragraphs of Schein’s entry are laughable. Look, folks, as someone who’s been paying attention, let me tell you that Terrell Owens is the last person to blame for the fact that the Bills are terrible in 2009. Now, he’s not exactly taking it on himself to make things a lot better, but he is in no way a cause of anything bad here. No, he doesn’t put a great deal of effort into things, but any locker room discord right now on the Bills is more a function of things like losing than T.O.’s complaining. If anyone thinks that the couple of passes a game that T.O. has dropped, or the routes he’s run half-heartedly when the ball had zero chance of coming his way anyway because the offensive line can’t block and the two quarterbacks can’t complete a pass to anyone other than a running back are primary reasons the Bills have been losing this year, then that person can speak up, and I’ll call them an idiot for their troubles.

Dick Jauron was an enormous factor in the Bills’ era of woe, and for Schein to pretend otherwise is just goofy — as is his bizarre T.O. rant.

UPDATE: As I write this, the Bills are playing the Jaguars. I’m not watching, but I just looked at the game stats as they are right now, with the 3rd quarter almost over, and T.O.’s line is 8 catches for 182 yards and a touchdown. Yeah, that guy’s certainly been the turd in the Bills’ punchbowl this year.

Share This Post

The football world is abuzz — abuzz! — with talk about a big gamble Patriots coach (and all around Incarnation of All Things Evil) Bill Belichick made in the game yesterday against the Indianapolis Colts. With the Pats leading 34-28 with a bit more than two minutes left, the Pats faced 4th-and-2 from their own 28 yard line. Just about everybody on the planet would almost certainly punt in that situation, the idea being that you at least want the other team to have a lot more field to cover if they have to drive for a touchdown to have any chance. But Belichick decided to go for the 4th-down conversion, which came up short. The Colts took over at the Pats’ 28 yard line with just over two minutes to go and with all three of their timeouts remaining, in a game in which they had just stormed back from being down 31-14 early in the 4th quarter to being down just 34-28. Peyton Manning drove them in for the touchdown that gave the Colts a 35-34 lead with less than ten seconds to go, and the game ended with that as the final score.

Now, I agree with the general criticisms being leveled at Belichick on this. There is a growing consensus in the NFL that you shouldn’t always punt on 4th down; going for it on 4th down is a lot more frequent now. But there are situations where it still seems prudent to kick the ball away, and this definitely seems like one of them. So what was Belichick thinking?

My suspicion is that he was, first of all, utterly confident that his offense would convert the 4th down. That seems obvious. Also, I suspect that he was less than confident of his defense, which, as noted above, had just been shredded in the 4th quarter and hasn’t looked like a particularly stout defense a whole lot this year. Most of all, though, I’ll bet Belichick was thinking about the game clock. I’d guess that his reasoning was something like this:

“Well, my defense is getting killed, so if we punt, we’ll almost certainly give up the touchdown. If we go for it and convert, we can run down the clock a bit and force the Colts to use their timeouts on defense. But if we go for it and fail, the Colts will still score. So, assuming that the Colts score their touchdown if they get the ball back in this situation, which situation is worse for us? If they score after going sixty or seventy yards, they’ll probably only leave a few seconds on the clock for us, so we won’t be able to get a winning field goal. But, if they get the ball back right here on the 28, then they probably score really quickly, right? And then we get more time to get the field goal we’ll need to win.”

I think Belichick was trying to play the clock a bit, choosing the scenario that gave him the most control he would have over the time he would have left: either keep the ball, or at least give the Colts a chance to score in a lot less time than it would have taken them otherwise. Of course, the problem with that kind of thing is when the guy on the other side of the field knows all this too, and Peyton Manning may be the single most football knowledgeable quarterback in history, which is why he was able to both score his go-ahead touchdown and leave New England a paltry nine seconds in which they could do exactly nothing.

(In other news, the Bills still suck. We watched Up instead. A post on that movie is forthcoming sometime.)

Share This Post