Tonight will be a slightly different type of post - a series of random thoughts that have been percolating in my head since my last entry. Kind of the way Herb Caen used to write, if memory serves....
Where better to start than the tanking economy? Today all the major stock indices lost another 2%. Both the S&P and Dow are officially in bear territory, and there isn't any particular reason to think things are going to improve soon.
About 3 months ago I wrote a post arguing that weak consumer spending was the biggest issue facing the US economy. And then last week I caught this piece on NYTimes.com essentially confirming my fears. This quote sums it up best:
Tighter lending standards imposed by banks in the wake of huge mortgage losses have made it hard for many Americans to secure credit — the lifeblood of expansion in recent years — crimping the appetite of consumers, whose spending amounts to 70 percent of the economy.
Add to that rampant job losses - unemployment rose again in June and high profile companies are laying people off left and right - and you have a bad mix. It's rough out there, people. Keep your job if you still have one....
So how then can anyone explain what I saw on CNBC on Monday? The Chief US Equity Strategist at UBS predicted that all the major US indices would rise 25% in the 2nd half of 2008!!!! My jaw nearly hit the floor. Unfortunately the comment never made onto the Web so I can't link to it. I wish I could because it's so outrageous part of me questions whether I heard it correctly. But I know I did....
In other news, today the US Congress approved the FISA bill. Why? Telecom immunity is not required to fight the war on terror. If those people broke the law they should be held to account, just like all of us would be. It's definitely a disappointing moment for our spineless Democratic controlled Senate, especially since Obama voted for the bill. Irony of ironies -- Hillary Clinton voted against. Unreal.
Meanwhile, in this week's issue of the New Yorker, Seymour Hersch has a long expose about Bush's $400million covert operation campaign in Iran. It's scary stuff. Again, our spineless congress forked over our hard-earned tax money so that Bush's gang of pseudo-CIA thugs can run rampant within Iran. They're actually using the cash to pay off organizations that have been on the US terror watch list for over a decade in hopes that they'll stir up trouble inside Iran. Suicide bombings are on the rise, but the Iranians know it's being perpetrated by the US. The whole thing is nauseating....
My final comment is about sports, or the lack thereof. Man, what a bummer -- I missed the best Wimbledon final ever. Many have said it was the best tennis match ever. I think missing this year's classic Super Bowl was still a little worse, but this hurt a lot. Definitely. On the bright side, I had a productive Sunday so that's good.
Cheers,
Chris
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Break's Over, Back to Work
I watched the entire NBA finals. I just couldn't resist. Lakers v. Celtics for all the marbles. It was kind of a no-brainer, actually. It's my favorite rivalry in any professional sport. In fact, I suspect that's true for most sportsfans who grew up in LA.
Pro sports in Southern California just don't have many compelling rivalries - it's not part of the culture. San Francicans will tell you that the Dodger's/Giants rivalry is a big deal, but Angelinos just don't care that much. And that's really the closest thing any sports team in LA has to a real rivalry. Dodgers/Padres? Angels/A's? Dodger's/A's? Yawn. Lakers/Clippers? Lakers/Warriors? Zzzzzz. Rams/Niners? Oops. (Actually when I was a kid that was a pretty good rivalry, though the Niners always won big in LA and always won when it counted.)
So this was it. If I was going to blow my resolution on a pro sports event, this truly was the one to do it. I'm 99% sure that no other combination of teams - except maybe Phoenix vs. Boston - would have even tempted me. But Phoenix was gone after the first round so that was moot anyway.
I definitely enjoyed the series, but it also really reminded me why I gave up sports in the first place. It's a pretty big time commitment, even with TiVo, and it didn't really give me a ton of satisfaction. Of course that's probably because the Lakers lost, and lost bad.
It was interesting to watch the games after having seen absolutely no NBA since Christmas. I hadn't even seen the new Celtics play yet. And I certainly hadn't seen Gasol in a Lakers uniform. I didn't know what to expect, but I'd heard great things about both teams. And I knew that the Lakers breezed through the supposedly tougher Western Conference playoffs while Boston needed 7 games to beat Atlanta! It didn't look good for the Celtics.
But what I saw was essentially a one-sided affair that was awfully close to ending in 5 games rather than 6. In fact, it's kind of amazing the Lakers took two games. Game 1 was a solid win for the Celts, and then Game 2 was an absolute rout that turned into a squeaker. But the Celts held on to win because they wanted it more. Game 3 was back in LA, and the Lakers showed a little heart and won despite a mediocre performance. But Game 4 was the one that really showed the difference between the two teams. The Lakers came out absolutely on fire - over the top impressive, dominant, overwhelming, you name it. But by the 2nd quarter they were sputtering and the 4th quarter was pretty much all Boston. That's not the stuff of a champion. It's weak. The same basic storyline unfolded in Game 5, but surprisingly the Lakers held on to win. The announcers couldn't stop ripping the Lakers for their poor play, and they were totally right. And Game 6 was an old-fashioned ass whooping.
Anyway, the point is that the Lakers aren't ready to be champs yet. Maybe next year. If Bynum is healthy they'll be contenders for sure. But they just don't seem to play with any heart. That will have to change.
On the other hand, the Celtics looked like they meant business from the opening tip. All three of their Big Three have toiled on crappy teams for years. They all know their careers won't last too much longer. And they weren't about to let the opportunity to get a ring slip by. You could feel it oozing from Paul Pierce every time Michele Tafoya interviewed him. After the win, KG couldn't even speak he was so overcome. Those guys wanted it with every fiber of their being, with their souls, with their hearts and that's how they played.
Come to think of it, I guess it's kind of inspiring. How about that. I was trying to write about how empty I found the experience, but upon further reflection I think it's the opposite. I was just considering the wrong team's perspective....
Anyway, my break from my break is over, again, and I'll be back to writing more regularly.
Cheers,
Chris
P.S. The Staples crowd definitely sucks. They reflect their team's ambivalence.
Pro sports in Southern California just don't have many compelling rivalries - it's not part of the culture. San Francicans will tell you that the Dodger's/Giants rivalry is a big deal, but Angelinos just don't care that much. And that's really the closest thing any sports team in LA has to a real rivalry. Dodgers/Padres? Angels/A's? Dodger's/A's? Yawn. Lakers/Clippers? Lakers/Warriors? Zzzzzz. Rams/Niners? Oops. (Actually when I was a kid that was a pretty good rivalry, though the Niners always won big in LA and always won when it counted.)
So this was it. If I was going to blow my resolution on a pro sports event, this truly was the one to do it. I'm 99% sure that no other combination of teams - except maybe Phoenix vs. Boston - would have even tempted me. But Phoenix was gone after the first round so that was moot anyway.
I definitely enjoyed the series, but it also really reminded me why I gave up sports in the first place. It's a pretty big time commitment, even with TiVo, and it didn't really give me a ton of satisfaction. Of course that's probably because the Lakers lost, and lost bad.
It was interesting to watch the games after having seen absolutely no NBA since Christmas. I hadn't even seen the new Celtics play yet. And I certainly hadn't seen Gasol in a Lakers uniform. I didn't know what to expect, but I'd heard great things about both teams. And I knew that the Lakers breezed through the supposedly tougher Western Conference playoffs while Boston needed 7 games to beat Atlanta! It didn't look good for the Celtics.
But what I saw was essentially a one-sided affair that was awfully close to ending in 5 games rather than 6. In fact, it's kind of amazing the Lakers took two games. Game 1 was a solid win for the Celts, and then Game 2 was an absolute rout that turned into a squeaker. But the Celts held on to win because they wanted it more. Game 3 was back in LA, and the Lakers showed a little heart and won despite a mediocre performance. But Game 4 was the one that really showed the difference between the two teams. The Lakers came out absolutely on fire - over the top impressive, dominant, overwhelming, you name it. But by the 2nd quarter they were sputtering and the 4th quarter was pretty much all Boston. That's not the stuff of a champion. It's weak. The same basic storyline unfolded in Game 5, but surprisingly the Lakers held on to win. The announcers couldn't stop ripping the Lakers for their poor play, and they were totally right. And Game 6 was an old-fashioned ass whooping.
Anyway, the point is that the Lakers aren't ready to be champs yet. Maybe next year. If Bynum is healthy they'll be contenders for sure. But they just don't seem to play with any heart. That will have to change.
On the other hand, the Celtics looked like they meant business from the opening tip. All three of their Big Three have toiled on crappy teams for years. They all know their careers won't last too much longer. And they weren't about to let the opportunity to get a ring slip by. You could feel it oozing from Paul Pierce every time Michele Tafoya interviewed him. After the win, KG couldn't even speak he was so overcome. Those guys wanted it with every fiber of their being, with their souls, with their hearts and that's how they played.
Come to think of it, I guess it's kind of inspiring. How about that. I was trying to write about how empty I found the experience, but upon further reflection I think it's the opposite. I was just considering the wrong team's perspective....
Anyway, my break from my break is over, again, and I'll be back to writing more regularly.
Cheers,
Chris
P.S. The Staples crowd definitely sucks. They reflect their team's ambivalence.
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Are We There Yet?
When I was a little kid I always hated long road trips (which was pretty much the only way my family ever traveled, BTW). I usually started off strong, but after a couple of hours I would get antsy. Every few minutes I felt compelled to ask my parents if "we were there yet." Needless to say, the answer was always the same. I especially remember the anticipation when we'd come close to reaching our destination - minutes seemed like hours, feet seemed like miles. But eventually we'd make it and it would all be worth it.
Tonight I feel like I'm 4 years old again.
Except that the boring car ride has been replaced by the interminable, excruciating democratic primary race. And tonight I'm finally seeing roadsigns suggesting we're near our destination. Which means that the next few days and weeks will be all the more painful.
Hillary got crushed in North Carolina and she's clinging to a minuscule lead in Indiana. It looks like she's finally running out of options. As the pundits like to say, there is no clear path to the nomination for her.
In fact, Tim Russert just called the race for Obama. So maybe it really will be over tomorrow.
But I doubt it. If I learned anything as a four-year-old it's that road trips don't end that quickly or easily. Even after the driving is finished, there's always something else to be done - gas to purchase, keys to pick up, directions to lose, groceries to buy. Something.
And technically speaking, Hillary still has cards to play. She has the so-called nuclear option, where she would use her influence over the Democratic Bylaws Committee to convince them to actually seat the Florida & Michigan delegates as per the original vote tally. It's a pretty crazy plan, since Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan and nobody campaigned in Florida, but she could do it.
And today her campaign asserted that the magic number to clinch the nomination is about 200 delegates higher than the figure (2,025) that everyone else has been using because it doesn't account for Florida & Michigan's delegates.
So we'll have to see where that goes.
As far as I'm concerned, until she withdraws from the race officially I'm assuming she's in. And as long as she's in, she can win.
In other words, we just got off the freeway but the hotel is still nowhere in sight.
Cheers,
Chris
P.S. Apologies for the long gap between posts. Truth be told, I nearly gave up on the project for a variety of reasons. Fortunately Dr. Beeper clued me in to the error of my ways....
Tonight I feel like I'm 4 years old again.
Except that the boring car ride has been replaced by the interminable, excruciating democratic primary race. And tonight I'm finally seeing roadsigns suggesting we're near our destination. Which means that the next few days and weeks will be all the more painful.
Hillary got crushed in North Carolina and she's clinging to a minuscule lead in Indiana. It looks like she's finally running out of options. As the pundits like to say, there is no clear path to the nomination for her.
In fact, Tim Russert just called the race for Obama. So maybe it really will be over tomorrow.
But I doubt it. If I learned anything as a four-year-old it's that road trips don't end that quickly or easily. Even after the driving is finished, there's always something else to be done - gas to purchase, keys to pick up, directions to lose, groceries to buy. Something.
And technically speaking, Hillary still has cards to play. She has the so-called nuclear option, where she would use her influence over the Democratic Bylaws Committee to convince them to actually seat the Florida & Michigan delegates as per the original vote tally. It's a pretty crazy plan, since Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan and nobody campaigned in Florida, but she could do it.
And today her campaign asserted that the magic number to clinch the nomination is about 200 delegates higher than the figure (2,025) that everyone else has been using because it doesn't account for Florida & Michigan's delegates.
So we'll have to see where that goes.
As far as I'm concerned, until she withdraws from the race officially I'm assuming she's in. And as long as she's in, she can win.
In other words, we just got off the freeway but the hotel is still nowhere in sight.
Cheers,
Chris
P.S. Apologies for the long gap between posts. Truth be told, I nearly gave up on the project for a variety of reasons. Fortunately Dr. Beeper clued me in to the error of my ways....
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Rough Patch
The economy seems to be deteriorating by the hour. New headlines come in daily that not only reinforce how bad things are but suggest that the worst is yet to come. It's like nothing I've ever seen.
To be fair, I've never followed the economic news as closely as I do these days so I don't have many other points of comparison. But I honestly don't think it would matter. If anything it would probably just remind me how much more severe this downturn is than everything since the Great Depression.
Check out this gem from Thursday's Wall Street Journal. The paper surveyed 46 economists about the overall health of the economy, and 3 out of 4 respondents said that we're already in a recession.
Not only is that a bad sign for the future, it's also a somewhat astonishing result considering that technically we're NOT in a recession. A recession has a very specific definition - 2 consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth. We haven't even had one quarter of negative growth yet. Q4 was positive (+.6%) and the majority of economists surveyed Thursday think both Q1 and Q2 will be mildly positive, too (+.2% and .1%, respectively).
In other words, they think we're still six months away from starting our first negative quarter, which means were still a full year away from actually being in a recession.
So why did so many of them say we're already in a recession when they know technically it's not true?
Because we are.
There are many reasons, but the biggest is the decline in consumer spending in the United States. Roughly 70% of US GDP comes from consumer spending - clothing, groceries, consumer electronics, furniture, appliances, etc. And for the past decade most of those purchases have been funded by easy credit: mortgages, home equity loans, and credit cards.
Those days are gone. Simply put, too many Americans are tapped out now - they can't borrow even if they want to. Thus, they can only buy what they can afford from their paychecks. That will significantly drive down retail sales, which will drive down share prices, which will lead to layoffs. And the cycle will continue, as fewer Americans have jobs and spending continues to fall.
The severity of the downturn remains to be seen, but there is not a lot of reason for optimism. $4.00/gallon gas certainly doesn't help.
We're in a rough patch now; here's to hoping we weather it well.
To be fair, I've never followed the economic news as closely as I do these days so I don't have many other points of comparison. But I honestly don't think it would matter. If anything it would probably just remind me how much more severe this downturn is than everything since the Great Depression.
Check out this gem from Thursday's Wall Street Journal. The paper surveyed 46 economists about the overall health of the economy, and 3 out of 4 respondents said that we're already in a recession.
Not only is that a bad sign for the future, it's also a somewhat astonishing result considering that technically we're NOT in a recession. A recession has a very specific definition - 2 consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth. We haven't even had one quarter of negative growth yet. Q4 was positive (+.6%) and the majority of economists surveyed Thursday think both Q1 and Q2 will be mildly positive, too (+.2% and .1%, respectively).
In other words, they think we're still six months away from starting our first negative quarter, which means were still a full year away from actually being in a recession.
So why did so many of them say we're already in a recession when they know technically it's not true?
Because we are.
There are many reasons, but the biggest is the decline in consumer spending in the United States. Roughly 70% of US GDP comes from consumer spending - clothing, groceries, consumer electronics, furniture, appliances, etc. And for the past decade most of those purchases have been funded by easy credit: mortgages, home equity loans, and credit cards.
Those days are gone. Simply put, too many Americans are tapped out now - they can't borrow even if they want to. Thus, they can only buy what they can afford from their paychecks. That will significantly drive down retail sales, which will drive down share prices, which will lead to layoffs. And the cycle will continue, as fewer Americans have jobs and spending continues to fall.
The severity of the downturn remains to be seen, but there is not a lot of reason for optimism. $4.00/gallon gas certainly doesn't help.
We're in a rough patch now; here's to hoping we weather it well.
Monday, March 31, 2008
News You Can Use
Dr. Beeper loves to give me a hard time about my enthusiasm for the Wall Street Journal. He calls me a Murdoch-lover, or some such nonsense.
The insult is so far from the truth it doesn't even bother me. But what does bother me is that at a practical level I am, in fact, supporting the man who created Fox News. That's a tough pill to swallow.
Unfortunately, there really isn't a comparable source for the daily economic & financial news that the Journal provides, with the possible exception of the Financial Times. I need to check that out.
Regardless, my larger point is that the world of finance has gotten so absurdly complex that only dedicated newspapers like WSJ or FT can hope to cover it adequately. And that's bad for everyone.
People throughout the country can relate to the economy's problems in personal terms - foreclosures are at an all time high, gas is nearly $4.00/gallon, unemployment is rising, the dollar is falling, and it goes on from there.
But can they relate to the problems on Wall Street?
How many people truly understand the inner workings of the so-called "credit crisis" that has been unfolding for the past six months? Who knows the difference between a CDS and a CDO? How about an ABS and an SIV? And why did Bear Stearns collapse, anyway?
Normally when an industry falls on hard times, it only affects the people who work in that industry. There might some related inconveniences (e.g., when airlines go bust travelers have to find new carriers) but the fallout is limited.
But the financial industry is different. When it stumbles like it has been lately, the entire banking system comes under stress. That's why the federal government stepped in to rescue Bear Stearns -- they honestly didn't know what would have happened if it had gone under. The worst-case-scenario was too severe and too plausible: a complete collapse of the capital markets.
Should we all be losing sleep over the situation on Wall Street? Maybe. The recent measures put in place by the Federal Reserve are helpful, but there are still severe problems that need to be worked out.
I recommend you all start paying closer attention, and find yourself a good source for financial news.
The insult is so far from the truth it doesn't even bother me. But what does bother me is that at a practical level I am, in fact, supporting the man who created Fox News. That's a tough pill to swallow.
Unfortunately, there really isn't a comparable source for the daily economic & financial news that the Journal provides, with the possible exception of the Financial Times. I need to check that out.
Regardless, my larger point is that the world of finance has gotten so absurdly complex that only dedicated newspapers like WSJ or FT can hope to cover it adequately. And that's bad for everyone.
People throughout the country can relate to the economy's problems in personal terms - foreclosures are at an all time high, gas is nearly $4.00/gallon, unemployment is rising, the dollar is falling, and it goes on from there.
But can they relate to the problems on Wall Street?
How many people truly understand the inner workings of the so-called "credit crisis" that has been unfolding for the past six months? Who knows the difference between a CDS and a CDO? How about an ABS and an SIV? And why did Bear Stearns collapse, anyway?
Normally when an industry falls on hard times, it only affects the people who work in that industry. There might some related inconveniences (e.g., when airlines go bust travelers have to find new carriers) but the fallout is limited.
But the financial industry is different. When it stumbles like it has been lately, the entire banking system comes under stress. That's why the federal government stepped in to rescue Bear Stearns -- they honestly didn't know what would have happened if it had gone under. The worst-case-scenario was too severe and too plausible: a complete collapse of the capital markets.
Should we all be losing sleep over the situation on Wall Street? Maybe. The recent measures put in place by the Federal Reserve are helpful, but there are still severe problems that need to be worked out.
I recommend you all start paying closer attention, and find yourself a good source for financial news.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Ramble On...
It's almost the end of March, so I've had nearly three months to reflect on my no-sports experiment. When I first started the project, I was at a loss. I even wrote an entire post about my anxiety over finding things to keep my interest. Sports had always occupied such a large portion of my web surfing and TV watching time that I had no real idea how to occupy myself when faced with a blank browser window or the TV remote control.
Gradually I figured it out. Now the pattern is unmistakable.
The two subjects that have replaced sports in my life are politics, particularly the presidential race, and the economy. Both topics are covered in detail and quite well on the Internet, so that's what I read 90% of the time that I'm online. TV is a slightly different creature. In my opinion, only politics is covered well on TV. And that would be a stretch, were it not for the 4 shows I regularly watch.
My #1 source for news is Countdown with Keith Olbermann. I'm a big fan. His strong personality can be a little much at times, but otherwise I think it's a first rate news show. And of course there's The Daily Show & The Colbert Report. And last but not least, Real Time. I've always liked Bill Maher, but I've been enjoying more than usual lately.
Anyway, what's remarkable is that both topics are in the midst of riveting, historic eras. The housing/credit crisis has been unfolding as if in slow motion for months and still nobody knows where the bottom is or what exactly it will look like (the options seem to range from bad to worse). Meanwhile, the Democrats are tearing themselves apart to win the nomination while John McCain bumbles his way toward the White House.
Which brings me to my next point. Why is the Democratic primary race still going on? What am I missing? Mathematically Hillary cannot catch Obama in any of three categories: pledged delegates, popular vote, and total states won. What is the point? It's over. It's time for the superdelegates to step forward and call it for Obama.
I saw two different news items on The Huffington Post today that really got me thinking. First, and don't laugh, I saw the latest YouTube offering from Obama Girl. It was the first time I'd seen any of her work, and man, what a winner. Just great. Totally funny and right on point. But what struck me even more is that people are so psyched about Barack Obama that they'll actually write songs about him. It's an amazing phenomenon. The guy just has it. Charisma doesn't do justice to his gift. I'm not entirely sure what it is, but it's powerful. I think trust is a big part of the equation, but it's more than that I'm sure.
The second thing I saw was also on Huffington. The gist of the story is that the the prolonged democratic fight is clearly harming the Democrats and helping McCain. As obvious as that may sound, now that it's in the news it's a self-fulfilling prophecy.
At what point will Hillary concede? I suppose she's hoping there's still a chance Obama will implode, somehow rendering him unelectable thus convincing the superdelegates to support her. One never knows what the future holds, but at this point that sure looks unlikely. If the Reverend Wright experience is any indication, it's going to take something pretty extreme to trip up Obama. He took a potentially crippling negative and turned it into huge opportunity. And the nation noticed. He didn't duck the issue. He didn't try to oversimplify it. He talked about it openly and intelligently.
Let's end this debate already so we can figure out how to beat McCain. Hillary can be the VP if she wants. Just get out of the way already.
Cheers,
Chris
Gradually I figured it out. Now the pattern is unmistakable.
The two subjects that have replaced sports in my life are politics, particularly the presidential race, and the economy. Both topics are covered in detail and quite well on the Internet, so that's what I read 90% of the time that I'm online. TV is a slightly different creature. In my opinion, only politics is covered well on TV. And that would be a stretch, were it not for the 4 shows I regularly watch.
My #1 source for news is Countdown with Keith Olbermann. I'm a big fan. His strong personality can be a little much at times, but otherwise I think it's a first rate news show. And of course there's The Daily Show & The Colbert Report. And last but not least, Real Time. I've always liked Bill Maher, but I've been enjoying more than usual lately.
Anyway, what's remarkable is that both topics are in the midst of riveting, historic eras. The housing/credit crisis has been unfolding as if in slow motion for months and still nobody knows where the bottom is or what exactly it will look like (the options seem to range from bad to worse). Meanwhile, the Democrats are tearing themselves apart to win the nomination while John McCain bumbles his way toward the White House.
Which brings me to my next point. Why is the Democratic primary race still going on? What am I missing? Mathematically Hillary cannot catch Obama in any of three categories: pledged delegates, popular vote, and total states won. What is the point? It's over. It's time for the superdelegates to step forward and call it for Obama.
I saw two different news items on The Huffington Post today that really got me thinking. First, and don't laugh, I saw the latest YouTube offering from Obama Girl. It was the first time I'd seen any of her work, and man, what a winner. Just great. Totally funny and right on point. But what struck me even more is that people are so psyched about Barack Obama that they'll actually write songs about him. It's an amazing phenomenon. The guy just has it. Charisma doesn't do justice to his gift. I'm not entirely sure what it is, but it's powerful. I think trust is a big part of the equation, but it's more than that I'm sure.
The second thing I saw was also on Huffington. The gist of the story is that the the prolonged democratic fight is clearly harming the Democrats and helping McCain. As obvious as that may sound, now that it's in the news it's a self-fulfilling prophecy.
At what point will Hillary concede? I suppose she's hoping there's still a chance Obama will implode, somehow rendering him unelectable thus convincing the superdelegates to support her. One never knows what the future holds, but at this point that sure looks unlikely. If the Reverend Wright experience is any indication, it's going to take something pretty extreme to trip up Obama. He took a potentially crippling negative and turned it into huge opportunity. And the nation noticed. He didn't duck the issue. He didn't try to oversimplify it. He talked about it openly and intelligently.
Let's end this debate already so we can figure out how to beat McCain. Hillary can be the VP if she wants. Just get out of the way already.
Cheers,
Chris
Sunday, March 23, 2008
My Inner Sportsfan Won
I caved.
Not only because my willpower deserted me, but also because I realized that it's nearly impossible to ignore the men's NCAA basketball tournament. It was tough enough to avoid the Super Bowl, but that game takes place on a single afternoon. The Tournament lasts for 3 weeks and is the most widely talked-about sporting event of the year.
It's huge news at my office. The firm actually streams CBS over our network throughout the Tournament so we can watch games from our desks. And this year my department started its own NCAA pool that was free to enter. So I pretty much had to enter. My boss is a huge Duke fan and we talk college basketball all the time. It would have been way too hard to explain why I didn't enter, and frankly it didn't make any sense to me either.
So I entered the pool (and another one with my friends). More significantly, I kept one eye on the games much of the day on Thursday.
And once I'd broken the proverbial seal, I really couldn't see the logic in not watching any more. I suppose I might have fought the urge a little harder if I were at home, but I spent the weekend with my in-laws. And as expected, my father-in-law and I watched parts of games all weekend. I watched the first half of the Oregon game, all of the UCLA game, and the end of the Georgetown & Tennesse games.
It wasn't much compared to every other year of my life, but it wasn't zero, either. And I'm glad. The Tournament really is the best sporting event of the year.
So we'll have to see what happens next. My intention is to resume my no-sports experiment when the Tournament ends and then reassess in September. Till then I intend to revel in my hiatus.
Cheers,
Chris
P.S. If anyone besides DrBeeper reads this site, they should check out this link (DrB put it in the comments section of my last post.) It's pretty interesting. It's an academic paper arguing that teams in red jerseys win more.
Not only because my willpower deserted me, but also because I realized that it's nearly impossible to ignore the men's NCAA basketball tournament. It was tough enough to avoid the Super Bowl, but that game takes place on a single afternoon. The Tournament lasts for 3 weeks and is the most widely talked-about sporting event of the year.
It's huge news at my office. The firm actually streams CBS over our network throughout the Tournament so we can watch games from our desks. And this year my department started its own NCAA pool that was free to enter. So I pretty much had to enter. My boss is a huge Duke fan and we talk college basketball all the time. It would have been way too hard to explain why I didn't enter, and frankly it didn't make any sense to me either.
So I entered the pool (and another one with my friends). More significantly, I kept one eye on the games much of the day on Thursday.
And once I'd broken the proverbial seal, I really couldn't see the logic in not watching any more. I suppose I might have fought the urge a little harder if I were at home, but I spent the weekend with my in-laws. And as expected, my father-in-law and I watched parts of games all weekend. I watched the first half of the Oregon game, all of the UCLA game, and the end of the Georgetown & Tennesse games.
It wasn't much compared to every other year of my life, but it wasn't zero, either. And I'm glad. The Tournament really is the best sporting event of the year.
So we'll have to see what happens next. My intention is to resume my no-sports experiment when the Tournament ends and then reassess in September. Till then I intend to revel in my hiatus.
Cheers,
Chris
P.S. If anyone besides DrBeeper reads this site, they should check out this link (DrB put it in the comments section of my last post.) It's pretty interesting. It's an academic paper arguing that teams in red jerseys win more.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Beware the Ides of March
I'm pleased to report that I've survived over two full months as a reformed non-sportsfan. And as I've mentioned ad nauseum in previous posts, it hasn't been nearly as painful as I expected. Missing the Super Bowl still sticks in my craw a little (okay, a lot) but otherwise it's been a relatively seamless transition.
Till now. It's March. And even though my beloved Cal Bears have nearly finished yet another dreadful season I'm still eagerly anticipating the upcoming NCAA Tournament. In a couple of weeks the field will be set and the pooling will begin.
What to do, what to do?
Though it may not be obvious, I possess the soul of a perfectionist. I don't know why - no one in my family has ever exhibited perfectionist tendencies. But I've been this way my whole life. As a small child it was particularly acute. It took me forever to get my school work finished because every number and letter had to be perfectly formed. I couldn't function without an eraser nearby. About the only explanation I've ever been able to come up with is that perfectionism is a fundamental trait of my astrological sign, Virgo. Maybe that stuff is really true.
The point is that the perfectionist in me wants to finish what I started. No cheating. No lapses. Just a full year without sports. Simple. Clean. Unambiguous.
But my inner sportsfan couldn't care less about perfection. He's just bouncing off the walls waiting for the Tournament to start.
The NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament is by far my favorite postseason event in all of sports, and I believe it always will be. It's special for several reasons. First and foremost, no other major sporting event reliably produces the quantity of upsets and surprises that the Tournament delivers. David slays Goliath every year. Multiple times. Two years ago tiny George Mason made the Final Four. There is no equivalent accomplishment in any other major college or professional sport; only the NCAA Tournament is sufficiently egalitarian to allow the little guys to compete with the heavyweights. It's actually become a cliche - sports pundits and journalists regularly ask who will wear this year's glass slipper.
Second, almost everyone I know, even if they haven't watched a single minute of college basketball all year, takes a few minutes out of their busy lives to fill out a bracket and join the same pool that we've all been in for over ten years now. It's great fun. Bragging rights are on the line, and everyone is out to prove they know what's really happening in college basketball. So far it's never been me; I suppose one of these years I'm bound to win the grand prize....
And on a related note, being in a pool makes everything a little more intense. Few experiences in sports are more nerve wracking than watching your Final Four pick struggle in the first round of the Tournament. (Unfortunately for me, losing a Final Four pick on Day #1 has become an annual event but it never gets any easier to stomach.) Conversely, nothing is more satisfying than correctly predicting a major upset - especially if it's under the experts' radar.
So I'm torn. I have to say that I'm leaning strongly at this point toward joining a pool and also letting myself watch a few games. But the perfectionist in me hasn't given up. It's a classic Freudian battle - my id wants to watch the games but my superego is trying to keep me disciplined.
We'll see what happens....
Till now. It's March. And even though my beloved Cal Bears have nearly finished yet another dreadful season I'm still eagerly anticipating the upcoming NCAA Tournament. In a couple of weeks the field will be set and the pooling will begin.
What to do, what to do?
Though it may not be obvious, I possess the soul of a perfectionist. I don't know why - no one in my family has ever exhibited perfectionist tendencies. But I've been this way my whole life. As a small child it was particularly acute. It took me forever to get my school work finished because every number and letter had to be perfectly formed. I couldn't function without an eraser nearby. About the only explanation I've ever been able to come up with is that perfectionism is a fundamental trait of my astrological sign, Virgo. Maybe that stuff is really true.
The point is that the perfectionist in me wants to finish what I started. No cheating. No lapses. Just a full year without sports. Simple. Clean. Unambiguous.
But my inner sportsfan couldn't care less about perfection. He's just bouncing off the walls waiting for the Tournament to start.
The NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament is by far my favorite postseason event in all of sports, and I believe it always will be. It's special for several reasons. First and foremost, no other major sporting event reliably produces the quantity of upsets and surprises that the Tournament delivers. David slays Goliath every year. Multiple times. Two years ago tiny George Mason made the Final Four. There is no equivalent accomplishment in any other major college or professional sport; only the NCAA Tournament is sufficiently egalitarian to allow the little guys to compete with the heavyweights. It's actually become a cliche - sports pundits and journalists regularly ask who will wear this year's glass slipper.
Second, almost everyone I know, even if they haven't watched a single minute of college basketball all year, takes a few minutes out of their busy lives to fill out a bracket and join the same pool that we've all been in for over ten years now. It's great fun. Bragging rights are on the line, and everyone is out to prove they know what's really happening in college basketball. So far it's never been me; I suppose one of these years I'm bound to win the grand prize....
And on a related note, being in a pool makes everything a little more intense. Few experiences in sports are more nerve wracking than watching your Final Four pick struggle in the first round of the Tournament. (Unfortunately for me, losing a Final Four pick on Day #1 has become an annual event but it never gets any easier to stomach.) Conversely, nothing is more satisfying than correctly predicting a major upset - especially if it's under the experts' radar.
So I'm torn. I have to say that I'm leaning strongly at this point toward joining a pool and also letting myself watch a few games. But the perfectionist in me hasn't given up. It's a classic Freudian battle - my id wants to watch the games but my superego is trying to keep me disciplined.
We'll see what happens....
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Is Arlen Specter a Steelers Fan?
Today I heard that Roger Clemens denied using steroids while under oath (in front of the Congress no less) and is now potentially guilty of perjury on top of everything else. That's old news compared to what I read tonight on the Huffington Post. Apparently Arlen Specter (R-PA) wants the NFL to come down harder on Bill Bellicheck for the Spygate incident. Maybe he's right.
When the Mitchell Report first came out I thought the whole thing was a waste of time. I figured the United States Congress should have bigger fish to fry than steroid use in baseball, especially with a disastrous war going on. And on some level I still feel that way.
But after thinking a bit more about it, I'm not so sure additional government oversight in pro sports would be a bad thing. Sports is big business, and the professional leagues effectively have a monopoly on the product they sell. Tom Brady won't be playing in the Arena League anytime soon. LeBron ain't going to the CBA to earn his paycheck. And the Rocket - he'll be in the Majors till his 'roids run out. Just kidding.
In sports, stars sell. Create more stars, sell more product. Simple. In other words, what is the incentive for any of these leagues to police themselves rigorously? If steroids fueled Mark McGuire's 70 home run year, so be it. The fans ate it up. And even Barry's controversial & cantankerous chase to break Aaron's record was great drama that brought all eyes to MLB for a year.
So maybe it's good Mitchell stepped in. If he hadn't launched his investigation, Roger Clemens would still be completely under the radar. And given the hell that Barry had to put up with to get his record, it seems like the Rocket should have to squirm in his seat a little also.
But I digress. This isn't about Barry & Roger. It's about preserving the integrity of sports. Mind you, I don't personally object to the use of performance enhancing drugs among professional athletes. It's their body and their choice. But either way, it should be discussed and ruled on in a neutral setting and then the enforced rigorously. If it's illegal, crack down hard on those who break the rules. If it's legalized, drop the whole debate and move on.
And I'm thinking that Specter, not my favorite senator, is right to have concerns about Spygate. Again, at first I dismissed the whole thing as harmless shenanigans. But upon further consideration (18-1), I'm thinking it probably gave the Pats an unfair advantage. An advantage they used to capture the best single season performance in league history - except for that last game of course. The drama of an undefeated team entering the Super Bowl was unprecedented - it was the most widely viewed Super Bowl ever. Why would the NFL want to step up and punish Bellicheck and the Pats for their transgressions? It would be bad for business.
And I haven't even commented on the absurd revelation last year that an NBA referee - in the Finals! - was guilty of having ties to the mafia and appears to have altered the outcome of some playoff games.
I'm not a huge conspiracy theorist by nature but there is ample reason for concern at this point. In the last year all three pro sports leagues have endured major scandals that cut right to the integrity of the games. That's pretty bad.
Perhaps it's time for some bona fide regulation to get things under control.
Cheers,
Chris
When the Mitchell Report first came out I thought the whole thing was a waste of time. I figured the United States Congress should have bigger fish to fry than steroid use in baseball, especially with a disastrous war going on. And on some level I still feel that way.
But after thinking a bit more about it, I'm not so sure additional government oversight in pro sports would be a bad thing. Sports is big business, and the professional leagues effectively have a monopoly on the product they sell. Tom Brady won't be playing in the Arena League anytime soon. LeBron ain't going to the CBA to earn his paycheck. And the Rocket - he'll be in the Majors till his 'roids run out. Just kidding.
In sports, stars sell. Create more stars, sell more product. Simple. In other words, what is the incentive for any of these leagues to police themselves rigorously? If steroids fueled Mark McGuire's 70 home run year, so be it. The fans ate it up. And even Barry's controversial & cantankerous chase to break Aaron's record was great drama that brought all eyes to MLB for a year.
So maybe it's good Mitchell stepped in. If he hadn't launched his investigation, Roger Clemens would still be completely under the radar. And given the hell that Barry had to put up with to get his record, it seems like the Rocket should have to squirm in his seat a little also.
But I digress. This isn't about Barry & Roger. It's about preserving the integrity of sports. Mind you, I don't personally object to the use of performance enhancing drugs among professional athletes. It's their body and their choice. But either way, it should be discussed and ruled on in a neutral setting and then the enforced rigorously. If it's illegal, crack down hard on those who break the rules. If it's legalized, drop the whole debate and move on.
And I'm thinking that Specter, not my favorite senator, is right to have concerns about Spygate. Again, at first I dismissed the whole thing as harmless shenanigans. But upon further consideration (18-1), I'm thinking it probably gave the Pats an unfair advantage. An advantage they used to capture the best single season performance in league history - except for that last game of course. The drama of an undefeated team entering the Super Bowl was unprecedented - it was the most widely viewed Super Bowl ever. Why would the NFL want to step up and punish Bellicheck and the Pats for their transgressions? It would be bad for business.
And I haven't even commented on the absurd revelation last year that an NBA referee - in the Finals! - was guilty of having ties to the mafia and appears to have altered the outcome of some playoff games.
I'm not a huge conspiracy theorist by nature but there is ample reason for concern at this point. In the last year all three pro sports leagues have endured major scandals that cut right to the integrity of the games. That's pretty bad.
Perhaps it's time for some bona fide regulation to get things under control.
Cheers,
Chris
Monday, February 11, 2008
But Seriously, Folks...
Welcome to the new & improved version of Blueshirt. Notice the fancy header, the subtitle, and the new content on the side. I figured it was time to add a little pizazz to the site. Consider this the first step in an ongoing evolution....
Anyway, now that I've dispensed with the pleasantries, allow me to get to the point. It occurred to me this weekend that following sports really is a big waste of time. (I don't mean to oversimplify - I obviously had my suspicions already or I wouldn't have undertaken this project in the first place.) The problem is that suddenly it troubles me greatly.
The realization really hit home yesterday. If this were an ordinary year in my life, I would have spent the afternoon at Haas Pavilion watching the Bears play (and lose to) the Oregon Ducks. And normally it would have been fun - those two teams always put on a good show in Berkeley and the Bears usually win.
But because I wasn't attending the game, I was able to take advantage of our unseasonably warm winter day and play 9-holes of golf at Tilden Park in the morning. Time is so scarce on the weekend that doing both would have been impossible.
So it really was that simple. I traded two hours of sitting on my duff, indoors, for two hours of walking around beautiful Tilden Park while working on my flawed golf game. No doubt, it was an upgrade all around. (I should add that even if the Bears had won it still would have been an upgrade).
Good for me - I did the right thing. But what about all the fans who actually went to Haas yesterday? And what about the millions of fans all across the country who watched their favorite college basketball game yesterday? Or the hundreds of thousands who watched their favorite NBA games yesterday? And let's not forget the die-hard NHL fans who watched their hockey heroes check each other into the boards last night.
I know that sports are hugely important to our society, and I understand better than most people why that is. But for the first time in my whole life I'm questioning if perhaps it's too important. The amount of time and money that people pour into sports (myself included) suddenly seems somewhat misplaced.
I'm sure I'm not the first person to make this argument, but I don't think it gets much play in the popular press. And how could it? Every major newspaper and television station in the country has a sports department. Who is going to get on their soapbox and tell Americans to stop wasting so much time watching the very content they're selling?
Indeed, sports have become big, big business. And big businesses want to get bigger, not smaller. For years, David Stern was lauded as the best commissioner in professional sports because he successfully marketed the NBA overseas. Everyone knows the fastest way to grow a business is to assimilate new markets, and Stern is the master.
Anyway, I'm not sure what to do with my newfound concerns. Writing about it is a good first step, and quite possibly the last. But is there something more that can or should be done? Do people need to be challenged on this issue? Or do most people just follow sports casually enough that a few hours here & there each week wouldn't really make a difference anyway? And if they didn't follow sports, would they just use the time to do something equally as frivolous? Perhaps even destructive? I certainly don't know.
What I do know is that people like me who love sports don't really think anything else is quite as entertaining so they don't worry about all the implications. They just want to root for their teams and talk about the games. Ah, the good old days....
Cheers,
Chris
Anyway, now that I've dispensed with the pleasantries, allow me to get to the point. It occurred to me this weekend that following sports really is a big waste of time. (I don't mean to oversimplify - I obviously had my suspicions already or I wouldn't have undertaken this project in the first place.) The problem is that suddenly it troubles me greatly.
The realization really hit home yesterday. If this were an ordinary year in my life, I would have spent the afternoon at Haas Pavilion watching the Bears play (and lose to) the Oregon Ducks. And normally it would have been fun - those two teams always put on a good show in Berkeley and the Bears usually win.
But because I wasn't attending the game, I was able to take advantage of our unseasonably warm winter day and play 9-holes of golf at Tilden Park in the morning. Time is so scarce on the weekend that doing both would have been impossible.
So it really was that simple. I traded two hours of sitting on my duff, indoors, for two hours of walking around beautiful Tilden Park while working on my flawed golf game. No doubt, it was an upgrade all around. (I should add that even if the Bears had won it still would have been an upgrade).
Good for me - I did the right thing. But what about all the fans who actually went to Haas yesterday? And what about the millions of fans all across the country who watched their favorite college basketball game yesterday? Or the hundreds of thousands who watched their favorite NBA games yesterday? And let's not forget the die-hard NHL fans who watched their hockey heroes check each other into the boards last night.
I know that sports are hugely important to our society, and I understand better than most people why that is. But for the first time in my whole life I'm questioning if perhaps it's too important. The amount of time and money that people pour into sports (myself included) suddenly seems somewhat misplaced.
I'm sure I'm not the first person to make this argument, but I don't think it gets much play in the popular press. And how could it? Every major newspaper and television station in the country has a sports department. Who is going to get on their soapbox and tell Americans to stop wasting so much time watching the very content they're selling?
Indeed, sports have become big, big business. And big businesses want to get bigger, not smaller. For years, David Stern was lauded as the best commissioner in professional sports because he successfully marketed the NBA overseas. Everyone knows the fastest way to grow a business is to assimilate new markets, and Stern is the master.
Anyway, I'm not sure what to do with my newfound concerns. Writing about it is a good first step, and quite possibly the last. But is there something more that can or should be done? Do people need to be challenged on this issue? Or do most people just follow sports casually enough that a few hours here & there each week wouldn't really make a difference anyway? And if they didn't follow sports, would they just use the time to do something equally as frivolous? Perhaps even destructive? I certainly don't know.
What I do know is that people like me who love sports don't really think anything else is quite as entertaining so they don't worry about all the implications. They just want to root for their teams and talk about the games. Ah, the good old days....
Cheers,
Chris
Monday, February 4, 2008
18-1? Doh!
Maybe sports is more than a habit. If it was just a habit, I don't think I'd be depressed today.
Yesterday the NFL staged one of the best Super Bowls ever and I missed it completely. I didn't listen on the radio, watch the highlights, or read about it afterward. All I did was talk about it at the office all day. Or more accurately, I listened to my many sports-knowledgeable colleagues give me a detailed recap of the game while I answered with my lame excuse for why I missed it.
It's true that during the game I was driving home from Tahoe in a snowstorm, averaging about 13 miles/hour between Tahoe City and Auburn. But it's not true that I forgot to TiVo the game or that I couldn't find it on the radio.
I haven't told anyone at work that I've given up sports for the year. I've told a couple of guys I'm trying to watch less sports in 2008, but that's it. It's easier than explaining the whole project.
(As an aside, with March Madness rapidly approaching I may have to come clean. There will be no other way to explain my decision to skip the office pool and miss all the games, especially since my passion is already well-known amongst my colleagues.)
Anyway, back to the Super Bowl. It was not only the biggest upset since I stopped watching/reading about sports (big deal, a whole month), but it's one of the biggest ever. Upsets are what makes being a fan so fun. If the favorite always won sports would be a totally boring experience. And teams like the Bears would have absolutely no fans at all.
So today was the first day that this whole project seemed like a genuinely questionable idea. I suppose I can take some solace in the fact that it took a full month to feel that way. And certainly it's not surprising. When I was deciding whether to give up sports for the year I made a list of the things I would miss most. #1 was Cal vs. U$C (football, of course). #2 was March Madness. And #3 was the Super Bowl.
So here I am. One down, two to go. But the gap between the Tournament and the Super Bowl is light years - if this hurt I can only imagine how I'll feel in March. And for good measure, the Bears swept their road series this weekend and are actually back in the Tournament hunt again. If they rally with a late season Tourney run, I'm going to implode.
With that, let me introduce the first recurring features of the Blueshirt blog:
- The Temptation Index. It measures how tempted to tune into sports I am for the coming week (on a scale from 1-10).
- The Regret Index. It measures how depressed I am that I missed the previous week's events (also on a scale from 1-10).
This week's Temptation Index is 2. I'm not convinced the Bears' road sweep will turn into a bona fide win streak (it never, ever does), plus I don't even know who they are playing this week.
This week's Regret Index is 7. I suppose it's kind of low considering it was the best Super Bowl ever, but even the best SB is still a lot worse than the first weekend of March Madness. I'm leaving room in the scale for the expected pain to come. Maybe I'll get lucky and it won't be that bad.
Signing off for now.....
Cheers,
Chris
Yesterday the NFL staged one of the best Super Bowls ever and I missed it completely. I didn't listen on the radio, watch the highlights, or read about it afterward. All I did was talk about it at the office all day. Or more accurately, I listened to my many sports-knowledgeable colleagues give me a detailed recap of the game while I answered with my lame excuse for why I missed it.
It's true that during the game I was driving home from Tahoe in a snowstorm, averaging about 13 miles/hour between Tahoe City and Auburn. But it's not true that I forgot to TiVo the game or that I couldn't find it on the radio.
I haven't told anyone at work that I've given up sports for the year. I've told a couple of guys I'm trying to watch less sports in 2008, but that's it. It's easier than explaining the whole project.
(As an aside, with March Madness rapidly approaching I may have to come clean. There will be no other way to explain my decision to skip the office pool and miss all the games, especially since my passion is already well-known amongst my colleagues.)
Anyway, back to the Super Bowl. It was not only the biggest upset since I stopped watching/reading about sports (big deal, a whole month), but it's one of the biggest ever. Upsets are what makes being a fan so fun. If the favorite always won sports would be a totally boring experience. And teams like the Bears would have absolutely no fans at all.
So today was the first day that this whole project seemed like a genuinely questionable idea. I suppose I can take some solace in the fact that it took a full month to feel that way. And certainly it's not surprising. When I was deciding whether to give up sports for the year I made a list of the things I would miss most. #1 was Cal vs. U$C (football, of course). #2 was March Madness. And #3 was the Super Bowl.
So here I am. One down, two to go. But the gap between the Tournament and the Super Bowl is light years - if this hurt I can only imagine how I'll feel in March. And for good measure, the Bears swept their road series this weekend and are actually back in the Tournament hunt again. If they rally with a late season Tourney run, I'm going to implode.
With that, let me introduce the first recurring features of the Blueshirt blog:
- The Temptation Index. It measures how tempted to tune into sports I am for the coming week (on a scale from 1-10).
- The Regret Index. It measures how depressed I am that I missed the previous week's events (also on a scale from 1-10).
This week's Temptation Index is 2. I'm not convinced the Bears' road sweep will turn into a bona fide win streak (it never, ever does), plus I don't even know who they are playing this week.
This week's Regret Index is 7. I suppose it's kind of low considering it was the best Super Bowl ever, but even the best SB is still a lot worse than the first weekend of March Madness. I'm leaving room in the scale for the expected pain to come. Maybe I'll get lucky and it won't be that bad.
Signing off for now.....
Cheers,
Chris
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Habitual User
Maybe being a sports fan is just a habit. Not a need, an addiction, or even a desire – just a habit.
For the last ten years I have attended, watched, or listened to most every Cal football and basketball game that has been played. That's a lot of games - about 12 football games and 30 basketball games every year.
During that time I essentially planned my whole life around the Cal schedule. Social events couldn’t conflict. Out-of-town guests could only visit during road weekends (unless they wanted to attend the games with me). Vacations & business trips had to be planned around the games. Hotels were selected based on their cable package (would they show the game?). Even the birth of our children couldn’t get in the way – our oldest daughter was only about 7 weeks old for her first football game. (She brought us good luck, by the way – that game was Cal’s historic win over USC during Tedford’s 2nd year.)
And however excessive that may sound, at the time it seemed perfectly reasonable to me.
But now that I’ve pulled the plug, I look back with a great deal of bewilderment. It just doesn’t make sense. Even accounting for the thrills of the great wins (the aforementioned USC game, this year’s Tennessee game, etc.) it’s hard for me to understand what I was thinking.
So I’m wondering if it was just a habit. I’m no expert on habitual behavior, but I believe they happen unconsciously. A habitual nail biter doesn’t realize they’re doing it. They just do it. Maybe I got so used to following the Bears that it never occurred to me that I was doing anything unusual or unreasonable.
It’s hard to imagine I could be so mindless about something so pervasive in my life, but it might actually be true.
I’m about a month into my no-sports experiment it’s been remarkably easy since day 1. I’ve been tempted a few times and I’ve had a couple of minor lapses, but that’s nothing in the grand scheme.
If the Bears were a true addiction, which I thought was a possibility, I don’t think the separation would be so easy. I know they’re having a disappointing season, but in years past that would be all the more reason to root for them. Hope springs eternal for a true fan, and this particular team does have a lot of talent.
Anyway, I don’t think I can answer the question right here or now, but it does seem worth asking. If anyone has any thoughts on the topic feel free to weigh in.
Cheers,
Chris
For the last ten years I have attended, watched, or listened to most every Cal football and basketball game that has been played. That's a lot of games - about 12 football games and 30 basketball games every year.
During that time I essentially planned my whole life around the Cal schedule. Social events couldn’t conflict. Out-of-town guests could only visit during road weekends (unless they wanted to attend the games with me). Vacations & business trips had to be planned around the games. Hotels were selected based on their cable package (would they show the game?). Even the birth of our children couldn’t get in the way – our oldest daughter was only about 7 weeks old for her first football game. (She brought us good luck, by the way – that game was Cal’s historic win over USC during Tedford’s 2nd year.)
And however excessive that may sound, at the time it seemed perfectly reasonable to me.
But now that I’ve pulled the plug, I look back with a great deal of bewilderment. It just doesn’t make sense. Even accounting for the thrills of the great wins (the aforementioned USC game, this year’s Tennessee game, etc.) it’s hard for me to understand what I was thinking.
So I’m wondering if it was just a habit. I’m no expert on habitual behavior, but I believe they happen unconsciously. A habitual nail biter doesn’t realize they’re doing it. They just do it. Maybe I got so used to following the Bears that it never occurred to me that I was doing anything unusual or unreasonable.
It’s hard to imagine I could be so mindless about something so pervasive in my life, but it might actually be true.
I’m about a month into my no-sports experiment it’s been remarkably easy since day 1. I’ve been tempted a few times and I’ve had a couple of minor lapses, but that’s nothing in the grand scheme.
If the Bears were a true addiction, which I thought was a possibility, I don’t think the separation would be so easy. I know they’re having a disappointing season, but in years past that would be all the more reason to root for them. Hope springs eternal for a true fan, and this particular team does have a lot of talent.
Anyway, I don’t think I can answer the question right here or now, but it does seem worth asking. If anyone has any thoughts on the topic feel free to weigh in.
Cheers,
Chris
Monday, January 21, 2008
Second Hand Sports
First off, thanks to everyone who gave me their thoughts about taking Syd to a women's basketball game. Although many of you said it would be okay I've decided to go with the hardliners - I'm not going to take her. Instead, I'll find another activity featuring M&Ms and popcorn that we can do together.
In other news, it's been exactly three weeks since I started this experiment and a few clear patterns have started to emerge.
The most obvious one, and the topic for this post, is that I am definitely not living in a sports blackout. On the contrary, sports is still all around me. Many of my friends & family are big sports fans so it comes up regularly when we hang out or talk on the phone. And at the office it is also a regular topic of conversation. In fact, at work it is somewhat of a necessity since I try to avoid discussing anything edgy (e.g., politics) with most of my colleagues.
And all my regular news sites (SFGate.com, WSJ.com, NYTimes.com) have sports headlines on their homepage, so without ever clicking a link I can get caught up on the basics. My commute is another wellspring of information. In the mornings I take the Casual Carpool to work so I hear different radio stations on different days. Today John Madden was telling me his views about whether Brett Favre would retire (he might). On the way home I take BART, and I occasionally see people reading the local sports page so I'm able to catch the headlines. That's how I learned that the Bears had recently dropped a double-overtime home game to perennial PacTen bottom dwellers Arizona State.
And that's not the worst of it. Sunday we hosted a small going-away party for some old friends, and one of them is a big Packers fan so we had the game on in our living all afternoon! Then Monday I was at the Tilden Park club house after a round of golf, and of course SportsCenter was on every TV in the dining room.
So what am I to make of all this second hand sports exposure? Is the whole experiment a failure after just three weeks?
I say no. On the contrary, I think it's going much better than expected.
I have faithfully adhered to the rules stipulated in my first post and that is the point. Excluding my lapses during the first week, when I read two articles about the Bears, I have not read more than a headline about any sporting event that has occurred in January. And until the Packers game on Sunday, I had not spent one minute of any day this year watching sports. (As an aside, I never sat down to watch it in earnest. I caught a few plays here and there, especially the critical field goals at the end, but I was too busy hosting to focus on the game.)
In other words, I'm doing exactly what I set out to do and I still know most of what's happening in sports. The only difference is that I don't find out till after things already happen. It's the best of both worlds. I don't have to spend any of my valuable free time following sports, but I don't have to live in a vacuum, either.
And what I've noticed thus far is that I haven't missed much of anything. There hasn't been a major upset in any sporting event so far in 2008. And my beloved Bears are heading for yet another disappointing season, despite having more talent on the roster than any of us can remember. If they were having a good year this would all be a lot harder.
Cheers,
Chris
In other news, it's been exactly three weeks since I started this experiment and a few clear patterns have started to emerge.
The most obvious one, and the topic for this post, is that I am definitely not living in a sports blackout. On the contrary, sports is still all around me. Many of my friends & family are big sports fans so it comes up regularly when we hang out or talk on the phone. And at the office it is also a regular topic of conversation. In fact, at work it is somewhat of a necessity since I try to avoid discussing anything edgy (e.g., politics) with most of my colleagues.
And all my regular news sites (SFGate.com, WSJ.com, NYTimes.com) have sports headlines on their homepage, so without ever clicking a link I can get caught up on the basics. My commute is another wellspring of information. In the mornings I take the Casual Carpool to work so I hear different radio stations on different days. Today John Madden was telling me his views about whether Brett Favre would retire (he might). On the way home I take BART, and I occasionally see people reading the local sports page so I'm able to catch the headlines. That's how I learned that the Bears had recently dropped a double-overtime home game to perennial PacTen bottom dwellers Arizona State.
And that's not the worst of it. Sunday we hosted a small going-away party for some old friends, and one of them is a big Packers fan so we had the game on in our living all afternoon! Then Monday I was at the Tilden Park club house after a round of golf, and of course SportsCenter was on every TV in the dining room.
So what am I to make of all this second hand sports exposure? Is the whole experiment a failure after just three weeks?
I say no. On the contrary, I think it's going much better than expected.
I have faithfully adhered to the rules stipulated in my first post and that is the point. Excluding my lapses during the first week, when I read two articles about the Bears, I have not read more than a headline about any sporting event that has occurred in January. And until the Packers game on Sunday, I had not spent one minute of any day this year watching sports. (As an aside, I never sat down to watch it in earnest. I caught a few plays here and there, especially the critical field goals at the end, but I was too busy hosting to focus on the game.)
In other words, I'm doing exactly what I set out to do and I still know most of what's happening in sports. The only difference is that I don't find out till after things already happen. It's the best of both worlds. I don't have to spend any of my valuable free time following sports, but I don't have to live in a vacuum, either.
And what I've noticed thus far is that I haven't missed much of anything. There hasn't been a major upset in any sporting event so far in 2008. And my beloved Bears are heading for yet another disappointing season, despite having more talent on the roster than any of us can remember. If they were having a good year this would all be a lot harder.
Cheers,
Chris
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Pull Up the Roots
Greetings, everyone. And thanks for all your support and encouragement this week. I definitely appreciate it.
A few people also wrote to me expressing concerns about the motives for the project, which I suppose is reasonable. One friend put it this way: "I can only conclude you concluded you had a problem. Best of luck making change in 2008." Others feared that perhaps Cheryl had given me some sort of ultimatum, or at the very least that it was motivated by marital stress. (Somebody also joked that Cheryl must have threatened to withhold sex unless I gave up sports.)
I'm pleased to say that none of these are correct. If they were, I don't think I'd be keeping a public log of my progress.
The truth is that the initial motivation for the experiment was to write about it. Like many (most?) people I have always dreamed of becoming a writer, and over the past few years I've started numerous fiction projects. But invariably I've abandoned them, and always for the same reason - they lacked passion.
And then one night in December it hit me. Living without sports for a year and writing about the experience would definitely solve that problem. It would be like a literary version of "Cold Turkey" with some social commentary thrown in for good measure. The pain of my sports withdrawals would make for compelling drama, and my observations about a life without sports would add depth and substance.
So that was the original thinking. I ran the idea past Cheryl and she liked it right away. Then I bounced it off a few more people and the results were mixed but mostly positive. A couple of people suggested I blog it, and I obviously took that advice.
But now that I'm actually not watching sports and writing about the experience, I've had to think about my motives a lot more carefully. Otherwise there wouldn't be much to write about. And upon further reflection there are three primary reasons this seems like a very good idea to me (regardless of whether the writing project comes to fruition.)
Starting with the negative, I'd be lying if I didn't acknowledge a grain of truth to my friend's conclusion that I concluded that I had a problem. Just before Christmas I went to my in-laws' house for the holidays. I arrived two days after Cheryl and the kids so naturally we were all excited to see each other. But after about a half-hour of catching up, I excused myself to go watch a delayed Cal BB game. I proceeded to waste the next 90 minutes of my life watching uninspired, losing basketball when I should have been spending time with the family. After the game, I realized what a waste it was. And I thought about all the times I had done something similar - too many to count - and I decided it was time for a change.
But I didn't have to go cold turkey to solve that problem. Simply cutting back my sports viewing would have been enough to get things under control. In fact, I think that's what most sports fans do.
But there are some positive motivations, too, and they are the ones that are driving me to go cold turkey. Mostly, I'm excited about this upcoming year because it will be the first time in my life I've made a conscious effort to pursue other interests with the intensity I pursue sports. I've never much cared for non-sports TV, and likewise my leisure time Web surfing has typically been limited to ESPN.com, SFGate.com/Sports, and The Bear Insider. During work hours, of course I check news sites like WSJ.com and NYTimes.com, but when I'm unwinding at home those are nowhere on my radar. And now all of that has to change. In fact on Friday night I was a bit panicked because I realized I had absolutely no leisure time sites to surf. But on Saturday I regained my composure and remembered The Onion.com and Slate.com, both of which were quite amusing.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, I wanted to challenge myself, to shake things up just for the sport of it (heh heh). My life has been a case-study in stability. I've never had a mailing address outside of California and I've lived in the Bay Area since 1987. I own a house that is about 1 mile from where I lived in college and around the block from my first apartment after college. I've had pretty much the same friends since graduating Berkeley, with a few key additions over the years. I've only worked for four companies in my entire professional career, and if things go well I'll stay with my current employer till I retire. And I'm married with kids. Things move slow in my world.
So what could I really do to shake things up? Quit my job? Sell my house? Find new friends? Leave my wife and kids? Not a chance - those are all the best things in my life. But I could give up the Bears and sports in general just to see what happened. I could remove a fundamental pillar of my identity and then live through the repercussions. Anything could happen, but it would be worth the risk. My biggest fear going in was that I would fall into a deep depression. And it still may happen. March Madness may take on a whole new, literal meaning for me. But I think it's the right thing to do regardless. As a working stiff/family man, it's easy to fall into a rut and just do what you've always done forever. Changing things here and there has to be a good idea.
Fortunately, so far so good. Until next time....
Cheers,
Chris
P.S. If anyone is still reading, I'd like some advice. Sydney has been asking me to take her to a basketball game, and I thought that maybe a women's game would be a good compromise. I haven't seen a women's game since college, so it's not something I'd normally do. And since it's a bonding activity for me & Syd, and it gives her a chance to see women playing sports at a high level, it seems like it wouldn't be breaking the spirit of my resolution. I'm curious to know what others think. (I changed the settings on the site so you can post comments anonymously.) Thanks again, Chris.
A few people also wrote to me expressing concerns about the motives for the project, which I suppose is reasonable. One friend put it this way: "I can only conclude you concluded you had a problem. Best of luck making change in 2008." Others feared that perhaps Cheryl had given me some sort of ultimatum, or at the very least that it was motivated by marital stress. (Somebody also joked that Cheryl must have threatened to withhold sex unless I gave up sports.)
I'm pleased to say that none of these are correct. If they were, I don't think I'd be keeping a public log of my progress.
The truth is that the initial motivation for the experiment was to write about it. Like many (most?) people I have always dreamed of becoming a writer, and over the past few years I've started numerous fiction projects. But invariably I've abandoned them, and always for the same reason - they lacked passion.
And then one night in December it hit me. Living without sports for a year and writing about the experience would definitely solve that problem. It would be like a literary version of "Cold Turkey" with some social commentary thrown in for good measure. The pain of my sports withdrawals would make for compelling drama, and my observations about a life without sports would add depth and substance.
So that was the original thinking. I ran the idea past Cheryl and she liked it right away. Then I bounced it off a few more people and the results were mixed but mostly positive. A couple of people suggested I blog it, and I obviously took that advice.
But now that I'm actually not watching sports and writing about the experience, I've had to think about my motives a lot more carefully. Otherwise there wouldn't be much to write about. And upon further reflection there are three primary reasons this seems like a very good idea to me (regardless of whether the writing project comes to fruition.)
Starting with the negative, I'd be lying if I didn't acknowledge a grain of truth to my friend's conclusion that I concluded that I had a problem. Just before Christmas I went to my in-laws' house for the holidays. I arrived two days after Cheryl and the kids so naturally we were all excited to see each other. But after about a half-hour of catching up, I excused myself to go watch a delayed Cal BB game. I proceeded to waste the next 90 minutes of my life watching uninspired, losing basketball when I should have been spending time with the family. After the game, I realized what a waste it was. And I thought about all the times I had done something similar - too many to count - and I decided it was time for a change.
But I didn't have to go cold turkey to solve that problem. Simply cutting back my sports viewing would have been enough to get things under control. In fact, I think that's what most sports fans do.
But there are some positive motivations, too, and they are the ones that are driving me to go cold turkey. Mostly, I'm excited about this upcoming year because it will be the first time in my life I've made a conscious effort to pursue other interests with the intensity I pursue sports. I've never much cared for non-sports TV, and likewise my leisure time Web surfing has typically been limited to ESPN.com, SFGate.com/Sports, and The Bear Insider. During work hours, of course I check news sites like WSJ.com and NYTimes.com, but when I'm unwinding at home those are nowhere on my radar. And now all of that has to change. In fact on Friday night I was a bit panicked because I realized I had absolutely no leisure time sites to surf. But on Saturday I regained my composure and remembered The Onion.com and Slate.com, both of which were quite amusing.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, I wanted to challenge myself, to shake things up just for the sport of it (heh heh). My life has been a case-study in stability. I've never had a mailing address outside of California and I've lived in the Bay Area since 1987. I own a house that is about 1 mile from where I lived in college and around the block from my first apartment after college. I've had pretty much the same friends since graduating Berkeley, with a few key additions over the years. I've only worked for four companies in my entire professional career, and if things go well I'll stay with my current employer till I retire. And I'm married with kids. Things move slow in my world.
So what could I really do to shake things up? Quit my job? Sell my house? Find new friends? Leave my wife and kids? Not a chance - those are all the best things in my life. But I could give up the Bears and sports in general just to see what happened. I could remove a fundamental pillar of my identity and then live through the repercussions. Anything could happen, but it would be worth the risk. My biggest fear going in was that I would fall into a deep depression. And it still may happen. March Madness may take on a whole new, literal meaning for me. But I think it's the right thing to do regardless. As a working stiff/family man, it's easy to fall into a rut and just do what you've always done forever. Changing things here and there has to be a good idea.
Fortunately, so far so good. Until next time....
Cheers,
Chris
P.S. If anyone is still reading, I'd like some advice. Sydney has been asking me to take her to a basketball game, and I thought that maybe a women's game would be a good compromise. I haven't seen a women's game since college, so it's not something I'd normally do. And since it's a bonding activity for me & Syd, and it gives her a chance to see women playing sports at a high level, it seems like it wouldn't be breaking the spirit of my resolution. I'm curious to know what others think. (I changed the settings on the site so you can post comments anonymously.) Thanks again, Chris.
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
One down, fifty-one to go...
Greetings, friends & family.
As many of you already know, my 2008 New Year's Resolution was to stop following sports completely. Cold turkey for one year.
And since one of my motivations for this improbable experiment is to write about it, I have decided to maintain a regular blog that chronicles my progress. Hopefully I can keep it interesting for you all.
The ground rules of the resolution are pretty strict. Obviously, I'm not allowed to watch any live or televised sporting events. Nor am I allowed to watch Sportscenter or any other TV sports news program. The radio is off limits, too. And finally, I'm not allowed to surf any sports related web sites or read any sports magazines.
As you all know, these are major, major changes in lifestyle for me. Following sports is pretty much my favorite leisure activity; I try to fit it in anytime I can. And not surprisingly, it takes most of my free time. I would estimate that during 2007 (like most every other year of my life) I spent an average of 10 hours per week following sports. And during football season, when I was simultaneously managing my NFL fantasy team and religiously following the Bears, I'd say it was between 20 - 25 hours per week. Living without it will be a whole new reality for me.
So in the interest of maintaining a modicum of normalcy, I have decided it's okay to talk about sports with coworkers, friends, & family. And I have accepted (enthusiastically, I might add) that some sports-related information will reach me via passive channels that are beyond my control. For example, Saturday I was at the liquor store and the clerk behind the counter had an NFL playoff game on the radio. We chatted briefly about the game while my credit card was processing. (Cheryl will probably notice me taking more frequent trips to the liquor store during the next few months....)
Considering the magnitude of the change, I would have to say that overall my first week has been very successful. I resisted the temptation to watch any of the New Year's Day and BCS football games, including my favorite, the Rose Bowl, plus last night's BCS championship game, the entire first round of the NFL playoffs, and most importantly, two Cal basketball home games against #22 USC and #5 UCLA. And I did not watch any Sportscenter or visit any of my usual sports websites. I also got a new issue of ESPN Magazine delivered to my house that I have not opened (though I did see that Dwayne Wade is on the cover).
As expected, by far the biggest test of my willpower was skipping the two Cal basketball home games. I honestly cannot recall the last time I missed Cal vs. UCLA in Berkeley. I may have missed a Trojan game over the years, but Cal vs. UCLA is sacred. Over the years our games against the Bruins (both home and away) have provided me some of the most memorable rooting experiences of my entire life.
With that as my excuse, I have to confess that I already violated the rules of the resolution a little. I allowed myself to read the Chronicle's recap of both Cal basketball games this week. I knew the outcome of both games at the time, so I figured I could just quickly dash through the articles and it would be okay. But in retrospect I know I cheated, and hopefully I can avoid that in the future.
Still, during a fabulously sports-rich week that included two of my favorite sporting events of the entire year (Rose Bowl, Cal vs. UCLA) I spent a grand total of 10 minutes being a sportsfan. Last year I probably spent 20 hours of my free time following all these same events. So overall I'd say I'm off to a solid start. It's not perfect, but I still have another 51 weeks to work out the kinks.
Until next time,
Chris
As many of you already know, my 2008 New Year's Resolution was to stop following sports completely. Cold turkey for one year.
And since one of my motivations for this improbable experiment is to write about it, I have decided to maintain a regular blog that chronicles my progress. Hopefully I can keep it interesting for you all.
The ground rules of the resolution are pretty strict. Obviously, I'm not allowed to watch any live or televised sporting events. Nor am I allowed to watch Sportscenter or any other TV sports news program. The radio is off limits, too. And finally, I'm not allowed to surf any sports related web sites or read any sports magazines.
As you all know, these are major, major changes in lifestyle for me. Following sports is pretty much my favorite leisure activity; I try to fit it in anytime I can. And not surprisingly, it takes most of my free time. I would estimate that during 2007 (like most every other year of my life) I spent an average of 10 hours per week following sports. And during football season, when I was simultaneously managing my NFL fantasy team and religiously following the Bears, I'd say it was between 20 - 25 hours per week. Living without it will be a whole new reality for me.
So in the interest of maintaining a modicum of normalcy, I have decided it's okay to talk about sports with coworkers, friends, & family. And I have accepted (enthusiastically, I might add) that some sports-related information will reach me via passive channels that are beyond my control. For example, Saturday I was at the liquor store and the clerk behind the counter had an NFL playoff game on the radio. We chatted briefly about the game while my credit card was processing. (Cheryl will probably notice me taking more frequent trips to the liquor store during the next few months....)
Considering the magnitude of the change, I would have to say that overall my first week has been very successful. I resisted the temptation to watch any of the New Year's Day and BCS football games, including my favorite, the Rose Bowl, plus last night's BCS championship game, the entire first round of the NFL playoffs, and most importantly, two Cal basketball home games against #22 USC and #5 UCLA. And I did not watch any Sportscenter or visit any of my usual sports websites. I also got a new issue of ESPN Magazine delivered to my house that I have not opened (though I did see that Dwayne Wade is on the cover).
As expected, by far the biggest test of my willpower was skipping the two Cal basketball home games. I honestly cannot recall the last time I missed Cal vs. UCLA in Berkeley. I may have missed a Trojan game over the years, but Cal vs. UCLA is sacred. Over the years our games against the Bruins (both home and away) have provided me some of the most memorable rooting experiences of my entire life.
With that as my excuse, I have to confess that I already violated the rules of the resolution a little. I allowed myself to read the Chronicle's recap of both Cal basketball games this week. I knew the outcome of both games at the time, so I figured I could just quickly dash through the articles and it would be okay. But in retrospect I know I cheated, and hopefully I can avoid that in the future.
Still, during a fabulously sports-rich week that included two of my favorite sporting events of the entire year (Rose Bowl, Cal vs. UCLA) I spent a grand total of 10 minutes being a sportsfan. Last year I probably spent 20 hours of my free time following all these same events. So overall I'd say I'm off to a solid start. It's not perfect, but I still have another 51 weeks to work out the kinks.
Until next time,
Chris
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)