R. Rich

Happy birthday and I hope you enjoy the game next week. I hear those seats you have are pretty good.

The former nickname of my alma mater, Shippensburg University. Due to PC, they are now the 'Raiders'.

Go Red Raiders!

This team is soft! It lacks discipline! Well, I have news for you now: you are mine now! You belong to me!!

I will get the 'Collector's Edition' as opposed to getting the one w/ the other 2 movies included. I really like the original Kong, and my brother and I have been looking forward to this release for years, ever since we heard Jackson was getting serious about doing the remake (he was set to do it before the LOTR trilogy).

These guys do have a say in where they end up playing, correct? I'm just curious as to what the selling points on this team will be. I guess we could always take the "give 'em whatever they want" approach that made the late John Butler such a beloved GM when he was here.

Yeah, there's plenty of movies that look interesting, but we just don't go out to watch movies that often anymore. We usually catch the annual "dusk to dawn" showing @ our local drive in; that way, we get to see a bunch of movies (4-5, usually) for one price. We went to see "Rent" yesterday because it was my wife's birthday and she really wanted to see that movie. I tend to wait for things to be shown on Starz.

I still think they should give this lineup a shot.

I grew up w/ the 70s Kong, but I also love the '33 original, as does my brother. We're getting together that weekend to watch the movie (we remember being @ the Strand Theater in Erie Pa to watch the 76 Kong remake when there were actually people sitting in the aisles-fire hazard be damned) and he's going w/ me to the Bills-Broncos game the next day. I think this Kong is going to be great. My brother told me that he read a story on the wire about the studio blowing a gasket when they found out how long the movie was. Jackson just invited them down to view the film. They took him up on his offer, then promptly left and, more importantly, left him alone. They know it's going to be a huge hit, but the advance word is that this movie is awesome. Jackson is being so anal about this that when he heard the film score (first done by his buddy who also scored the LOTR trilogy), he fired the guy on the spot, as it wasn't up to his expectations. One movie I just saw today that I didn't see mentioned by you is "Rent", the film adaptation of the award-winning musical. I thought this movie was pretty good. They have all but 2 of the original Broadway cast members from the musical in this movie (including Taye Diggs and Law & Order star Jessie L. Martin), but the 2 cast members who weren't in the Broadway production, Rosario Dawson and Tracie Thoms, had the two best performances in the movie.

I hope to see you soon.

I probably won't be able to make the 12/18 meeting, unfortunately. I think I'll have to work @ least half the day and then drive up after work.

Current Champion of Whatever Sport = Spike, the dog ESPN = Chester, the dog

I can see both sides of the argument, and both have valid points. Those who would not rest their starters (if they have a shot @ an unbeaten season) seem to feel that it's a big part of history that the team should shoot for, if they're in the position to do so. That doesn't sound too unreasonable. However... Those who would rest their starters seem to feel that the most important thing is to be in the position to win it all, not break a record. The focus should be on the championship, not the record. Another premise that seems reasonable. Personally, I'd try to have my team go for the record. Now, I wouldn't unnecessarily risk a player's health to do so (for example: I wouldn't start Edgerrin James if he wasn't fully healthy), but as long as they're healthy, I'd take a shot @ it. Like Mike Ditka said on ESPN the other evening, the record is memorable, probably more so than being a champion. More people will remember the Dolphins for winning every game en route to a championship than they will a team that won a title but didn't win them all. In the long run, who's right? Who cares. All it does is give people more topics to debate. Is Thurman Thomas' chance of getting in the Hall of Fame diminished by not winning a rushing title that Marv Levy, by resting him, in effect gave to Barry Sanders (when the teams played each other @ the end of the 1991 season)? I don't think so, but who's to say?

Aaaaaaaah, sit down and shaddup!

Dear ESPN, Thank you so much for staying focused on the task @ hand: giving complete coverage of the Champs! I know they're just a 6-5 team that isn't playing so well right now, but I'm glad that you haven't let such trivial matters stop your coverage of their trials and tribulations. I think your touching miniseries on the Tedy Bruschi saga should win the Emmy this year: well done! Also, thank you again for bringing a fresh perspective to your reporting of sports news. I can't say enough how pleasing it is to hear the news reported in hip hop fashion. It is especially pleasing to hear this style utilized by what could be seen as "nerdy, geeky white guys", which makes it even more appealing. Keep up the great work! For these and many more fantastic reasons (I won't even go into the brilliance that is the Stuart Scott 'Spoken Word'), I keep the TV on ESPN all day long. You guys are the greatest! Sincerely, Well Educated Sports Fan

I hear ya. Have they started going on the talk shows to tear down the Colts yet? You know, the old, "...the league is watered down compared to when we played and it isn't as competitive as blah blah blah blah blah blah...." routine.

Good idea.

I hear he called the Bills dumb.

He's our illiterate man, it would seem.

Granted, he's no Andy Katzenmoyer, but come on, Mark!

He's built some nice receipts for Ralph, in terms of club seats and season tickets.

Yeah. I thought it was funny when his kid 'ran away' from the menacing new logo.

Unless the Bills finish worse than the Texans, he won't be available.

Sigh. I mentioned Vilma as an example of a person who was described as a guy w/ potential when he was drafted. They said that because he basically was still learning the position and had plenty of room to improve. How is Scott different than Big Mike? Nobody's suggesting any team take a #4 pick and draft Scott, that's how. I mention him as someone else who merits 1st round consideration @ LT. That's all. Is he the caliber of LT that D'Brickashaw Ferguson is? No, but he doesn't suck and is far from a "reach". I don't even know if I hope he ends up a Bill. I kinda would like to see us draft a run stuffing DT w/ our first round pick......and Scott will possibly not be around when our 2nd round pick comes up. Now, if he somehow is AND we get our big DT in the first, he'd be a great pick there.

I dunno. I got a kick (no pun intended) out of the one yesterday on Neil Rackers.