Buftex

This should be required viewing...you don't want to be a swirly Stan, do you?

According to Ainge, in his press conference yesterday, he said he was being "very honest" when he says that they hadn't given any serious thought to a replcement, because, up untiil Monday, he thought there was no way a deal was going to be done, and Doc would be back. Ainge was saying all the PC things, and was insistent that there was no feeling of betrayal from him, or ownership...but you could tell he was genuinely disappointed. The owners only reference to that was "we had kind of developed a 12 year plan with this coach, to rebuild...but it took a detour after 9". The owner, and Ainge, also dispelled the popular notion being spewed out all over on ESPN, that this was the Celtics choice..it was all Doc. Rivers himself even said that he could just feel it was time for a change. I think Ainge knows that Boston fans, in all sports, are notoriously bitter when they perceive that they are being slighted...I think he was doing a lot of spin control, so it isn't ugly when the Clippers come to TD next season. Oh well..that is sports...or moreover, that is big business. I have come off my legde a little since the other day, I don't hate Doc, but man, I am really disappointed with this development..hard enough to see great players get old and fade away...but it realy hurts when a guy who has so much to offer (not to mention had 3 years left on a deal) chooses to walk away from your team. It may sound corny, but rooting for the Bills and Sabres my whole life, as much as I love both teams, I was starting to forget how much fun sports can be when you have a good team to root for...it was kind of feeling like more of a chore. I have been a Celtics fan since the Braves left Buffalo, and they have given me lots of joy over the last 35 years or so...but even they had tailed off miserably after the late 80's. When they added Garnett and Allen in the summer of 2007, it was a great ride..and Rivers was a big part of that. Sure, they only won one championship, but I just loved the character of those teams...I was really proud to root for them... they had an "old school" toughness and resovle that seems to be missing in sports, to a large degree, these days. They weren't always the most talented team, they might not have even been the better "team" every night..but man, they played their asses off more often than not and were never afraid of the big moments. So, for that, I give Doc a lot of credit... I have a weird feeling, Danny Ainge will end up coaching the C's next year...there have been rumours about Brian Shaw (hired by the Nuggets, finally!) and Vinny Del Negro... I really want no part of Vinny... not crazy about the idea of Ainge either, but I think he has done a credible job as a GM, and since he is the architect of the team, let him see, first hand, what he has.

Congrats!

Wow, if more people cared about hockey, that Bruins loss would go down as one of the all-time greatest "sports meltdowns". I hate the Bruins, though I admit, I admire the way they play...but the petty part of me took a little glee in seeing Charra play such a big role in the Bruins demise...what a Bufffalo (fill in the team) like ending for them...had to have sucked big time for Bruins fans who were actually at the game. Would have liked to see a game 7, because this was the best finals series I can remember in a while...but what a memorable ending. I must say, I don't see a ton of the Blackhawks in the regular season...why does everyone (proverbial everyone) hate Patrick Kane so much? Every time I see him he is doing something great...is this just a case of envy (see Sidney Crosby) or is the guy really a putz? Cab drivers don't get to vote on this...

Just watching the interview with Jim, from his football camp yesterday, you can see the toll the surgery took on him...he looks drastically different than he did just a few weeks ago when he announced his condition. Tough guy, you could see he was in a lot of pain but he was trying to be as chipper as possible. Always pullling for Jim Kelly.

I am predicting Don goes to California and offs himself at Joshua Tree, or something like that. He checked out of that job early in the season... I think he is resigned to killing himself, or living a drastically different life than he has as Don Draper. I think we will see next season (the last) Don coming to terms with Dick Whitman (taking his kids to the "bad neighborhood" to see where he grew up, telling his story to the Hershey execs, letting Megan walk off all signs), and whatever that entails. His days as Don Draper are coming to an end. If you ever notice, before each episode, they say "previously on Mad Men" and they show you some key moments, from throughout the series (not necessarily just the previous week) that they want you to keep in mind...one they have shown a few times is Don, in his suit coat, face down in the swimming pool, his near drowning at the hippie pool party. Also, a few times, they have shown Sally on the phone, talking to Don saying "I don't know anything about you". All in all, IMO, not the best season of "Mad Men", but it rebounded nicely the last few weeks...from the moment Don "re-connected" with Betty things kind of took off. For some reason, this season, for me, kind of plowed through a lot of little story-lines without any real insight. I took away from the Bob Benson story, more from his understanding with Pete, that he is just using Joan as a rung on his ladder to success, as Rodger had warned him not to do. Perhaps, if the **** hits the proverbial fan, the partners will have to deal with him..it will be interesting to see how much differently they treated him than Don/DIck. Benson is obviously a con-man of some kind...seems him hooking his 'friend", Milano (?) up with Pete's mother was just a ploy to get at the Campbell fortunes, real or imagined. Maybe Milano was conning Bob Benson too...Bobs' reaction to Petes' accusation seemed pretty honest. Bob Benson is a social climber..listening to his "how to succeed in business" records...I think he knows, by getting in good with Joan, he as a valuable ally in the company. Rodger can't mess with him, because he wants desperately to be in Joans' good graces...so, by extension, Rodger becomes a professional ally with Bob. Pete has already decided that he is going to try to use his "secret" about Bob as tool of manipulation, so he has Pete too... nobody seems to want to cross Joan. Her "sacrifice" for the company seems to have made her "untoucable" to everyone but Peggy. But even there, she has the "pants of the ya-ya sisterhood" to her advantage. In a way, Joan has as much, if not more, power than any of the partners. Loved the scene where Bob puts Pete (not a great driver) on the spot in front of the Chevy execs. "You can't drive a stick?" For a minute, realizing the show is coming to an end, I was thinking Pete might die in that little sports car. His father dies in a plane crash, his mother drowns after falling off a boat, and he dies in an automobile, driving it in a show-room no less! Maybe Petes' brother completes the circle and dies in a motorcycle accident! Speaking of Rodger...it seemed just a season ago, that Sterling was kind of in the same place as Don finds himself in. Desperate, not as important as he once was perceived to be, and kind of a pariah for those who once considered him the companys greatest asset. I have never been fired from a job, but I have seen it happen a few times...the person being sort of "blind sided" by their bosses. I know, Don is a partner, so he can't be "fired" in the traditional sense, but forcing him to take time off, sort of a suspension, is kind of the same thing. That was a pretty great, albeit uncomfortable, scene. Question: maybe I missed something, but was it implied that Pete was heading to California, long term, to work as well? Petes' whole story this season was kind of hard to figure...his wife (foxy Allison Brie) was kind of looking at him lovingly, like maybe "lets' give it another try", but then next scene he is talking about living in California. Is he going to work with Ted? Did Duck find him a job on the left coast too? I was a little confused.

Maybe...being a fan (FAN-ATIC ralph w ) maybe my feelings are a little raw on this, but I think the Celtics come out with crap on this one...they lose the coach that was the cornerstone of their franchise, and they get a mere 1st round pick (likely back 1/3) of the round in two years. I loved the job that Doc did with the Celtics....he got a ring, and honeslty, got more out of them than I thought he would the 4 seasons after...but I think his lack of committment to his word was a big let down to a lot of people. I guess I expect more from a coach than I do players in this area. Rajon Rondo may be the only one happy with this. The amount of money saved is minimal, in regards to the hole it leaves in the foundation of the franchise. Not to be repetitive, but the ideal rebuild, you add good young players through the draft, and develop them to play the kind of ball you expect from them. But, your front office also tries to add young free-agents...it is no secret that most players do not gravitate toward Boston, storied history and all. Doc was the very face of the franchise. Remember that Paul Pierce claims to have cried when he was drafted by the Celtics, Garnett had to be talked into accepting a trade to Boston...it was after talking to Rivers that he relented. Ah...so you do have a motive!

Maybe so, but I think there is a very great chance that Kevin Garnett, if he plays in 2013-14, does it in a Clippers uniform. Yeah, I get that. Why I said it isn't the ultimate factor. But, you are assuming that every move forced by a player, or a coach, is best for the franchise...I don't believe that to be true.

I see this sentiment expressed a lot, whenenver anyone expresses disgust (warrented or not) over player or team actions. But don't these leagues rely on fans to be selfish? If fans weren't selfish, there would be absolutely no reason for leagues to exist. It's not like these people are curing cancer, they are entertainers... fan opinion isn't the ultimate deciding factor in where players or coaches go, but it is a factor. Leauges market to their fans, playing on their team loyalty...they have for decades. It shouldn't be so unreasonable for fans to expect the same from teams, or players.

Yeah, that is the spin they are trying to put on it now, but I do not buy it for one second...if the Celtics really didn't want to pay Rivers, why would they have singned him to a 5 year extension, acknowledging that they wanted him around for a "re-build", which Doc professed he wanted to see through. They have known for about 2 or 3 years they were running on empty with Garnett-Pierce-Allen. At the time, I recall, Ainge saying that having a guy like Doc Rivers, so popular around the NBA, would be a great assett in accelerating a re-build. I understand player movement, as there is salary cap.. I don't believe that Celtics ownership was really that concerned abot how much they paid Rivers. There is no salary cap hit for coaches. Rivers was their greatest assett. Also, if the Celtics were truly the ones who put this into motion, why did it take so long? Why did they refuse to let two other teams talk to him? Why did Ainge, repeatedly, say that he wanted Rivers on the sidelines for the Celtics next season? The spin is coming out so everyone can save face...like those NFL teams that always get "exactly the guys they wanted" in the NFL draft. And, for Rivers, he heads to LA with his "great guy" image intact. They got almost nothing in return, IMO, because Doc held all the power. If the Celtics wouldn't let him go, he could, as he has hinted at the last 3 years, just sit out a year. I think Rivers wanted out, forced the Celtics hand, and then they had to scramble to get something, anything, in return. I don't think they said no trade could happen...just that the trade would have to make some sense for both teams, when both movements were measured on their own merits. Celtics trade their highly re-garded head-coach for a scratch-off lottery ticket down the road because they have no other option. I don't know how successful they have been, but the NBA is attempting to, at least give the appearence, that they are trying to keep some parity in the league.

Doc was under contract. LeBron was not. This is more like the college coach who bails on his recruiting class. All one week away from the draft. You obviously missed my point. My fault. I will try to write shorter posts. I have no problem with guys following their dreams, and I wasn't knocking LeBron...quite the opposite. Doc not only broke his word, he broke his contract

As a huge Celtics fan, I gotta say, I am very disappointed in Doc Rivers. I don't buy, for a second, the sudden spin on this, that getting rid of Doc was actually instigated by the Celtics. In the end, it may turn out to be a good thing for the Celtics, but a first round pick, in 2 years, from a team that should be one of the better in the league is pretty worhless. The NBA draft ain't like the NFL draft. Top 5 picks have some immediate value...after that there isn't much to distinguish from a #6-64. Doc preached "Utumbo" (one heart) with the Celtics...he publically derided Ray Allen when he played out his contract, and chose to pursue rings elsewhere... so now, the leader of that team wants out. Casual NBA fans might forget (but Celtics followers don't) that Doc Rivers was considered one of the worst coaches in the NBA, prior to the arrival of Garnett and Allen. The Celtics stuck with him, when a lot of other teams would not have, and gave him a team to win a ring with. They made him an "elite championship" coach. He waffled at the end of every season about coming back..then, prior to last season he publicaly committed to the Celtics, saying he realized they were about to be in a rebuild mode, and he was committed to that re-build. As a Celtics fan, what Doc Rivers has done here is worse than what Lebron James did to Cleveland, and certainly far worse than what he chastized Ray Allen for doing prior to this season. Doc was the Celtics greatest assestt in a re-build. For irrational reasons, young black NBA players do not gravitate to the Celtics when they are free-agents. Doc's greatest contribution to the franchise was that he was the ultimate recruiter for the franchise. They gave him pretty much everything he wanted...paid him handsomely...so how does he re-pay them? He waffles about wheter he wants to come back. This wasn't "I need to take a year off and re-charge my batteries" move...it was more "I don't want to be here to re-build, i want to win now" move. I am not going to root against Rivers, because what the Celtics did the last 5 years or so, under his leadership kind of re-vived my love of sports...but it is going to kill me to see he, KG and Paul Pierce playing in LA...for the Buffalo Clippers. May feelings may soften by the start of next season, but I find this whole development really depressing. The fact that I loathe the Clippers doesn't help any... I predict that the Clippers owner (one of the worse in the NBA) will do everything in his power to blow their chance at a ring. I know what you mean, but I think in this instance, the leauge was right to act. The rule is, you can't trade players for coaches..but you can trade draft picks. All of the talk surrounding Doc to the Clippers revolved around Garnett following him, as if it was a package deal. It is a good rule when you think about it. Essentially, the Celtics are getting a scratch-off lottery ticket in 2 years, for Rivers... if Doc is the coach the Clippers think he is, the pick the Clippers surrender will likely be in the 25-30 range... the eqivalent of a 4th round pick in the NFL.

A guy who delivers Coke to the building I work in is a huge Jets fan. As someone who grew up Buffalo, and lived in NYC for four and half years, it is pretty sad the only "hardcore" Jets fan I have ever met was in the middle of Texas. He is probably around my age (48), maybe a couple years older...we always give each-other crap about our respective lousy teams. Sometimes it ends up more each of us making a case for how tough it is to root for our teams. You know what his biggest embarrassment is as a Jets fan is? "Even friggin' Joe Namath hates us." A couple of years ago, when it seemed like the Jets were on the cusp of being a power-house, he talked so much smack about them, and how they were going to do "this and that" once the playoffs started...the way he talked, you would have thought the Jets had been a perennial playoff team with a fistful of Super Bowl rings... I used to feel a little pity for him when they would get bounced from the playoffs...I know the feeling all too well.

No, not yet...

Every time I get discouraged as a Bills fan...I think about what it would be like to be a Jets fan...it makes me feel a little better.

Agreed on Lisa Fischer...she has an amazing voice...they started doing "Gimmie Shelter" on that tour as a "show stopper" to feature her as a vocalist. The way that do it now is worlds different than they did the song on the early 70's tours. That 1989 tour was the first one where they used back-up vocalists on-stage. As for Sheryl Crow, yeah, I thought her first 3 albums were really good but have pretty much lost interest in her at this point...she has the stench of John Mayer on her now...and her albums are just dull with a capital "D". But those early hits were solid...always thought "If It Makes You Happy" would have been a good single for the Stones. And yeah, she is pretty milfy, even today.... Good call...Gram Parson's "Grievous Angel" is a desert island record for me, thanks in no small part to Emmylou and GP's vocal chemistry.

Spam!

Put faith in the coaching staff you just hired, and go with EJ Manuel. Sorry if this point has already been made, but remember Vince Young's rookie season with the Titans? He went 8-3 as a starter, after it was apparent that Kerry Collins couldn't eek any wins out with that team. Young was a very gifted athlete who had great success in college...he had a huge arm, and was very mobile. Young won in the NFL, not because he was a great NFL QB, but because he was a great athlete, playing a position that allowed him to experience some success, and pull out wins. EJ Manuel seems similar in a lot of ways, except, I believe, the most important one...he is smart and has been described as "very coachable". This is what derailed VY... he never learned to become a good NFL QB. If you trust that you have the right coaches in place, let Manuel start, enjoy some success...let the whole team enjoy some success...build some momentum for the future. That is the Bills biggest asset right now...for the first time in about 15 years there is a sense that there is something new going on with the Bills. Plugging Kevin Kolb in to start 5-8 games, hoping for a 4-4 record isn't new. IMO, if you put Manuel in from the start, you hope he succeeds, and you get a gauge as to what he is as an NFL QB. We already pretty much know what Kolb is. If Manuel goes out and is just terrible, and the coaches feel it will be a detriment to his development to continue, you can always go to Kolb... the notion that a rookie must sit on the bench and learn is, more and more, becoming antiquated. Manuel was drafted as a franchise QB...the future is now!

Well, yeah, but they are all copying the original..and most, IMO, use too much vocal pyro-technics.. Lisa Fischer has been the Stones live fe-male back-up singer since the 1989 tour. More often than not, she is Jagger's singing partner when they do the song live. The woman has an amazing range...maybe even more so than Merry Clayton. The difference is, though, when Clayton sang it, it was a studio track, and her "back-up" vocal, mixed with Richards' menacing guitar work, and the desperation of the lyrics all work together. When they do the song live, now, it is done as more of a showcase for Fischer, almost like Mick is just along for the ride. Still sounds great, but her role is different in the way it is performed. Fischer has been one of the premiere studio vocalists in R-N-B for years...she is always the counter to Luther Vandross on his baby-making jams. I have seen the Stones bring up Joan Osborne to do what Fischer does, and she can hold her own... but I have also seen Sheryl Crow do the same thing, and she sounded awful...not to knock Crow as an artist, but I can't for the life of me figure out how she got her start as a live-backup singer for Michael Jackson. It must have been cuz she looks good in skimpy outfits, she isn't really a great singer at all.

Yes, Merry Clayton was a fine singer. The Rolling Stones, gun to my head, are probably my favorite band ever, and "Gimmie Shelter" is probably my favorite song of theirs, ever...Claytons' vocals are a huge part of that. Not long ago, an elderly gentlemen came into the record store I work at, looking for some Ray Charles stuff. As we were talking, he said he was looking for the specific recordings, because he had recently found out that his cousin, who he didn't know all that well, was once a Raelett... he didn't have a lot of info, and didn't own a computer. So, I started looking into it for him...trying to figure out when his cousin would have been singing with Charles. Came to find out, there were dozens of women, over time who spent time as Raeletts. Information about them was sketchy for the most part, but from what I could deduce, his cousin sang with them at the same time that Merry Clayton was in the group.

Another great badn of yore..though still around with a bit different lineup...NRBQ! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s416hHKiA_w

Springteen pays tribute: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/21/bruce-springsteen-james-gandolfini_n_3477837.html

Always loved the backup vocals on Johnny Rivers' stuff...particularly "Mountain Of Love"... skip to about the 2 minute mark to really here them.. or listen to the whold song, cuz it rocks!

JW...as one who worships the Stones as "gods", which is the other "best album" of the era....you already mentioned "Exile On Main Street"? Just curious, because on any given day, my favorite rock album of all time could fluctuate between "Exile","Stickey Fingers", "Let It Bleed", and "Beggar's Banquet". I like other albums of theirs a whole lot, but, for me, no rock band has ever been as flawless as the Stones were during that run of albums. I would even throw the live album "Get Yer Ya-Yas Out" in there...because the live performances of some of those songs takes them into places that you didn't hear on the studio recordings..they sounded more menacing and dangerous than the studio albums. It is the earliest live album by a pop/rock band that I can think of, where they weren't trying to sound like the album... a conscious effort to create new songs out of old songs...a concept that rarely works, but Stones hit it out of the park, IMO. Having Mick Taylor in the line-up certaily didn't hurt. Seems like his influence on the bands was more pronounced in live performance than on studio album at that point (1969) I normally fall back on "Let It Bleed" as my favorite..."Gimmie Shelter", "Monkey Man", "Midnight Rambler...amazing songs, amaznig art. Maybe this is another topic for another thread...

Antoine Winfield and Pat Williams clear their throats in unison...