bartshan-83

ANSWER: 1. e : PHON = loudness unit (phonograph) 2. h : FEME = wife (feminine) 3. g : COCO = palm tree (coconut) 4. b : FISC = royal treasury (fiscal) 5. a : GROT = cave (grotto) 6. f : BACH = live like an unmarried man (bachelor) 7. c : DEFI = a challenge (defiance) 8. d : GRUE = shudder of fear (gruesome) Well, done Sage, linkfiends and Scott (bonus for nailing gruesome as well). Nanker, you and I had the same wrong answer (flip-flopping 7 & 8). I thought GRUE would be "a challenge" as in GRUELING.

Word. What kind of rice you using? Rita's is the truth. They had a special going on around Easter when they had Peeps-flavored ice. Awesome.

Slice of pizza and Rita's Swedish Fish flavored water ice. Incredible. Woah...sounds legit! Homemade you say?

YESTERDAY: Wedding stuff (although Dan's answer was better ) TODAY: The unusual four-letter words below are all acceptable tournament Scrabble words. Even if you don't know them, see if you can match them with their meaning through your knowledge of common words that contain them. 1. PHON 2. FEME 3. COCO 4. FISC 5. GROT 6. BACH 7. DEFI 8. GRUE a. cave b. royal treasury c. a challenge d. shudder of fear e. loudness unit f. live like an unmarried man g. palm tree h. wife

Apologies...I was out of the office all morning. Yesterday's Answer: 480 Congratulations to SonofWade, Jim in Anchorage, linksfiend and DC Tom. TODAY: "Eventful Rhymes" Rhyme each of the words below so that all the answers relate to a certain event. 1. Kings 2. Clown 3. Stake 4. Charter 5. Cows 6. Search 7. Gusher 8. Broom 9. Deception 10. Fried 11. Ghost 12. Sinister

I got one of those daily calendars on my desk and it has a puzzle, word game, trivia, etc. every day. I spend a few minutes on it each morning when I get in. Some are fun, some are stupid. As long as they aren't too dumb, I'll try to post the daily one each day. I'll start you off with a pretty easy one from today: A sealed rectangular box measuring 8x6x18 contains 864 sugar cubes, each measuring 1x1x1. How many of the sugar cubes are touching the box?

C'mon....no mockery or anger. Just a little fun (well, maybe a little mockery too). I shouldn't have deleted the winking smiley face before I posted. Your predictive powers were impressive...as we were all reminded several times. Oops...my fault. I meant to post that in the Jimmy Spagnola thread. Just got mixed up, I guess...

Woah! Talk about nailing it. Why have you hidden this from us this whole time? If I were you, I would have been beating this like a dead horse all throughout the thread. J-E-T-S Jets JEts JETS.

Disclaimer: I wasn't old enough to appreciate the Showtime Lakers or Larry's Celtics...I started watching basketball just as MJ made his rise. This is not directed at you, AJ, but I think for the most part, peoples' gripes against the NBA are unfounded, exaggerated and often contradictory. Most arguments seem to fall into three groups: (1) Lack of talent (2) Thug culture (3) Style of play (1) Since the mid-2000s, the star quality in the league has vastly increased. LeBron, Wade, Howard, Carmelo, Paul, Rondo, Williams, Durant, Bosh, etc. represent a great depth of young superstars. The elder-statesmen (Kobe, Duncan, Pierce, KG, Allen, Dirk, Nash, etc.) having numerous rings between them and still lead winning teams. (2) This was partially legit and partially overblown. A lot of players got in the news for the wrong reasons and the league rightfully paid the price. But a lot of it was an audience's inability to relate to baggy shorts and tattoos. Interestingly, the NFL has never had such a "thug" stigma, but the same kinds of people reviled on the hard-court populate the gridiron. (3) This is usually separated into two groups: (a) The NBA is nothing but one-on-one dunking and threes (b) The pace of play is boring. The first one is for the most part wrong, yet it is comically ironic. Usually the people championing this viewpoint are the same ones praising Michael Jordan for being the best player of all-time. His Airness is SOLELY responsible for spawning an entire generation of me-first, one-on-one players who grew up wanting to "Be Like Mike™." He is the tongue-wagging, ****-talking, through-the-legs-dribbling, 40-shot-jacking, GTFO of my way architect of the style of play that so many criticize. If you truly think team basketball is dead, then you can blame it on your hero. Now the pace of play argument obviously has no defense; the game has slowed down significantly. More defense, more set plays, less fast breaks. I personally never experienced the time when 145-132 was commonplace so I can't relate. But I could see how the game might seem less exciting to those who lived through that. Basically, the NBA has one major weakness right now, and it is really a Catch-22....the league is too nice. After the Palace Brawl, the NBA **** its pants and declared all-out war on its bad image. The results have been mostly great. The culture has been cleaned up significantly and faces of the league are seemingly good guys. But it lost an edge when this happened. The players are all buddies! Everyone hugs after games and hits the clubs together. If two guys so much as glare at each other, referees fall over each other to issues Double-Technicals (the scourge of the league!). While a lot of this is great, the intensity suffers and the fans become less invested. No more MJ choking Reggie Miller after two hours of jawing at each other. No more Charles Oakley clotheslining someone when the come into the lane. Hell, last year when LeBron didn't shake everyone's hand after the Magic loss, David Stern seemed about ready to check him into rehab! What a joke. It's great that everyone is buddy-buddy, but I miss animosity and bad blood. It's part of sports. The NBA has artificially removed it because it is scared to death of another Brawl. But it makes the game unnatural and wishy-washy. And realistically, they are in a tough spot. People pine for the old days but as soon as a few fights start, the same ignorant "thug" card will be brought up again. But overall, the quality of play and quality of players has been very good for the past few years...and the future looks bright. A lockout is probably all but certain, but nothing new there (or unique from other sports).

I have nothing helpful to add, but I just wanted to say that I love how you phrased this. FIRED! I'm definitely going to start saying that for subscriptions as well...far more satisfying than canceling, discontinuing, etc. "ESPN Insider has been giving me useless information so I fired its worthless ass. And GQ magazine? It showed up late last month so I fired the bastard too!"

Ahh...last game of the year. Always kind of sad on the last day of any sport. I'd be pretty shocked if the Lakers didn't sew this up. Losing Game 7 on your court is pretty ugly. And as much as I think Perkins is a scowl-making crybaby, his loss is huge. At best, it evens the up the front court with Bynum being semi-useless. At worst, it allows the Lakers to pound on Baby and KG. But.....I'm feeling Boston +7. That's a lot of points to give to a prideful team of veteran champions in the biggest game of the year. Hopefully we get some fireworks and not a replay of either of the last 2 games.

Who cares about the Redskins changing their defense or not?? Haynesworth really thinks its reasonable to sign a multi-year deal and be guaranteed that his role will never change? What a joke! Sure Albert....here's $100MM. And since that is not enough, we cross-our-heart pinky-promise that the exact same coaching staff and scheme will remain static for the better part of a decade. Just as long as you're happy. Bottom line: The guy wanted "Snyder Money" and could have given two-***** about his "role" when he signed on the dotted line at exactly 12:00:01 midnight on Free Agency day 2009. !@#$ him.

The obvious solution is (and always has been) to pay college athletes a modest salary for the time and work they put into the school. "Student"-athletes in moneymaking sports (Football, Men's BB) create a financial windfall for the universities they attend that is severely under-compensated. This whole Big 10, Big XII, Pac-10 fizzled-shake-up was just a huge money-grab for the conferences. I don't agree with the "free education" argument because the behavior of the parties involved belies its equity. Every college football program in the country uses up their scholarship allotment because they know it's a steal on ROI. And scholarships have been the standard compensation for generations. Yet the amount of money generated by the sports has increased astronomically. Cases like Reggie Bush are extreme and I'd wager that the vast majority of misconduct (or temptation to engage in it) occurs with players who have nothing and want just a little. It's easy to cast them as spoiled and greedy with their free education, room and board and perks of being an athlete. But it sucks having no money in college (anytime actually). I knew guys at ND who were ballin on the field but didn't have 10 bucks to grab a pizza. They can't get jobs, FOOTBALL is their job and I guarantee it's like working 40 hours and going to school full-time. How tempting would it be to take $1500 from a booster when you're scoring TDs every week but can't afford to take your girl to dinner and a movie? I don't condone it, but I understand it. Paying for condos and buying kids cars is not the reality of college cheating. It's the 1K payments, the plane tickets or the cushy no-show job. Let's say you work at the Gap in college 35-40 hrs/week...you might pull in $1000 a month. I bet if colleges paid players that amount there would be a huge drop in impropriety among NCAA athletes. The only obstacle (and it's pretty major) is Title IX and how you would deal with only compensating athletes from revenue-generating sports. I'm not sure how to answer that. But the system we are in is broken...it survives only because people don't care enough to upset the status quo.

Blue, I don't see how Texas is as big a loser as you'd think. If Chip Brown is to be believed (and I think he is despite the fact that he is now spinning away for UT since his source was from within them), it looks like UT faced a tough spot and got the most out of it. They aren't the shining knight who saved the Big XII, but they didn't want to be blamed for its demise. Supposedly, the UT network would still be a few years away and it wouldn't show football, but it is still a step in the right direction of independently guiding your own brand. I think UT's schedule will be just fine with some good OOC games (there has been talk of an ND series for awhile and further talk that ND's AD Jack Swarbrick was involved in this whole Big XII revival). As a Notre Dame guy, of course I'm pro-Independence and I think Texas has put themselves in a very good situation going forward. There were plenty of reasons why the Pac-10 was a bad idea (fuzzy $$ numbers, lack of geographical fit, opening recruiting beds to West Coast schools, playing in a ridiculous 16-team conference, etc.). The Big XII is definitely weaker now, but UT isn't.

Been away from here for awhile...sorry to miss out on all the action. With apologies to my boy Smokinandjokin (wherever you are son), USC's actions throughout the entire investigation and reaction to the decision have been nothing short of bizarre and embarrassing. They F'd up, tried the "who knew?" defense and then got slammed. In the meantime, they proudly gave the middle finger to the NCAA by hiring Kiffin and continue to wave it around through Garrett and company's ridiculous reaction ("they all want to be Trojans...they're jealous!)" I mean, really....WTF? Garrett is definitely mentally unbalanced and Kiffin just doesn't seem to realize the situation he is in. And now Carroll is chiming in from Seattle toeing the company line? Just too much... As an ND fan, I don't want to see a weak USC. I hate that these sanctions may very well cripple them for awhile. But they got what they deserved, and from the looks of their reaction, they just still don't seem to get it.

Great game, one of the best of the playoffs. I had my finger on the remote to turn it off it probably 4-5 times when LA built those huge leads. But Phoenix charged back each time. I liked LA's strategy of making Nash be a scorer not a distributor. Would have been great to see it go 5 more minutes. And Ron Ron was definitely approaching crazy-mode. "Say Queen's Bridge!"

Please... I don't know about "far more deserving", but Nash doesn't need to feel a shred of doubt over that MVP. Both he and Shaq did great things for their teams, but there had to be a winner. And I think they got it right. Nash improved the Suns from 29-53 to 62-20 in his 1st year (+33 wins). In the seven games he didn't play, they went 2-5. Shaq took a 42-40 team to 59-23 (+17) wins, but in the nine games he missed, the Heat went 6-3. It's arguable whether or not he was even the best player on his own team. [i think actually Dirk got shafted that year and should have gotten more credit. He held that Dallas team together (actually won 6 more games) after essentially trading Nash, Jamison and Walker for Terry, Stackhouse and Dampier.] For awhile it could be argued that maybe Nash was a product of D'Antoni's system, but that has clearly turned out to be false. The guy's a champ and he deserves his hardware.

No argument that the Suns probably can't win this thing, but what makes you think both Boston and Orlando would destroy them? They will likely bow out to the Lakers in 6, but they've given them a decent fight. So unless you think both Boston and Orlando are far superior to LA (doubtful), why couldn't Phoenix at least hang with them? If anything, LA is setup to dominate them the best of the three.

Howard and Perkins are both children. Howard has amazingly managed to squander a good deal of his "superstar goodwill" by throwing his little mini-tantrums and leading the lead in eye-rolling. If he would just grow up and keep his mouth shut, officials would cut him more slack and he could dominate even more. Perkins is just as Special K described him...spoiled and whiny. He get's unfairly tagged a lot, but that's the way it goes for run-of-the-mill big men. However, BOTH technicals were BS, and the league should rescind them. This whole "double-tech" craze the NBA is entangled in is a joke, and even worse in the playoffs. Perk should never have been whistled, but with the second one, that's the risk you run when you whine about everything relentlessly. Basically, talking back to the refs is part of the game, but there are two ways to approach it; like a man or like a child. Jordan, Kobe, Wade, Ray Allen...even LeBron...all have had their share of techs for jawing too much (some more than others). But right or wrong, they come at the refs with authority. Guys like Howard and sadly one of my favorites, Allen Iverson for some reason choose the whiny route. Refs are human...who do you think is going to get the better treatment?

That's me exactly. I'm not a huge soccer fan, but I'll definitely try to catch the USA games and maybe one of the final matches. A nap is not completely out of the question either. Back in '02, I rented a beach house with a few buddies and it happened to be during the Seoul World Cup so the games came on at like 5 am. So we'd just drink all night, stay awake for the games and pass out afterward. That's the way to get into a sport!

Yup. Been doing that for about an hour. Probably time to stop.

That was sick!

Save your energy. I used to hate those kind of people, now I just laugh at them...and I'll tell you why: As I explained in this thread, I've only been following the Phillies for a few years and my timing couldn't have been better. It's awesome to cheer for a winner and watch a quality team. But two years ago when they won the World Series, I felt like an impostor. I was at a bar near my law school watching the final game with a packed house of die-had Phillies fans. When Lidge threw that final strike, the place went apeshit. I was thrilled, but I knew I wasn't feeling what everyone else was. And I wasn't some team-swapper...I was a genuine fan. I just didn't have the investment others had. A guy I didn't even know very well came over and gave me a huge hug. I watched as another friend called his father and tears were streaming down his face as they talked. That's how it will be for me when the Bills win a Super Bowl. So people can jump ship and front-run all they want and they can fake it. But trust me, when they are pumping their fists and celebrating "their" championship, they aren't truly feeling it inside. That feeling, the feeling of unadulterated joy and relief, is only something you get when you stuck by during the lows. And you can't fake that.

I'm still very leery of Philadelphia sports fans in general...and it feels weird to be one of "them." You could hear a pin drop in the Vet when the Eagles hit their lull in the mid-90s (except for when they decided get excited about something like throwing batteries or booing an injured player). Then they came out in droves during the good times only to whine about their probowl QB for the past 5 years. Tards. I went to Game 2 of the 2007 NLDS vs. Colorado. Backs against the wall (already down 0-1) and trailing 10-5 with 2+ innings left and people just sat there like stiffs. No pumping the team up, no energy...just loser defeatism. Things have definitely changed since the WS though...I think it took a championship to knock a collective chip off the city's shoulder. You have partial seasons? I try to make it up to 5-6 per year. We should grab a beer at McFaddens some time.

I get what you are saying. Shirley there is a difference between the situations; I agree. I just think the result would be the same. In essence, one team (NE) was breaking the rules and not getting caught and that affected the outcome of the game. It's on a different scale from in-game penalties, but it is essentially the same idea. If you told that same gambler that one team had devised a good scheme of holding on every play but not getting caught, they probably wouldn't make the bet either. There have been point-shaving scandals before...I'm not aware of any successful lawsuits against any of the major sports leagues or NCAA by disenfranchised gamblers.