because it's that time of year, i'd like to post my top 18 records of 2003. (according to my count, i've purchased 18 records during 2003.) one record, travis' 12 memories, did not get enough spins to earn a ranking. (i did listen to the album a few times while sleepless on friday night, and i do think 'quicksand,' the opener, is superior. no opinion on the rest of it.) beulah's yoko will also go unranked, as it was stolen within two weeks and five spins of my acquisition of it. as i recalled, i did enjoy the record quite a bit.

the rest:

16. black rebel motorcycle club - take them on, on your own
15. the pernice brothers - yours, mine and ours
14. the thrills - so much for the city
13. grandaddy - sumday (also a theft, although i'd had it for five months...must not have made an impression)
12. guided by voices - hardcore ufo's box set
11. the joggers - solid guild - super album. super discovery.
10. ted leo and the pharmacists - hearts of oak
9. the shins - chutes too narrow
8. the new pornographers - electric version
7. the wrens - the meadowlands
6. the white stripes - elephant
5. the decemberists - her majesty the decemberists
4. the decemberists - castaways and cutouts - i guess we'll call it a 2003 release, since its first wide release was this year
3. death cab for cutie - transatlanticism
2. the strokes - room on fire
1. guided by voices - earthquake glue

this is the first time since i've listened to the band that their release has been considered my number one of the year. i think earthquake glue is their best record since alien lanes, and the best pollard's released since speak kindly of your volunteer fire department (or maybe since 1996's not in my airforce.). quite an accomplishment.

not on this list, that certainly will be when it gets purchased/is received: the postal service's give up. i also purchased the rapture's echoes on saturday...it is really good, although i'll pass on the opportunity to rank it at the moment.

i'd also like to revisit my 2002 top ten, because i can. in parentheses is my ranking of the record this time last year. (five of my top ten were purchased during the 2003 calendar year. others have moved.)
10. hem - rabbit songs (7)
9. cody chesnuTT - the headphone masterpiece (N/R)
8. ...and you will know us by the trail of dead - source tags and codes (2)
7. blackalicious - blazing arrow (N/R)
6. the mountain goats - tallahassee (N/R)
5. guided by voices - universal truths and cycles (6)
4. the streets - original pirate material (N/R)
3. spoon - kill the moonlight (3)
2. bright eyes - lifted, or, the story is in the soil keep your ear to the ground (N/R)
1. interpol - turn on the bright lights (1)

falling out: brendan benson's lapalco (8/13), the breeders' title tk (5/16), the flaming lips' yoshimi battles the pink robots (9/14), the walkmen's everyone who pretended to like me is gone (4/12) and wilco's yankee hotel foxtrot (10/11)

i love northwestern wildcats victories, especially when they come against ncaa tournament qualifiers and especially when they come on last-second shots. t.j. parker will get the limited publicity for the win, being that he's the brother of the nba player and being that he did his a fadeaway 16-footer after going the length of the court in 4.6 seconds (sweet tyus that was beautiful!), but vedran vukusic played so damn well. he's such a complete player, it makes me sick. i don't know if he's quick enough to be an elite '3,' but he's quite a 'tweener.' other than the size-speed problem, i think the only weakness in his game is that he sometimes tries to force the backdoor pass, rather than opting for the 'kick-out-and-reset' method employed four times per possession. 'vu' put up a career-best 26 points tonight, including (i think) 5-for-9 from the arc.

the highlight of the game, other than t.j.'s game-winner and jitim young's 'hand of otto' tie-up to set up the buzzer beater was a vukusic three-pointer. it came at about the six-minute point, when some dude hit a trey to tie the game at 49 apiece, the first time the cats hadn't led since about 8 minutes into the game. on the ensuing possession, the 'cats ran their offense for about 25 seconds, before vu, icewater in the veins, stepped out and answered. at that point, it was apparent that the finish was going to be a good one (to me anyway).

today's game is also significant because it marks the first time in my life that i've done the whole sports bar thing to watch the cats, and come up victorious. my previous quad cities foray, this year's miami (ohio) football game, was an utter disaster. other trips to lovely sports fans pizza in bettendorf include the 2002 big ten tournament first round flameout against michigan, and last season's big ten hoops losses to michigan (blown first-half lead, at welsh-ryan), indiana (big ten opener) and michigan state. i also watched an ugly football loss to ohio with sumo and unstadt while in san francisco this fall.

there's a part of me that wishes coach carmody had scheduled a little lighter this year. facing a traditional northwestern schedule, this team's probably good enough for the NIT. but with colorado (loss), depaul (loss), florida state (loss) and illinois-chicago (huge game saturday) on the non-conference slate, i fear it'll be a post-seasonless career for jitim, which just shouldn't happen. god he's good

so i was at the library (who goes to the library? hello. these days, we use the internet, usually to research toasters.) on friday afternoon and i decided to pick up the bill james historical baseball abstract, his 2000 update of his 1985 "classic."

for a geek as myself (perhaps flax would qualify as well - i don't know if anyone else will), this is just a supremely enjoyable read. about 1,000 pages in length, the book goes through a decade-by-decade history of the sport, beginning in 1870, and rates the top 100 players at every position. (interestingly, 'pitcher' is listed only as one position. i would have preferred to have lefties and righties divided.)

of course, the decade histories aren't really histories in the traditional sense of the word, but instead a series of anecdotes, essays on historical minutiae, and an all-encompassing box which mentions, among other things, the decade's winningest pitcher, its ugliest player, and its most dishonorable star.

but the more fascinating section is, as is to be expected, the top 100 players at every position. i mean, i get to read about rennie stennett, and bubby murcer, and pirates greats don slaught and mike lavalliere. the descriptions range from eight-page career rundowns, to strange anecdotes about their youth, to lists of similar players, to 'what might have been' stories about guys like pete reiser. my favorite description is of delino deshields (2B, #74), whose comment is "Still building his legend." and indeed, he is.

in other news, i've received two written treatises regarding how a non-northwestern/non-bowling green fan could possibly be interested in seeing the motor city bowl. one included an exclamation point, and the other was a well-thought-out statement that essentially boiled down to "beer is good." and it is.

this week's sign that the apocalypse is upon us: flax is writing the classic "boring fantasy football post."

bowl season starts tomorrow. gots to make my picks. adios.

(p.s. it appears that old comments are, as guster would say, "lost and gone forever." it happens, i guess.)

for the record, i am not a fantasy football expert. i'm not even a playoff team. growl.

i will, however attempt to answer the questions in the previous shout out section.

to flax: under no circumstances would i start any player at new england. they're the best defense in the league - un-score-upon-able. start the other three. mccareins is more than respectable, expecially against the houstons.

to rico: as i recall, arizona is a far better team at home than on the road. cincinnati is playing 'marv'elous defense and, as i recall, san fran's is solid as well. arizona allowed 50 points last week, and 28 (to the bears) the week before. either they'll give up or they'll be real good. carolina really needs a win, and delhomme's the type that can get that win. i'd go with delhomme.

i wish there were something else to report in my life. i took an hour-long nap after work today.

boo-yah.

now surpassing michael jackson as the greatest mug shot of all time...


















the great george clinton


p.s. i don't even know what he did.

there appears to be a misconception regarding the miami (ohio) redhawks.

apparently, having the longest winning streak in football is not a feat to be recognized. apparently, having just one loss, on the road, in august, against a top 12 team, is not impressive. apparently, destroying the 'top' team in your conference - for the second time of the season - on the road - in the biggest game for both teams all season long - isn't something to be impressed with. apparently, having the nation's best quarterback and perhaps the nation's best offensive line doesn't mean anything.

no, i'm not saying that miami would knock off three top eight or four top 16 teams if the situation were to come upon them, but i'm saying that it could happen.

the difference between the ncaa hoops tournament and any 1-AA-style ncaa football tournament is that top teams - legit teams - will get left out of the football tournament. that is not the case in the hoops field.


and, by the way, this year's version of the bcs did get the top two teams in the nation correct. on the basis of winning percentage, on the basis of schedule strength, and on the basis of quality losses, oklahoma and lsu both had better seasons than usc. i don't care that usc got dealt a blow by having scheduled a bunch of traditionally strong teams that turned out to suck. and i don't care that human voters, who remember only what happens on a weekly basis, overrate the importance of usc's recent sexy wins. i do care that usc lost to freakin' 6-6 freakin' cal. the best team in the nation can not lose to cal.

and it also seems ludicrous to me that oklahoma, who was being hailed as the greatest team of all time on friday, is suddenly made out to be some sort of impostor. they spent a week being told "it doesn't matter if you lose to k-state...you'll still be in the title game" and they laid an egg in the big game. but they also blew out everyone in their path the rest of the season.

of course, if you want the two teams who were playing best at the time of their last game, you'd have a michigan-lsu championship.

but let's forget about this whole bcs-playoff-is the bowl system really worth it? debate. what it comes down to is this: in its current state, college football is the only major sport in which the regular season really means something. one bad game, one bad quarter can eliminate you from contention. it's the best, most compelling system in all of sports, and to change it would only hurt the sport.

i mean, who remembers who won the national hoops championship three days later?

unless jake delhomme puts up six touchdowns tonight and stephen davis gets hurt, it appears that willie's destroyers will wind up on the outside looking in in the 2003 fantasy football playoffs. this could have changed had i:

1) followed my instinct and acquired the jacksonville defense (shutout, two turnovers, a few sacks today)

2) started bobby engram, i guess

3) started josh reed, had i been a genius

4) not drafted badly

oh well. good vibes to delhomme.

at least the davenport darts are in, with a shot to make some real noise in the postseason.

in other news, i guess the bcs is a bit dumb, no? but, of course, the solution is not to offer some contingency plan, nor is it to create a playoff system. no, my friends, the option is to go back to the old system. that would put the postseason matchups this way:

rose bowl: USC vs. michigan
cotton bowl: oklahoma vs. florida state
fiesta bowl: lsu vs. texas

these are, of course, hypothetical matchups. but the point is that they would have made so many games interesting come the start of the new year. i mean, who in their right mind is planning on watching k-state and ohio state? utterly meaningless, and stupid.

why is the playoff system wrong?

to have the championship game to take place new year's day, you'd obviously have to back-date the system. an eight-team tournament would have to start three-plus weeks before the championship, a sixteen-team tourney four weeks. (i.e. this year's championship game would be thursday, january 1. that would put the playoff dates as december 20, december 13, and december 6 - yesterday.)

teams that would be left out of an eight-team field: k-state, for one. florida state, for another.
teams that would be left out of a sixteen-team field: ole miss, or nebraska, or probably miami (ohio).

the point is, unlike the ncaa hoops tournament, there's no possible way you could get every team with even a reasonable chance to win into the field.

and you can't have the championship game in january. you're already cutting too far into the basketball season. and you can't start the tournament in november, because schools are too reliant on the 12- and 13-game schedule. and this ignores the 'academic constraints' of such a tournament.

point being, a playoff system is a bad idea. as is the bcs.

there's no perfect way to determine this thing; let's just let 'em play who they play, and then argue about it.


in other news, i generally find sideline reporters to be harmless people. many do a horrible job of it, but it is an artform that can be done well. and a reporter who asks probing questions can often get reasonable answers. (unless you ask lloyd carr. he's just a dick about it.) and i'd rather hear mark richt spout cliches than verne lundquist, anyway. generally speaking, they don't detract from a telecast and can add to it.

there is one exception to this rule, and his name is jack arute.

a rough transcript of his interview with k-state's bill snyder last night:

jack(ass) arute: i guess the understatement of the day would be that this is your biggest win.
bill snyder: is that your statement or mine?
arute: mine
snyder: ok then.
arute: how 'bout the way your team got those turnovers?

as a fat, stupid boy once said: "'great game michael' is not a question."

and finally, sunday night football gave us a bitchin' 'welcome back michael vick' introduction. so great that it featured approximately eight grown men in vick jerseys at urinals while a woman cooed 'i love the way you move.' it also featured the staff of the varsity yelling 'welcome back michael vick!'

jake delhomme just threw a pick. there goes that dream.

prepare yourself for the most boring post you've ever read.

it's fantasy football time. final week of the season. (for some reason. our playoffs run weeks 15, 16, and 17. don't ask why.)

i basically need a win to get into the playoffs, and i'm left with some difficult decisions. (after reading, you'll wonder how i ever got into the playoff running. ridiculous.)

quarterback:
kelly holcomb (v. saint louis) or jake delhomme (at atlanta).
i've got a feeling about cleveland this week, but i've been hurt by holcomb every time i've used him. delhomme is the pick, although the fact that he's on the road and the fact that michael vick will alter the state of the game in some way scares me.

running back (start two):
ahman green (v. chicago) or michael bennett (v. seattle) or domanick davis (at jacksonville) or ladell betts (@ nyg).
green is obvious, and the non-use of betts is as well. davis has been one of the league's top backs over the past month, but bennett played well in his first extended action last week. davis' injury may preclude him from playing, so bennett has to be the choice. slightly reluctantly, although seattle's awful on the road.

wide receiver (start two):
amani toomer (v. washington) or josh reed (v. nyj) or tyrone calico (v. indianapolis) or troy walters (at tennessee) or andre johnson (at jacksonville) or bobby engram (at minnesota) or brian finneran (v. carolina).
yes, i'm terrible here. toomer is the only guy who's got any semblance of consistency, so he's one guy. the rest is a crapshoot. reed's a target in the offense, but never gets the end zone; calico's no longer a target. finneran's hurt, but could wind up having a huge day. engram's had about three huge days but, as i said, seattle's awful on the road. johnson is one hit away from catching passes from dave ragone. walters is playing tennessee, and his role in the offense seems to be on the upswing. reluctantly, walters is the guy, although it may become engram in the morning. or johnson. (incidentally, johnson and walters were both picked up this week.)

tight end:
my only guy is billy miller.

defense:
my only 'guy' is tennessee. jacksonville is available, and good, but i'm gonna 'dance with who brung me,' to quote nemo and coach walk. or was is 'dance with who ya brung' ?

kicker
even this is a decision of sorts. josh brown (at minnesota) or sebastian janikowski (at pittsburgh). brown's been one of the top guys of late, but seattle's still bad on the road. oakland can't score, but janikowski still can kick (and we get bonus points for long ones). while seattle's numbers have been bad on the road, brown's have actually been slightly better. that makes brown the pick, i guess.

p.s. i'm a complete and utter dweeb.

this afternoon my favorite fat bald men, tony kornheiser and mike wilbon, were discussing whether or not parity is good for the nfl. as i recall, their conclusion was that the nfl's the only league that can survive such parity, but that it probably was better to have dominant teams. people like dynasties, to a point.

i'll agree with the statement that i like dynasties and a lack of parity, but i have different reasons. you see, i've been enlisted to make the picks in my mom's nfl pool this week. my dad's been doing it, but he slumped last week, and now he's soliciting my help. he's begging.

and, of course, this happens to be...THE WEEK FROM HELL.

I mean, even the games that are supposed to be easy, like 8-4 Carolina at 2-10 Atlanta, are extremely difficult. KC at Denver, I guess, should be an easy pick. But it's not. Sucks. Pressure's on.

i'll post my perhaps awful picks tomorrow.

In other news, nemo, who graciously hosted me for one-and-a-half nights this past weekend, is phenomenally talented at (aiding me in) turning an intended 4-minute conversation into 40 minutes. and for that i am grateful.

conan just referred to jon lovitz as 'one of the funniest people on the planet.' ewww.

UPDATE, 20 minutes later:
first, to rico: i just noticed that san fran's hosting arizona, who just allowed 28 points to the bears. i start whoever dennis erickson starts.

and now, my picks for the week...can one really put 15 points on a loss by the tuna? yes.

16 - SAN FRANCISCO over arizona
15 - PHILADELPHIA over dallas
14 - NEW ENGLAND over miami
13 - GREEN BAY over chicago
12 - TENNESSEE over indianapolis - is that really allowed?
11 - MINNESOTA over seattle
10 - kansas city over DENVER
9 - new york jets over BUFFALO
8 - PITTSBURGH over oakland
7 - cincinnati over BALTIMORE
6 - washington over NEW YORK GIANTS
5 - DETROIT over san diego
4 - ATLANTA over carolina
3 - tampa bay over NEW ORLEANS
2 - houston over JACKSONVILLE
1 - CLEVELAND over st. louis

what i did this weekend, in no particular order: drove, slept, drank, complained about aches, slept, watched football, drove.

the highlight was undoubtedly my invasion into the annual post-thanksgiving sugarbush football game. the game was sloppy, wet, muddy and cold, and, was perhaps the ugliest pickup football game ever played. but it was fun, and we kept unstadt's dad's car relatively clean. and afterwards, i slept for approximately four hours.

other highlights of the weekend included sleeping on the nemo hide-a-bed.

returned to chicago with unstadt on saturday, and we did our best to convince that fine young gentlemen that the only thing my family does is watch football. (in actuality, we also watch baseball during the spring and summer and, in extreme cases, the fall.)


big sports night tonight. scott skiles' bulls debut (good), notre dame hoops' 2003 tv debut (bad), and willie's destroyers' usage of the tennessee defense during the monday night game (good). [i've got a tenuous hold on the final playoff spot, it appears.]

tonight also marked the opener of the big ten-acc challenge, featuring the cats. northwestern led by five at the half against a florida state team that's expected to be a tournament team, but the cats stopped hitting their outside shots in the second half. (they lost by about 20.) still, they played pretty well, and the matchup zone was stifling at times. i haven't looked much at the schedule, so i can't anticipate a non-conference record, but i figure they'll be good for 4 or 5 conference wins. i wish vedran would handle the ball a bit more . . . he's their most skillful player.

in related news, brad daugherty is perhaps even more annoying than chris speilman. and espn's mark jones is officially unwatchable in every sport. maybe they should switch him to bowling; that way, i'd never have to watch him.