Who do YOU root for?

I've never quite understood the sports fan who gets way too amped up about a professional or collegiate team - unless the fan is an alumni of said collegiate team.

Caring on a certain level is expected, but we all know those people that care just a little bit too much, right? The guy who's depressed and moping like his dog just died for about two weeks after whatever heart-wrenching playoff or Super Bowl loss just took place. It forces all of us to sit back and think 'A little perspective, please.' Doesn't it? At least for me it does.

I prefer to think of it this way: Professional and major college teams could give a rip whether you root for them or not. They exist primarily to make money. Oh, and win games. Which gets them more money. If you stop rooting today or tomorrow, plenty of others will continue to support your team or drop off the map, and nobody will really care. This isn't an argument that you should cease all rooting immediately for your teams, but simply to draw attention to the fact that it's primarily a one-sided relationship.

But when you can trace a rooting interest in something as far back as your earliest memories and your instrumental formative years, that's when emotional investment becomes so much more real and tangible.

To wit, my alma mater, Southern Columbia Area High School, residing on the outskirts of Catawissa, Pa., in east central Pennsylvania, will attempt to make history tomorrow at 1 p.m. at Hersheypark Stadium by becoming the first Pennsylvania scholastic football team to win a seventh state championship.

Now THIS is something to get behind in terms of a sports-related rooting interest, primarily for us proud alumni of what has transformed into one of the truly well-recognized statewide powers in Pennsylvania football. Especially for those of us who witnessed that transformation firsthand from a barely competitive program (1960s and 70s), to a district-wide competitive program (1980s and early 1990s) to the present standard by which all other Class A football teams in Pa. are held.

Even when the Tigers don't make the championship game - they have been to the big dance 13 times in the past 18 seasons - their presence looms large over the proceedings. It's usually worth noting whenever SCA isn't there simply because, they aren't there.

There are a myriad of components for why the program has become so successful, many of which are well known by several folks reading this piece. For some quick bullet-points, they include tons of hard work (in the offseason too), strength training, superb conditioning, high football IQ, talented players that learn the value of hard work from an early age onward, a dedicated coaching staff that molds young men into respectable people in addition to teaching the Xs and Os of the game, and probably a dozen other reasons.

But I like to think, more than anything else, it's about the stuff that transcends learning the proper gap protections or anticipating where the ball is headed. It goes beyond knowing the playbook.

It's about the blood, sweat and tears, baby. It's about having no doubt you can accomplish anything. It's also about trust, camaraderie among teammates, and doing anything in your power to not let people down.

This is all from the perspective of someone who didn't actually wear the uniform, but was as close to the program as one can be without doing so. Having that vantage point allows for the sort of observations that could seemingly never otherwise be gleaned.

Watching a year-by-year transformation of a district champion, to a state playoff qualifier, back to a district champion that could advance no further due to an outdated, wacky points system and then finally culminating in the school's first gold trophy (1994) was an indescribable experience I will always have with me.

No loss by a pro or college team could possibly match the disappointment I felt from the stands in 1995 and 1996 when SCA came up short against Farrell (6-0 and 14-12, respectively). I can't even imagine how the players felt. Another four gut-wrenching losses would have to be endured over the next 5 seasons before that glorious string of five consecutive championships took place from 2002-2006.

And as a lot of athletes will probably tell you, the toughest of losses stays with you longer than the most thrilling of triumphs. I used to think this was B.S. But now, I actually kind of understand it.

No matter what happens tomorrow in Hershey, head coach Jim Roth, his staff and his players will come out prepared and give everything they've got against unbeaten and two-time defending state champion Clairton. But anyone who knows anything knows better than to count the Tigers out.

Finally, the games play out year after year, and the graduates move on with their lives. But regardless of what the scoreboard said when it was over, what's most important is how inspiring the program is to current and former members. We see it in the results on the field, and the fact that for the first time ever this year, an SCA alumni is playing in the NFL (congrats, Henry Hynoski). Great things are only possible through hard work and determination.

At the time, it seems like you're only learning the game of football and pulling for victories on the field, above all else.

Then you learn more as you get older.

Why I'm Okay Without an FBS Playoff

I don't know what it is. Maybe it's the fact that it's about 70 degrees outside in the New York metro area and it's only a couple days shy of December. Maybe it's the Bieber Fever. Perhaps it's the staggering amount of money that the latest installment in that dreadfully annoying Twilight movie series is pulling down. Or maybe even it's the fact that Tim Tebow is 5-1 as a starting quarterback in the NFL.

Or maybe I'm just getting old. Yeah. I think that's probably it.

Seemingly since the dawn of time, I - like most college football enthusiasts - have lobbied for an NCAA Division I/FBS playoff as the most appropriate method for determining the sport's champion at the conclusion of each season. At the very least, my fervor on this subject strengthened to a considerable degree upon formation of the Bowl Championship Series, the selection system utilized to rank the top two teams nationally after the conclusion of regular-season play.

Few entities in life have been more roundly, and probably rightfully, criticized than the BCS system, with the possible exception of Herman Cain, Crystal Pepsi, and the jury that acquitted Casey Anthony.

And I would be about as forthcoming as Jerry Sandusky during the Bob Costas interview if I tried to peddle to you the notion that I've not been one of the BCS' most vocal critics.

But recent reflection, primarily through the close observation of how the 2011 season has unfolded coupled with intelligent point-counterpoint discussions with a few of my well-informed fellow College Football junkies, has me thinking differently about this topic.

First off, let's not kid ourselves: A well-constructed and researched by-the-seeds bracket will always be the most traditional and bulletproof convention for narrowing down any competing group of teams/individual athletes as it applies to organized sport.

But as we all know, Division I-A college football - oh wait, I'm sorry, FBS football - has never subscribed to that 'bracket' construction in the first place. And I know this sounds as if it's headed for the same 'defenses' territory proposed by opposers of a playoff, but it also happens to be a true statement - this is what makes this particular sport so unique and enthralling for those who hang on the edge of their bleacher seats each weekend with an eye on the games that have the most across-the-board, high stakes implications.

What I've come to realize, more than anything, is that the best approach to take here is the idea that each weekend, what you have on tap is at least a couple, if not a handful, of games that are essentially 'mini-playoff' contests. I used to scoff at this notion, often propounded by defenders of the current FBS system, merely tossing it off as an over-reaching argument made to preserve the already-in-place platitudes of tradition and history within the sport. Simply a defense rooted in laziness and resistance to alter the status quo rather than a firmly-held belief that change would do more harm than good.

And I'm not sure exactly why I'm thinking about it differently suddenly now. Maybe it's because more hours on the couch this fall (even more so than usual for me, which is a lot) due to home and family time with my wife and bubbly infant son have provided me with the benefit of more rigid observation. But whatever it is, what I can say with much certainty is that I've enjoyed this season as much as, if not more so, than any other in recent memory. I cannot think of a Saturday (or in the case of Oklahoma State, a Friday) that hasn't involved a plethora of televised games that have held some sort of broad appeal in terms of the final outcome.

As much as it pains me to say it, and as much as it may annoy you to read it, an 8-team or 16-team bracket ultimately detracts from this drama. It just plain does, and you can't tell me otherwise.

Also, does anyone who lobbies for a playoff really believe that many of the same politics and major conference biases wouldn't also negatively influence the construction of these brackets each season? I could make a fairly strong case for why undefeated Houston or one-loss Boise State should be sitting at home while the big bangers from the six major conferences duke it out in an 8-team playoff (a simple 'strength of schedule' argument, for one), but that's a separate discussion. Okay, so maybe Houston or Boise deserves a spot instead of the Big East champion. Either way. The point is - the same type of debates would be in play whether there's a bracket system or the current one.

I could live with a plus-one, and I've not yet heard anyone who has even the slightest gripe with that idea. This would help eliminate the concerns of those who cry foul when a perceived third deserving team is left on the outside looking in at Numbers 1 and 2 playing for the ultimate prize. The only possible criticism goes like this: Team No. 1 gets an extra weekend of rest while Team Nos. 2 and 3 knock heads for the right to play Team No. 1. Okay, but then I can point out how teams with long layoffs or coming off bye weeks in first-round playoff scenarios often come out rusty and with a lack of momentum.

So basically, the arguments are never going to end.

But all the pontificating and debating and pollstering is what makes this stuff so juicy. In a certain way, a bracket system reduces any sort of drama or fun. Draw up your 8, 12 or 16 spots, slot your teams in and let it all rip. And don't talk to me about a 4-team playoff. That's just dumb. Either go all-out with this or don't do it at all.

Okay, so you've got your bracket drawn up now. Why should I care about the Bedlam game this Saturday pitting one-loss Oklahoma State against two-loss Oklahoma? They're both most likely making a 16-team bracket. Who even cares who wins the conference?

Why should I have given a damn about Michigan vs. Ohio State this past Saturday if I didn't have a rooting interest for one of those teams? Ohio State has had, by their standards, a sub-par season. Reasons for that aside, it's clear they're not making a playoff and Michigan is. Why watch the game? If it's all about the destination and not the journey, why pay any attention to the journey? I may as well give up Saturdays watching any of these games, and just gloss over the AP Rankings and BCS Standings on Monday morning to get a feel for who's got a shot at the title and who doesn't.

The best example of all - would No. 1 LSU vs. No. 2 Alabama earlier this year have garnered nearly as much attention if it was basically predetermined (and it was) that the Tigers and Crimson Tide were both bracket-bound? Hell to the No!

It's so much more enjoyable to have the perspective of following the sport closely throughout the year and being able to pick out which games are essentially 'playoff' games and which ones aren't. Honestly, it's not even that difficult to do this either. You don't even have to be a junkie (though it helps).

This weekend's conference championship contests are the final chance for teams at or near the top to sway voters into tallying schools into their best possible destination. An extension of those 'playoff' games previously mentioned.

Should No. 1 LSU still play for a title even with a loss to Georgia this weekend in the SEC title game? Should No. 3 Oklahoma State leap-frog idle No. 2 Alabama with a convincing victory over their in-state rival Sooners? These are the questions the CFB junkies are waiting to have answered. It's fairly clear that the championship game will likely involve 2 of these 3 teams. LSU's overall body of work this year has been impressive enough to likely garner it a spot in the title game, even with a loss to the 9-2 Bulldogs. This is where it gets a bit complicated, because if this weekend's game is a 'playoff' - then how can LSU lose but still be rewarded with a chance to be called the best team in the country? I have a feeling the Tigers won't let that debate happen. This might be LSU's best team ever, and that's saying something. I also can't see Oklahoma State leap-frogging 'Bama, having lost to an unranked opponent, even though it was in double-overtime. If you can't kick a 37-yard field goal for a clinching victory in regulation, you're probably not the best team in the country.

Here's hoping my current 'okay with a playoff' stance doesn't come back to bite me in the tookus someday. Right now I'm fine with it.

PENN STATE

The Penn State scandal has been attacked, covered, dissected, taken apart, put back together and re-disassembled about 20 ways until Tuesday by now. But I'd be remiss if I didn't offer my thoughts on this, since it's by far one of the most polarizing, attention-grabbing sports-related stories in a long time. Still unbelievable is how many are describing it.

Having grown up less than an hour and a half from the university and having many friends and family members who have been lifelong supporters of JoePa and the Blue and White, this whole event has impacted many of us in a way that's difficult to put into words. First off, I'm not, nor have I ever been, a Penn State fan. I don't know - maybe it's how much it was shoved down my throat by everyone around me from a young age, turning me off even more. Maybe it's my reluctance to support a guy who, though universally revered in the college game, seems ultimately resistant to change and alternative ideas. Let's face it, if Penn State didn't always play like it's still 1975, maybe they could have been in more national championship discussions over the past 20 years or so (I nearly fell over in disbelief when I saw the Nittany Lions become the Nittany ‘Wildcats’ a couple weeks ago).

But beyond that, I've never been one to get too far behind any institution that browbeats so heavily about off-the-field model behavior. We've all heard jokes about athletes at schools like Miami or USC, and some of the stuff that is overlooked. But at least those schools aren't purporting to uphold values that they ultimately don't in reality.

For all of JoePa's morality and talk about 'The Great Experiment,' Penn State often proves to be no different than any other huge university in a small town. There is a culture of drinking and partying (PSU has been at or near the top of the 'party schools' lists that pop up every year) among the students who hypocritically claim their undying love and support for a man who upholds morality above all else. And as we found out, that guy most likely failed to act appropriately when learning that some of the most despicable behavior a person can commit was happening right under his nose.

The illusion that everything is A-okay in Happy Valley has always bothered me, even before we learned that there was a defensive coordinator who was allegedly a serial child molester.

The students love the ultimate moralist behind their institution so much that they riot and overturn vans when he's fired for malfeasance, flying directly in the face of what their beloved father figure would want them to do in the first place. People bought into the misguided notion that student-athletes in Happy Valley are somehow more noble or moral than their counterparts in other geographic regions of the country, as if Centre County, Pa. has some sort of magical vapors in the air that make the college football players there superior human beings. Most of all, people went all in on the idea that one man could symbolize everything they believed about being a model citizen, an ideal person, and a leader of young men.

As we learned a few weeks back, there are no more surprises left. Nobody is above reproach. And there is no such thing as a person who doesn’t make the occasional mistake.

I guess that's one of the reasons I always liked the 'Michigans' of the college football world. I don't see a whole lot of romanticizing going on. Just the desire to win games. Every program has its problems, for sure. But the fall from grace isn't as far when you don't hoist yourself up so high in the first instance.

For example, I wonder if a school like LSU would trade the two national championships it’s won in the past decade (and chance for a third in about 6 weeks) for Penn State’s legendary media reputation, institutional figurehead coach and zero titles since 1986, scandal aside. I think I know the answer. And if you think football fans in the SEC aren’t as crazy for their teams as Blue-and-White supporters are for Penn State, take a trip down south one fall Saturday, please, and report back to me.

As for the actual incident, I'd prefer to allow all the facts to come out before saying anything further. But if it's all true, I can only hope the victims find some peace in this world, in one way or another.

Why the Eagles Won't Win Super Bowl XLVI

Don't be fooled. I'm not.

I've been a Philadelphia Eagles fan long enough to know better.

The Eagles' 34-7 dismantling of hated division rival the Dallas Cowboys Sunday night has everyone back on 'The Dream Team' paddywagon once again.

You know, our 24/7 reactionary sports news cycle is like a bunch of 10-year-olds with ADD.

"Hey look, they beat the crap out of a 3-3 team with a hot-and-cold QB, they're the best team in the NFC behind Green Bay!"

Not so fast my friend (props to Lee Corso).

True, Sunday night's performance at The Linc was probably the most complete all-around four quarters of football the Green Men have compiled thus yet in the 2011 season. But when you put it up against their other efforts, that's like saying it's the most polished turd in a punch bowl filled with barely polished turds.

Also, any joy that Philly fans are feeling should be tempered by the fact that this victory came against the very definition of a 'Jekyll and Hide' football team. On one given day, Tony Romo hustles his squad down the field late in the fourth quarter in San Francisco like a crafty vet, sporting a cracked rib or two all the while, to hand the suddenly daunting 49ers their only loss of the season. In other tight games (see NY Jets), he has been decidedly un-heroic during the late moments when his team had a chance to win. But then, this is typical Cowboys - flooded with talent but inconsistency personified.

Had that thorough butt whipping by the Eagles come against Green Bay, Detroit or San Francisco, I would be admittedly slightly more encouraged. Although even then, I would still like to see this sort of potential realized on a more regular basis. There is still a ton of work to do in order to be one of the top 3-4 teams in the NFC, and a 2-4 start through the first six games unfortunately leaves little margin for error going forward.

Here's a quick breakdown of what I do and don't like about these 2011 Philadelphia Eagles:

PROS list: Diverse, multi-talented offense; the ability to move the ball/score against most any defense when play-calling and execution are fully realized; Two of the best pass-rushing defensive ends in the game (Trent Cole, Jason Babin) and three of the most skilled defensive backs (Nnamdi Asomugha, Asante Samuel, Dominic Rodgers-Cromartie); Veteran coaching staff; Noticeable improvement in the offensive line play this season due primarily to the addition of veteran O-line coach Howard Mudd.

CONS list: Weak spots on defense (linebackers, safeties) that can be badly exposed when attacked properly (run/pass plays up the middle, over the middle); Downgrade in kicking game since the start of the season (losing David Akers in the offseason - Akers was one of the most consistently reliable field goal makers in the game - for rookie Alex Henery); Always one of the most penalized teams in the league (this year is no different) often contributing to losing efforts; Turnover ratio has regressed compared to last year (Michael Vick alone has 8 interceptions through the first 7 games of this season but finished with a total of 6 INTs in 2010); Andy Reid still has a tendency to mismanage the clock inside of 2-3 minutes left in the half; The decision to move former o-line coach Juan Castillo to defensive coordinator has been a questionable move, to say the least, and appears to have a lot to do with the considerable defensive deficiencies; Michael Vick is more injury/concussion prone than ever before.

I could go on with the 'Cons' list, but I think you get the point. There's a lot more this team has done/is doing wrong than right, even with Sunday's juggernaut showing taken fully into consideration.

The Eagles are kind of like an impressive fireworks display. Every now and then they wow you, but they go away quickly and you pretty much forget it/them. Their weaknesses are always exposed when they do make the playoffs, and perhaps most troubling of all, they display a baffling inability to make crucial game-time adjustments when the predetermined plan of action just isn't working.

Championship teams can adjust on the fly and adapt to the strengths/weaknesses of their opponents. The Eagles play their own brand of football, and everything else be damned. They have their own rope, and it will always either hang the opposition or hang the Eagles. But they'll never throw their own rope to the side and look for a new one when it just ain't happening for them.

When you play that style of football, you need a variety of factors to go your way to get that big prize - in this case, The Lombardi Trophy.

What would have to happen for the Eagles to do this? Well they would need a lot of help from the opposition since they most certainly won't stop making their own mistakes. They need to stay healthy (kind of obvious, right?) In other words, they're not going all the way with a half-hearted Michael Vick. They need that toughness, swagger and mojo that they seemed to have in the early part of the 2000s, when they made 4 straight NFC Championship games and one Super Bowl. I'm just not sure this current coaching regime inspires that.

Many of the current players have all gone on record about how much they love and support Reid, and will go to battle for him under any circumstances. I guess it's easy to feel that way about a coach who never chews you out or gets pissed off, even when things look miserable.

Reid is the ultimate 'me' guy. He's always quick to blame himself and never his players when things go wrong, but he never seems to have a response for how to fix it. Improvements only come in the form of the Eagles being better than future opponents by default of their talent or game plan. And that's exactly why they can't make that next-level jump and beat the truly elite teams.

You know what I'd love to hear from Andy after a bad loss, just once? Instead of "It all starts with me, it's all my fault" ... I'd love to hear him adopt the Bill Belichick or Rex Ryan approach of "We stunk today. We got beat. We were outcoached and under-prepared."

Notice the word that begins each of those last three sentences. It's two letters and it starts with a 'W.'

It's perfectly acceptable to make everyone accountable for a bad loss. Just like players do not alone lose a game, neither does the coaching staff. It's got to be shared for it to truly play as a team dynamic. How can the Eagles' players truly feel 'on the hot seat' when they're never really culpable for their actions, save for some heat by the fans? (You'll always have that though, especially in Philly).

By all accounts, Reid is a wonderful guy. You can tell he's just too goddamn nice to lay into any of his players, no matter how serious their infractions might be. But all that leniency has to vanish and be replaced by a greater sense of urgency if the Eagles are really going to be champions one day.

I hope that day comes sooner rather than later.

Enough Metal to Build a Skyscraper

It was with mixed feelings of joy, fear, trepidation, nostalgia, ambivalence, hope and all-around not knowing what to expect that I approached this past Wednesday's Big 4 of Heavy Metal concert at Yankee Stadium in the Bronx.

I mean, here I was, about to witness for the first time - along with my primary NYC-area concert-going friend as it applies to witnessing musical acts of the guitar-bass-vocals-and-drums variety - two of the all-time hallowed metal music kingpins, lynchpins of the industry that I spent countless hours listening to, watching and admiring during an often un-stimulating late 80s/early 90s adolescence in central Pennsylvania.

Music was the one thing that I could always count on to get me jazzed up (but generally not jazz music). Metallica's 'Master of Puppets' or Slayer's 'Seasons in the Abyss' was never not going to sound awesome, no matter how many times I listened to the cassettes from front to back, or stayed up late on a Saturday night to watch Headbanger's Ball until 2 in the morning knowing that an early-morning Sunday wake-up call and a trip to Church were in short order.

As an aside, am I destined for hellfire because I was playing classic metal in my head while in church to get through the experience whenever the off-key singing of religious recitations wasn't chorusing through the cavernous building and disturbing the in-my-head live shows that always took place from approximately 9:30 to 11 a.m. every Sunday morning? If so, I guess I'll go down rocking out, rather than going up as a square.

Either way, a whole lot was on the line for this concert. Stakes were high - for the fans, for the performers, for pretty much everyone involved. For the first time in the NYC metro area, the primary four 80s thrash-metal heavyweights were occupying the same stage in one night of what would either turn out to be a bloated, past-its-prime display of retrospectively ridiculous musical excess, or a mega-ton bomb of supremely fulfilling, ear-splitting, precise metal madness that would sound good in 1981, 2011 or 2052.

Thankfully, we got the latter, not the former.

Admittedly, I'm predisposed to that opinion because of my loyalties and proclivities for these particular bands and their classic music. But I've never been one to follow trends or do something just because everyone else is on the bandwagon. And I would have no problem elucidating an opinion of disappointment or a sense of "why did I ever like this shit?" had I really felt that way before, during and after the concert.

I'm happy to report this shit sounded just as good at age 34 as it did at age 13.

I can cross Metallica and Slayer off my live-show bucket list. I'm very happy about that. I didn't get there in time for Anthrax and Megadeth since this ode to buzzsaw solos, complex riffing and harshly soaring vocals kicked off at 4 p.m. and I've got this unfortunate responsibility known as a "day-job" (I'm working on that, really I promise).

But my friend who purchased the tickets and arrived shortly before I did assured me that Megadeth was indeed impressive, as he caught the later part of their set. I have to say, I would probably have given up a quart or two of blood to see songs like "Hangar 18" or "Holy Wars (The Punishment Due)" performed live at break-neck speed. But such is life.

As it stands, I knew I was in for a hell of a performance. Well, two of them, actually.

At about 7 p.m. sharp, Slayer took the stage, and did just what the fuck Slayer does (or so it's been said by others who have experienced a live Slayer show). I would use the word 'intense' to describe a Slayer concert, but then the word 'intense' would most surely have some cross words for me for not doing the description proper justice.

Let's put it this way - I've often found that bands who are great in a live setting are usually a more exaggerated manifestation of the persona that comes across on record. Slayer fits that mold, tenfold.

My friend and I were in the Grandstand seats, probably about 8 or so rows from the very last row in the house. It sounds like we got bum seats, but honestly, I loved being that far up. We could still hear everything clear as a bell, we could see the big screens projecting the on-stage action quite clearly, and the field of vision from that high up allows you to really survey the whole scene and see what's going on - namely, the small circle-shaped mosh pits that kept sporadically forming while Slayer was murdering the shit out of the audience. Only the strong survive a Slayer mosh-pit. A different concert-going friend and I barely made it through two and a half songs at a Rage Against the Machine mosh pit on Governor's Island four years ago, but I digress.

In a nutshell, Slayer's set was comparable to a heat-seeking missile. It gets there fast, it's not pretty, it causes mayhem and destruction the whole time, and when it's over, you kind of just sit there in awe for a few minutes at what you just witnessed. Such was the case as three of the original four members - Tom Araya, Kerry King and Dave Lombardo, playing along with a fill-in for Jeff Hanneman - sonically assaulted Yankee Stadium with a harrowing blast of old classics and new material. After 60 minutes, with a few silent pauses between songs and minimal crowd banter from Araya, it was all over. If you wanted more after that was done, you're one sick puppy, because too much more of that would have been too much to handle. And I mean that in the most complimentary way possible.

Slayer is so bombastic, so mind-bending and so unlike any other band in the history of time that to over-indulge in them is to do yourself an injustice. They are most effective in small doses, like ultra-rich cheesecake, or an annoying-but-super-nice co-worker.

End result, I couldn't have been happier with Slayer. And after doing some quick post-concert internet research to learn that this band is all basically pushing 50 years of age and still putting on that kind of a show, I felt immediately like a failure for being about 14 years younger and complaining about getting out of bed tired the next day. Slayer doesn't get tired. They slap 'tired' across the face with their fretboards and drum sticks.

The highlights for me were "War Ensemble," "Dead Skin Mask," "Angel of Death," "Chemical Warfare" and of course the piece de resistance "Raining Blood" and "Postmortem" - the two closing tracks from the classic album 'Reign in Blood.' These two work best when played together since one transitions seamlessly into the other as recorded on the album. They broke them up for this set, but I'm not complaining.

Slayer exited the stage just before 8 p.m., leaving everyone in the place amazed, amused, aghast and other adjectives that begin with the letter 'a.' I took this opportunity to get the closest I possibly could to a real dinner, which consisted of exactly two overpriced hot dogs and a half-flat Pepsi. Sixteen dollars and a few hundred nitrate-soaked calories later, I hit the bathroom and returned to our seats to await the mother-effing mother-lode of metal madness - Metallica. In all their glory. As with Slayer, three of the four original lineup members would be in effect. For 30 years, it's been James Hetfield (guitar/vocals), Kirk Hammett (lead and rhythm guitar) and Lars Ulrich (drums). Many fans, both casual and hardcore, know the bass-player history. Original bassist Cliff Burton, one of the truly innovative pioneers of 80s metal bass playing and a huge creative force in Metallica's early sound, was tragically killed in a bus accident in Europe as the band was touring to promote the 1986 release "Master of Puppets" - generally hailed as the band's best 80s album (many would say their best record to date, including me).

Jason Newsted was a longtime replacement, and a few other guys have come and gone, but now they've got Robert Trujillo, former longtime bassist for Suicidal Tendencies. He's proven to be an ample substitution.

At about 5 minutes to 9, the lights went down and the operatic intro music began playing, set against a backdrop of war movies/TV show explosions playing on the big screens mounted on either side of the stage.

And before you knew it, there were the kings of this heavy metal music shit, launching into a blistering rendition of "Creeping Death," a classic cut from their sophomore LP "Ride the Lightning."

It was interesting to note the difference in fan reaction between Slayer and Metallica. People respect Slayer. They sit in awe of them, and every now and then a random fan throws out a "Fucking SLAAAYYERR!!" yell.

But people absolutely whole-hog LOVE Metallica. I've never seen such a devoted, frenzied reaction to a band before, and I've been to a LOT of concerts. It was a whole other level on both sides of the fence, both from the band and the fans. That's when a show is at its best - when all parties involved are giving it 189 percent and filling the need that each has from the other. It was truly magnetic.

Any doubts anyone may have been having about the ability of bands like Metallica and Slayer to perform at a high level at this stage of their careers was firmly put to rest Wednesday night. Sure it helps that they're only doing a handful of these shows a year rather than 4-5 nights every week. But nevertheless, it's something to behold.

Also, Metallica's overall presentation was like nothing I've ever seen. They made the most of the Yankee Stadium setting by using a dizzying blend of pyrotechnics, lasers, fire - and, I shit you not - fireWORKS to help illuminate what was already a memorable performance.

Preceding the gripping war tale "One" was a barrage of thunderous gun shots and mini-explosions on stage to mimic the sounds and sights of a firefight in some Godforsaken Middle Eastern shit-hole.

Towers of flame exploded into the night sky during "Fuel" - especially in the seconds after Hetfield would shriek into the mic "Gimme Fuel, Gimme Fire, Gimme that which I desire!" Thankfully, no such stage accidents would befall any of the band members such as when Hetfield got burned on stage during an early 90s Vancouver show on a tour with Guns'n'Roses, leading to a cancellation and subsequent fan rioting after Axl Rose - only a couple songs into G'n'R's set - threw a hissy-fit and stormed off stage to leave the frustrated fans devoid of not just one but BOTH performances.

No sir, there would be no disappointments on this great night of music. Metallica slammed through songs old and new, giving the people what they wanted. They played half of the classic albums 'Ride the Lightning' and 'Master of Puppets.' And they didn't seem to hit one off note all night.

Probably my favorite moment during the set came in the form of the instrumental 'Orion' - a song that's probably been played live only a handful of times over the past 20 years. It's an almost 9-minute masterwork of guitar-and-drum wizardry, and it's essentially the band's tribute to the late, great Burton, who was hugely influential in the stylistic and melodic progressions the band made from their first two albums (Kill 'Em All, Ride the Lightning) to their third one (Master of Puppets).

And when has the title track to 'Puppets' ever not kicked ass? Same for "Battery" and "Sanitarium." "Blackened," the harrowing opening track from '...And Justice for All" was a great surprise, while other classic gems like "Sad But True," "For Whom the Bell Tolls" and "Ride the Lightning" further cemented what a mind-blowing show this really was.

When it was all said and done, Metallica had played for 2 hours and 15 minutes. Nobody could complain they didn't get their money's worth.

And nothing was as bad-ass as members of all 'Big 4' bands coming on stage toward the end of Metallica's set to engage in a spirited rendition of the Motorhead classic "Overkill" - taking turns on guitar, vocals and drums between verses and choruses.

If your appetite for good metal wasn't sated after this blitzkrieg of insanity, then I don't know what else to say, other than "you have no off-switch."

It was completely amazing to re-live some youthful nostalgia by being lucky enough to actually see these bands at this juncture of their careers performing at such a high level. This is what's great about being a musician. You never get too old. You never lose the will to keep doing it.

There will always be a Slayer or Metallica show playing somewhere in the recesses of my aural passages.

Linden Boulevard, Represent Represent-sent

Thank you, Michael Rapaport.

You have proven to be extremely valuable to the popular public discourse for something other than being recognized as a bit-player in 'True Romance' and 'Higher Learning,' or for your surprisingly funny turn as a disgruntled employee in the 'Pop Copy' sketch on Chappelle's Show.

For you, good sir, compiled and directed an admirably entertaining and thought-provoking documentary on seminal 1990s hip hop collective A Tribe Called Quest, titled "Beats Rhymes & Life" (incidentally, also the name of the group's fourth album, a release that sadly signaled the beginning of the end for the ambitious Queens jazz-rap pioneers).

I've been as amped up as a trailer park junkie waiting for a new shipment of Heisenberg's blue crystal upon finding out that said doc was to be released this summer.

Tribe holds special significance for me. They were the first true iteration of genuine, non-mainstream hip hop that I discovered in my younger days, and absorbing their rare form of jazz-infused musical goodness was instrumental in setting me on a path of discovery for a sonic movement that once thrived, but is now unfortunately buried in a morass of generic and uninspired beats/lyrics, marketing, self-promotion, twitter, auto-tune, i-tunes and a new generation of listeners that wasn't around to appreciate hip hop's golden era.

In the late 1990s, the Wu-Tang Clan is the hip hop collective I would claim as the genre's saviors, and my personal favorites. But before there was Wu-Tang, and before there was Biggie, even before Tupac started blowing up, there was the Native Tongues movement, spearheaded largely by A Tribe Called Quest and their 'hip hop brothers from another mother' De La Soul.

Yes, Tribe was amongst the early hip hop acts that wasn't concerned with videos, swag, chart positioning, groupies or any of the pratfalls that has prematurely claimed the careers of many a great musical artist. The focus was on the music, plain and simple. And boy, did Q-Tip and DJ Ali Shaheed Muhammad dig deep into the crates to find some of the most blessed, inspiring soundscapes to serve as a backdrop for the dope lyrical stylings of Tip and Phife Dawg.

The documentary was filmed mostly during Tribe's 2008 Reunion Tour, when they performed at the annually largely-attended Rock the Bells Festival. As with most films of this genre, we see the chronological progression of Tribe's career, the genesis of how they all met each other and began performing and recording their music. But a constant overall theme that Rapaport is wise to examine heavily is the long-standing tension between Q-Tip and Phife Dawg, which ultimately led to what many would describe as a premature disbanding of the group in 1998.

To be honest, Tribe breaking up when they did was a dagger in the heart of hip hop fans everywhere. The musical form was starting to navigate into a weird place. The 1980s represented the art form's burgeoning popularity and its invasion into the mainstream music-consuming experience. It was no longer just for jeeps and landcruisers rumbling through gritty urban landscapes, or block parties in the South Bronx or Union Square, or the rowhomes of Philadelphia or Baltimore.

It began to find its way into the homes of white suburbia. My own experience is proof positive. As far back as 1987 in east central Pennsylvania, I can vividly remember my older brother and I owning at least 3 cassettes that were an integral part of us becoming rap music fans at a young age - and for the curious-minded, those cassettes were Run DMC's "Raising Hell," (1984) The Beastie Boys' "Licensed to Ill" (1986) and LL Cool J's "Bad" (1987). Which is all fine and good.

But those artists are prime examples of those who were groomed for the big-time, for mainstream success. Even in the world of hip hop and rap music, there is a clear divide between those who enjoyed that type of success, and those who never quite made that large an impression in terms of overall popularity and record sales, but have a certain amount of respect and cache that can never be measured in dollar signs. Tribe certainly falls into that latter category, and it's always a magical experience when you discover your first favorite musical collective that is great to you, but will completely miss the boat with almost everyone else. Then, as you get older, you realize that just because a large number of people aren't digging something, that doesn't mean it's not good. It just means it wasn't made for the masses. This perfectly describes Tribe's music, as well as that of countless other highly-respected genre practitioners from back in the day.

Tribe's sound is rooted in jazz horns, thumping rhythms, fat bass lines and the smooth rhymes and flow of Tip and Phife. There's also a noticeable touch of social awareness in some tracks, and an appreciation for the music they're creating. With Tribe, the music isn't merely a vehicle for a message, as is the case with righteous power-rappers Public Enemy, or the gangster posturing of N.W.A. With Tribe, the music and lyrics co-exist together effortlessly and beautifully, unlike many unbalanced rap artists who are clearly much more gifted at either music or rhymes.

Beats Rhymes and Life, however, explores the degeneration of Tribe as much as, if not more so, the actual music. Some would criticize the film for this, but I say, it's an endeavor worth exploring, especially since so many years have passed since the breakup, and all that we fans have ever been able to pontificate about it all is - "Uh, so that's it? They're not getting along anymore?" As I mentioned before, the type of hip hop that Tribe excelled at was beginning to die out when the group broke up anyway. If you want to get philosophical about it, you could ask which event triggered the other? Did Tribe break up because they couldn't figure out how to continue putting out great music within the context of hip hop's rapidly evolving state, or did the shift that hip hop was undergoing signal the 'end' for musical acts cut from Tribe's cloth?

I prefer to think it was the latter, but I recognize that on many levels that simply makes me a curmudgeon, and not entirely unlike the grumpy grandfather shaking his cane from his front porch at the rowdy youngsters. However, I know there are lots of others who feel the same way.

Ultimately, Tribe's first three albums - People's Instinctive Travels and the Paths of Rhythm (1989), The Low End Theory (1991) and Midnight Marauders (1993) - are the gold standard by which all innovative hip hop of that time capsule is measured. Nobody could fuck with Tribe back then, and all real hip hop heads knew it. Yeah, maybe they weren't getting as many spins as Dre and Snoop when "The Chronic" exploded, but like I said, real heads knew where the hip hop perfection was truly located. Tip or Phife would slay Dre or Snoop in a lyrical battle without batting an eye.

Then after Midnight Marauders, they took an extended break. Phife's health troubles began to seriously take their toll (he's suffered from diabetes for most of his life, and needed a kidney transplant within the past few years from his wife). Aside from that, Phife and Tip have long had their own personal turmoil with each other regarding their individual roles and their relationship with each other as defined through Tribe. Tip states repeatedly in the documentary that it's about the group, and no one individual should rise above any of the others. That sounds great and all, but for hip hop fans in general, it's fairly routine knowledge that Tip is the group's defining member. He had the business savvy, and he was the guy making sure shit got done. Phife, it seems, was happy to write and spit nasty rhymes, but that's where it seemed to end with him. As we all know, you need at least one guy in the group to be the one who cracks the whip; the 'dad' making sure everyone eats their peas before dessert. Apparently, that was Tip, and Phife grew tired of it after awhile.

But it would be unwise to blame the group's disbanding simply on the Phife/Tip squabble. The changing landscape of hip hop was part of it. The fact that "Beats Rhymes and Life" and "The Love Movement" were received with lukewarm reception from both fans and critics alike was another part of it. Nothing continues forever. At least they still reunite for a tour every once in a while. I saw them myself twice, once at Rock the Bells in '08 and again at Rock the Bells last year, and let me tell you, they were amazing in the more recent performance (not even a year ago).

Hip hop is still alive and well if you know how to keep it going. But the current musical landscape isn't littered with groups like Tribe, De La Soul, Biggie, Tupac, Rakim, Gang Starr, Big L and a whole host of others. It's not like it was 15-20 years ago and beyond. To find the good-to-great stuff is harder than ever, but it IS out there.

Beats Rhymes and Life is an extremely in-depth look at Tribe. Tip, Phife, Ali Shaheed Muhammad (the peace-loving DJ who just wanted to make music) and Jarobi (whose spirit defined what Tribe was really all about) made musical history, and every now and then, they do revisit that special place. Even if you're not a huge fan of hip hop, it's hard not to appreciate this flick. Tons of cameos from hip hop visionaries abound as well, such as Busta Rhymes, Beastie Boys, De La Soul, Common, even Black Thought and Questlove from The Roots.

But perhaps the most poignant moment in the film comes when Phife is discussing the current state of hip hop, and pontificating whether other career options he’s considering might need to take over his involvement full-time. He makes an allusion, with respect to the music, about “the way things are going,” and sort of trails off while shaking his head, letting those words hang in the air.

At that point in the otherwise animated (for much of the movie, anyway) theater, it was soft enough to hear the needle dropping on an old piece of vinyl from about 50 feet away.

A METH-od to his Madness

Sunday, July 17th, marks the return of television's greatest crime drama. And if you consider yourself a fan of episodic TV crime drama, then you are undoubtedly aware that the above reference is to the darkly brilliant and wholly engrossing AMC show "Breaking Bad," a tour de force of desperate characters and unbelievable events that has only gained considerable momentum with the passing of each of its three seasons.

I shouldn't have to break you off with the "spoiler alert" warning if you're already this far in, but let's make it official. If you haven't peeped the manuscript, avert your eyes, because lots of plot points from past episodes need to be revealed here.

First of all, it would be boring and a waste of time for you to read some lengthy fan-boy dissertation about how fantastic this show is, how solid the acting is, or how much it sucks you in and convinces you to root for characters you would rather not piss on if they were set ablaze.

If you're a fan of the show you already know all about what makes BB great, and have your own well-formed (or perhaps not so well-formed) opinions. If you're not a fan of the show and haven't seen it, you're likely either scrolling past this section, or more realistically, muttering to yourself "Who the hell is the Player President and why does he call himself that" while hitting the 'back' button on your web page and looking for someone who you may actually have heard of before.

Either way, I would prefer to delve into something a tad juicier. Perhaps a topic not so easily dissected - much like that first frog in freshman Biology (or something you did in Chemistry - cue Mr. Walter White in ugly smock and safety goggles!)

I would love to explore for a bit, if I may, the much-debated aspect of how the show forces us to consider morality, how easily skewed our sense of right and wrong can become by mitigating circumstances, and perhaps most importantly, whether the show's central character Walter White - portrayed flawlessly these past three seasons by the uber-talented Bryan Cranston - orchestrated his manifestation into "a bad guy."

I use the "quotes" because I'm not entirely sure if I would even classify Mr. White as such, crazy as though that may sound to both casual and hardcore viewers of the show alike.

Pop culture philosopher extraordinaire Chuck Klosterman has constructed an intriguing take on Breaking Bad, comparing it to three other highly acclaimed TV dramas from the past decade (Mad Men, The Sopranos and The Wire). As riveting a read as this is, I find myself to be in at least mild disagreement with the viewpoint that Walter White at some point "changed himself" and decided "to become bad."

I'm not even sure what this means, really. Are we to believe that anyone wakes up one day and consciously wills himself/herself to begin committing morally questionable actions from that point onward? Even if the argument is such that this is a gradual transformation, it seems a questionable theory at best. Behaving "bad" or "good" isn't any more of a choice within us than whatever it is that exists in our brains and causes us to decide we might prefer mozzarella cheese over American, or that we may rather blue over green. It's all hard-wired within us before we can even ponder the question.

When I view Walter White, I see a man who opened a series of doors over the course of the show with a noble initial goal - to provide for his family after what appeared at the time to be his imminent demise. It is this choice, coupled with White's backstory, that has placed him into the position we find him during the gripping conclusion of Season 3 - hastily ordering the murder of an innocent man to save his own hide. (And if you think you wouldn't ever do the same thing if your own ass was on the line, you may not know yourself as well as you think you do).

My point is this -- folks like Walter White who color inside the lines for their whole lives cannot become something they aren't any more so than Marlo Stanfield from The Wire can put on a business suit, hobnob with city officials and stay off the streets. But what they can do is awaken something within themselves they didn't know was there when desperate times call for desperate measures. This isn't so much a reflection of a conscious decision to change as it is letting your body and brain take over naturally to accomplish goals that you see as needing to be realized, without any other option.

To give you a microcosmic example, I've observed behavior in New York City from people who would never otherwise need to exhibit such actions to get ahead, or even 'tread water', just about anywhere else in the country, geographically speaking. But because they are in New York and are subject to the unwritten rules and laws of such a hyper, Type-A mentality and culture, they do what they have to do or else they'll never get anywhere. And I'm not just talking about in the corporate world either. It can be as innocuous as getting the spot you want on a crowded subway car, or using just the right blend of assertiveness and politeness to get a table at the crowded restaurant with amazing food but horrible customer service skills.

Walter White finding out that a terminal disease was about to claim him from a meekly-lived, routine existence was the catalyst to awaken within him that which was always present, but just lying there dormant.

Does anyone think he took some crazy pills one day to transform himself into somebody that willingly allows young female drug addicts to choke to death on their own vomit with nobody else around to stop it, or the guy who barrels his modest middle-class automobile into a pair of wasteoid drug dealers before planting some liquid steel into their heads to finish the job with the no-doubt-about-it killshot?

Let's look back on just a few examples of some of the more heinous acts Walt has committed, and we will soon realize he only did so out of self-preservation.

1) Putting in a fake call for DEA agent Hank about his wife Marie being involved in an auto accident to throw the investigation off the scent and buy Walt and Jesse more time when they were about to get busted in the RV? Self-preservation.

2) Allowing Jane to choke on her puke? Self-preservation. Remember, she threatened to expose Walt if he and Jesse wouldn't agree to cut her in on their profits, even though she was doing nothing to deserve any of those funds (other than being the subject of Jesse's unwavering love and affection).

3) Barrelling into those lowlifes and then caving in their brains with some hot lead when they were about to waste Jesse? Okay, not completely an act of self-preservation, but you could extrapolate that it actually was just that since Jesse is as important to Walt's current position as anyone else, and he needs him as a No. 2.

4) Phoning Jesse and imploring him to rush over to Gabe's house and "do the deed" is the ultimate act of self-preservation, and it was about as calculated as what you do when a line drive is screaming at your dome. It was the ONLY option for Walt to survive that situation, and he definitely wasn't thinking about it on his way over to the laundry facility to meet up with Hitman Mike, you best believe that shit.

There are certainly other examples. And look, let's not fool ourselves into believing that Walt doesn't make less hasty but still conscious choices that harm others on a daily basis (cooking meth that destroys lives and no doubt causes an untold myriad of individuals to overdose on his intoxicating brand of crystal heaven). But it's much easier to rationalize actions that harm others when the negative consequences and suffering of nameless, faceless individuals isn't presented before us as a direct result of the dark choices that we make. If anyone reading this can honestly say they've never performed an action - whether minor or major - that hurt someone else knowing that nobody could trace it directly back to them, then I can point you to a polygraph waiting impatiently to strike said person with a closed fist of skepticism.

Finally, I've seen others posit that the show builds itself around the concept that the main character, or "protagonist," transforms from a likeable to an unlikeable character, and that to do this is a crazy move on the part of the writers/show creators.

For me, quite the contrary. I think Walt has become more likeable since the show has started. In season one, when we see Walt working a shitty second job in a car wash and being berated by some of his obnoxious students, or when we later find out how he was once such a brilliant, promising scientist who should have made more of himself but was screwed over by more opportunistic "colleagues," we just feel bad for him.

It's with careful examination that we learn that Walt doesn't so much as "become bad" as he decides to stop letting life kick him in the balls time after time when it becomes apparent that the fuse that is his life is about to be snuffed out anyway by a terminal illness.

How can you not root for him when he leg-bombs that dickhead jock making fun of his kid that has Cerebral Palsy? How can you not identify with him when he flips out at the asshole car wash boss and quits in a fit of self-satisfied but somewhat justifiable rage? How could you possibly not want Walt to come out on top against these lowlifes around him who would be selling meth and jacking people up for a high regardless of what was happening around them?

The difference between Walt and someone who is "bad" is that Walt wouldn't fuck with a regular citizen under any circumstance. If you didn't already have it coming, you weren't going to get yours from Walt. Well, unless you become hooked on meth and send yourself into an irreversible downward spiral as a result of your addiction to Walt's blue-powdered candy. But even then, you can't blame your choices or addictions on an individual you never met before. Are we really so naive as to believe that someone else's meth wouldn't be killing people if Walt's product wasn't on the street?

We continue to root for Walt and his morally ambiguous choices not just because Cranston does such a wonderful job at evoking sympathy for his character's plight (that's part of it).

I would like to believe that we continue to root for Walt because he embodies what we all would love to believe is right and just in the world - and that is the story of a man who gets kicked to the ground by a gang of cowardly bitches (i.e. life pushing you around), picked back up, and then kicked back down again for some more abuse before saying "fuck it" and unleashing a holy hell's worth of vengeance on everything around you that's trying to stop your progress.

Breaking Bad is the story of a lot of different things, and a lot of different philosophical and morally debatable questions.

But above all else, I like to think that it's the story of a man who was always capable of anything, but behaved like a good citizen until being a good citizen just wasn't cutting it anymore.

Love or hate what Walt is becoming, what you should love is the fact that his "taking shit from people" days are long behind him.

The true brilliance of Breaking Bad is how we can find ourselves hoping that characters like Walt and Jesse can keep this ridiculous streak going. If heading into Season 4 we were supposed to be starting to hate Walt right about now, mission failed. I hate Pollos and Hitman Mike 10 times more than I hate Walt at the moment, and I don't even really hate those guys.

The only way I could hope that Walt actually fails or gets taken down is if he were to start sacrificing the citizenry who have no real place in all this ugliness. That's when someone has lost all control of their faculties (see the story about Pablo Escobar taking down a commercial airliner full of innocent people because he wanted to kill one guy who was found to not even have been ON THE PLANE!).

But who knows, this show is so unbelievably good that maybe even that wouldn't be enough for me to jump off the U.S.S. Walter White.

Shmoke and a Pancake? Blintz and a Blunt?

Then there is no PLEEAASING you.

Dated Austin Powers references aside (2004's "Goldmember" WAS one of the funniest of that franchise), I come to enlighten and amaze you with opinions aplenty.

You may notice a disjointed smattering of seemingly random thoughts and patterns in this space lately, and less frequent updating.

I blame everyone/thing except myself.

But seriously, this entry is going to be like whatever type of artist just throws a bunch of crap at the canvas and lets it all fly. Is that an expressionist? A minimalist? Whatever.

Let us start in the merry land of sport.

FOOTBALL

Well, the most recent news is that as of this past Monday, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the ruling of U.S. District Court (Minnesota) Judge Susan Richard Nelson, who was of the opinion that the lockout should be lifted and league/player negotiations should immediately resume.

The three-judge panel at the appellate level ruled 2-1 in favor of a stay of Judge Nelson's decision, meaning that until the appeals court has further considered and finally ruled on the matter, the lockout is back in place (for now).

In the Monday Morning Quarterback column on si.com, Peter King - who has been covering the NFL for about 30 years now and was around for both of the league's work stoppages in the 1980s - reports that considering talks with others and his own view of the current situation, it's likely that if a deal isn't reached soon the season might not begin until as late as November.

I know we're all sick of the labor aspect of this story and we just want football to proceed on a normal schedule again, but what's at stake here is critical for the future of the league as well as the players. There's talk that the players are pushing for the elimination of the draft, and the possibility that all transactions would be facilitated through either a free-agent signing or team trade basis. In that scenario, each franchise would be worth its own weight in gold, without a collective bargaining agreement or revenue sharing of any kind. It would almost be like how the Yankees have a kajillion dollars, but the Kansas City Royals are expected to be able to compete with teams like N.Y. and Boston with limited funds, resources and difficulty attracting big-time talent or blue chip players.

Could you imagine it? The Dallas Cowboys and Pittsburgh Steelers type franchises would rule the sport, and teams like Cincinnati, Carolina and the like would struggle mightily. Parity would virtually vanish. We'd be back to the late 80s/early 90s era, when Dallas, San Fran, the N.Y. Giants and a few others reigned supreme and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers didn't have a prayer. Not sure this would necessarily be a good thing.

It should be interesting to see how the legality of this could play out. The NFL currently offers such a high-quality, sought-after product, but the future direction of the league's landscape could very well be primarily determined by lawyers in power suits and a couple of very powerful Appellate Court Judges. Here's to hoping the two sides can reach a semi-amiable agreement through mediation, but it hasn't looked so great thus far.

BASKETBALL

What can I say? I love the NBA. (Wow, they should use that as a marketing slogan!)

The Los Angeles Lakers and San Antonio Spurs have been eliminated from the postseason, and the Final Four is down to Chicago vs. Miami for the Eastern Conference crown, and Dallas vs. Oklahoma City for the Western Conference title. I'm just glad there will be a new champion, and like most, I hope it isn't Miami. I'd be fine with any of the other three teams bringing home the hardware.

First off, I was one of the few who thought LeBron should have the right to go play wherever he wants after the infamous 'decision.' And I still believe that (even though I, like most, hated HOW he announced it to the world). But I also believe, having watched this Heat team all season, that there isn't anything about them that gets me to want to root for them. It's a calculated, assembly-line, built-for-a-championship team that seems devoid of chemistry or likability, and the same goes for their slick-haired, glitz-and-glamour head coach/Team Prez combo of Erik Spoelstra and Pat Riley. There's nobody who appears as though he's genuinely enjoying his experience out there. Okay, maintain a tough facade, that's fine. But have a few human moments every now and then as well. They're so cold and calculating. I have a feeling the only happy emotions we would see from any of them would come only moments after winning a title, at which point most would have already long decided they wouldn't want to see those moments of joy in the first place.

You know, if LeBron had joined the Bulls, alone, and casually dropped it into a press conference unexpectedly that he was leaving Cleveland, without all the hype and fanfare, I think I would have a much different outlook on the situation. But the body of evidence for what's happened makes things clear. He made a big deal out of being part of a new 'Big 3' in Miami, replete with tons of media attention and the most overdone, ridiculous welcome party for a trio of players with only one championship ring amongst them that has ever been produced (youtube it, you'll see what I mean).

He's still a tremendous talent, with his physical gifts, his power, his speed, and his ability to drop 3-pointers from a standing position seemingly without effort. But he's not a killer (ala Jordan, Kobe), and he doesn't long to take over in big moments. It's Dwayne Wade's team, and we all know it. But Chicago gave the Heat quite a convincing beatdown in Game 1. We'll see what happens tomorrow night in Game 2, but I can easily say I'm rooting for the Bulls. Now that's truly a 'team basketball' type of squad. Derek Rose is clearly the man who makes them go, but their role players know their place, and have no problems with that.

As for the Dallas-OKC series, the Mavs are going to be one tough out. This might finally be their year to get a ring, having come so painfully close in 2006 before allowing a 3-1 series lead to implode into a 4-3 Finals loss at the hands of Miami. They've got a great starting five, a deep bench, and excellent coaching/management. The Thunder are a great story, but if they have enough left in the tank to take out this Dallas team (which swept the Lakers) - especially after OKC fought tooth-and-nail to beat Memphis in seven games in the WC Semifinals - I'll be amazed.

I think we're headed for Dallas vs. Chicago in the finals. At least I hope. If not, it will most likely be Dalls vs. Miami - in which case, I'll certainly be rooting for Mark Cuban, Dirk Nowitzki, Jason Kidd and company.

BASEBALL

I'm not used to rooting for a team that's a favorite (unless it comes to high school football - Go SCA!).

So when it comes to the 2011 Philadelphia Phillies, I'm still a bit gun-shy. Sure they've got R2C2 on the mound, one of the best starting rotations in the majors this year (if not the best) with Roy Halladay, Cliff Lee, Roy Oswalt and Cole Hamels. But it's becoming increasingly clear that they've got little else on which to hang their funky, P-shaped, embroidered caps after 9 up, 9 down.

The offense has been quite anemic with Chase Utley out of the lineup (injury) and Jayson Werth having departed in the offseason. Ryan Howard continues to be all-or-nothing at the plate (don't expect that to change anytime soon). And defensively they're adequate, but not the best in the bigs or anything.

Middle relief and bullpen can use some work, but those areas are far from the worst that the Phightins' have seen.

As we all know, it's a brutally long season, and we're just over halfway through May. So yes, a ton can happen, both good and bad. I just caution anyone who's overly optimistic about this Phillies team to temper that enthusiasm with a healthy dose of reality every now and then. The offense needs to find its rhythm and start clicking. Still, I do recognize it's hard to complain with a division lead and a 10-games-over-.500 winning percentage.

MOVIES

Haven't seen a whole ton lately, but don't miss Bridesmaids. If you've been led to believe it's a chick-flick, stay clear of that propaganda, homey.

It's Judd Apatow and Paul Feig at their finest - raunchy at times, heartfelt at others, but genuine and ultimately, hilarious. Oh and you'll be re-introduced to Wilson Phillips, but in a good way (I promise).

There's actually a bunch of summer flicks I've highlighted that I want to check out over the next couple of months, but in El Presidente's usual style, none of the 'big blockbusters.'

Will keep you posted. You bring in the noise, I'll bring in da funk.

TV

There's always good shit on TV, no surprise. Mad Men has been pushed back to 2012, and we'll also need to wait until then for Season 3 of the brilliant Eastbound & Down.

But we do have Breaking Bad making its return to AMC, likely in July. Season 4 promises to keep raising the bar and upping the ante, but I'm not sure how much better this show can get.

SPOILER ALERT

Will Walt's power play (having Jessie kill Gabe) come back to bite him, or will it guarantee his safety, at least in the immediate future, while earning him respect in the eyes of Gus (aka 'Pollos') for his steel cojones? Will Jessie really need to skip the country now because of his infraction with Gabe, leaving Walt by himself and breaking up everyone's favorite two-man Meth-cook crew? Will Hank ever put two and two together, and what in God's name will happen when/if he does? Will Walt and Skylar get back together? Tons of questions.

Michael Scott is done on The Office, and I was glad they didn't beat us over the head with his departure. It was more understated, and we've already seen that the show will be just fine without him. They've totally mis-used Will Ferrell (bad job by them), but you can't win 'em all.

30 Rock was decent as usual, but it's on summer hiatus, and I have to say Parks & Recreation is killing it. It's improved in leaps and bounds. They've hit on a winning formula, great cast too. Don't eff it up, peeps.

Season 2 of 'Treme' began on HBO a few weeks back, and it's consistently excellent, as it was last season. David Simon and his crew are just spot-on at capturing the local flavor of a given locale when they shoot there, which is the essence of his work at its finest. Post-Hurrican Katrina New Orleans comes to life like nowhere else in this brilliant one-hour show. It's not packed with high drama every second and replete with shootouts galore, but if you can invest intellectually what the show demands to be enjoyed to its fullest, you won't be let down - trust me.

Finally, going into the back catalog of some shit I never seen before, but am glad I'm seeing it now, I present to you the addictive, powerful HBO prison drama 'Oz,' which aired from 1997-2003. This show is INSANE, but in a really good way. In some ways, I want to put it up there with 'The Wire' or 'Breaking Bad' or other similarly fantastic crime-oriented dramas, but some of the hokey, far-from-realistic plot twists and playing out of events hold it back from being among the 2-3 best shows ever of its genre. Not to mention that it's emotionally exhausting to watch (not happy times!). Overall, it is by all accounts though, a fairly accurate portrayal of prison life, except that they pack all the action into each episode rather than fully focusing on all the boring down-time that inundates REAL prison life. A former roommate and current friend of mine who works in corrections used to watch it when it aired back in the late 90s/early 2000s, and I often found him shaking his head in knowing disgust at many of the unpleasant but all too real atrocities the show portrays.

What keeps you coming back for more despite some of the suspension-of-disbelief type shit going on? The characters/casting is unreal. Just great. And the writing/dialogue is pretty damn good. I can overlook some of the more dis-believable aspects of the show because of this. Just finished Season 4 on HBO's nightly reruns, only two seasons and 16 episodes left. Grade A stuff. But if as many people die in real prison every day as they do in a typical epsiode of Oz, we definitely wouldn't have the prison overcrowding problem that we do.

MUSIC

Finally, a quick nod to a great experience that was Jazzfest 2011 in New Orleans a couple weeks ago. The wife and I jetted down and stayed with a friend and his family, and hit up Jazzfest on Saturday 5/7 to eat some amazing local cuisine and check out some banging sounds. The highlights? Trombone Shorty absolutely murdered the Gentilly Stage. I felt bad for The Strokes having to follow that shit up as the headliner, but the Garage Rock Kings from NYC represented well in their own way. At the end of the day, Trombone is a local NOLA musical legend, but the show he put on that day would slay anywhere on the globe. Truly amazing.

I've gotta thank my buddy The Danimal for putting us up and showing us a great time down there. Living in the Big Easy is unlike living anywhere else. And sadly, Strawberry Abita beer is going out of season, but I was lucky enough to enjoy it down there.

Viva la Jazzfest.

Playoffs?! Did you say Playoffs?

Ah yes, as the great Jim Mora Sr. once incredulously intoned to a reporter during a press conference many moons ago.

The postseason to what many are calling one of the more entertaining and notable NBA regular seasons in quite some time has been underway for about a week or so, and holy crow have we got some delicious storylines.

We’ve got the villainous Miami Heat looking like (unfortunately) one of two solid favorites in the Eastern Conference. We’ve still got LeBron getting booed every time he touches the ball in enemy territory. We’ve got the Boston Celtics having swept the beloved underdog New York Knicks out of their first postseason appearance in seven years (sorry New York. It’s an improvement over recent seasons’ results, but there’s still a lot of work to do). We’ve got a possible first-round bouncing of Orlando in the works (Hawks lead that series 3-1!). We’ve got a strong possibility that either the L.A. Lakers or San Antonio Spurs (God willing – how about both?!) might be shown the door to an early summer vacation before Round 2 tips off.

And there’s even a decent chance that Dirk Nowitzki and his ugly mug will be booted in Round 1 since Dallas is tied with Portland 2-2 as the series shifts back to The Lone Star State for Game 5. I’m definitely rooting for the Blazers in that series simply because I can’t take the HD closeups of Nowitzki anymore. If you have children, and you want to frighten the hell out of them, forget about scary movies or threatening to take away their PS3’s or Xbox’s. Simply strap them down for a couple hours whenever Dallas’ next game is on the tube, and they’ll be horrified for days to come after staring at Dirk for about 160 minutes.

And without further ado, check the rhyme technique.

EASTERN CONFERENCE


(1) Chicago Bulls lead (8) Indiana Pacers 3-1

Derek Rose is the all-but unanimous pick for the 2010-11 MVP in an era of unprecedentedly diverse talent for the league. He’s the youngest and most dangerous floor general out there, and his team actually has a shot to go to the finals this year. It’s likely going to come down to an epic Eastern Conference Finals series between Chicago and Miami, but it would be unwise to count out the defending Eastern Conference champion Boston Celtics, whose first-round sweep of the Knicks wasn’t so much a testament to the Cs’ play as it was a showcase for N.Y.’s postseason shortcomings. Either way, believe it or not Indiana has challenged Chicago in a way that few thought they would be capable through these first four games. They’ve all been close, and the Pacers could have won a couple that the Bulls pulled out in the end. Defensively, Indiana is deceptively effective. They’ve got youth and they contain Chicago’s offensive weapons reasonably well in the half-court game, but it’s damn hard to bottle up Mr. Rose permanently. Nice effort by the Pacers thus far, but it’s quite likely that Chicago will take Game 5 at home Tuesday night. Keep an eye on D-Rose though, as he came up a bit gimpy in Game 4 and wore a protective boot to practice during one of Chicago’s recent off-days. By all accounts he’ll be ready to go in Game 5.

(2) Miami Heat lead (7) Philadelphia 76ers 3-1

As a Philadelphia fan, of course I would love to have seen a better showing from the Sixers, an early-season playoff longshot that began 3-13 before later righting the ship under the inimitable Doug Collins, a man whose coaching carousel activity over the years would make a circus performer dizzy. But you know what? Winning Game 4 at home and prolonging the agony, er um, extending the series (that’s it!) is a positive for which this young team can … you know what, forget it. They’re getting smoked in Game 5 at Miami. And it’s not a reverse jinx, I truly believe it, I tell you. Look, Philly doesn’t have the schemes, the athletes or the playoff experience to oust this Heat team, but if Miami goes cold in the shooting department, anything is possible. But I don’t think I’m going out on a limb by predicting that the Heat will take Game 5 in South Beach and most likely end up playing Boston in Round 2. And that series will be a fight to the finish. If it goes any less than 6 games I’ll be shocked. Philly has some nice building blocks for the future. Evan Turner is a great young player, and Spencer Hawes has actually held his own at times in the low post against the likes of Joel Anthony, Chris Bosh and LBJ (not the toughest task, I realize). Lou Williams, Jrue Holliday and Elton Brand have all provided sparks at times. But we all know how this one is going to turn out.

(3) Boston Celtics def. (6) New York Knicks 4-0

This is not last year’s Boston team. The departure of Kendrick Perkins has completely changed the identity of Doc Rivers’ crew. And don’t be deceived by the Knicks sweep. Sure it’s a positive outcome, but the Knicks were simply not prepared to contend in these playoffs. Chauncey Billups got hurt, Amar’e Stoudamire wasn’t 100 percent healthy for the whole series, and the Knicks had few (or no) other adequate options for scoring the ball consistently and repeatedly outside of Carmelo Anthony. And let’s not even get started on the defensive end. Lots of work to do there. Somebody pointed out earlier this year how interesting a choice it was for Mike D’Antoni to be coaching New York. After all, he’s a run-and-gun, offensive-minded guy coaching a franchise whose hallmark traits are toughness, defense and a slower-paced, half-court brand of basketball. All of these are contributing factors in the Knicks’ early playoff exit. But they made it for the first time in seven years. There is once again optimism about basketball in New York, and there should be because it’s a basketball town. I hope they can continue to improve and generate excitement, because the league is much better off when the Knicks are relevant. Now as for Boston, they still have a great nucleus in place. But they’re not as ferocious in the low post as they once were. Perk is gone, Shaq is still hurt (and washed up), which means that Big Baby, Kevin Garnett and Jermaine O’Neal are your superstar big men on your Title Run. Good luck Boston fans, because I think you’ll need it. The Heat matchup in Round 2 will be very intriguing because Miami has its own low-post deficiencies as well, so we could see a neutralizing effect there. Rajon Rondo, Ray Allen and Paul Pierce will need to be successful for the C’s to keep winning, because eventually their weaknesses under the basket are going to be exposed. Most of all, Boston needs to regain their swagger and overall intimidating presence to stay alive. Half the reason they made it all the way to Game 7 in the Finals last year as a No. 4 seed is because they believed they could do it and they just straight muscled their way there.

(5) Atlanta Hawks lead (4) Orlando Magic 3-1

This is by far the most surprising result so far in the Eastern Conference Playoffs. Not even because of the seeding, but because of how deep Orlando’s playoff runs have been the past three seasons. Also because Orlando blasted the Hawks with a first-round sweep last year, and all of those games were heavily in the Magic’s favor. But as with the Boston-New York series, Atlanta’s success is just as much a function of Orlando’s shortcomings as it is due to the Hawks’ level of play. The Magic are shooting about 40 percent from the floor through the first four games. And nobody besides Dwight Howard is bringing the offensive firepower. If other Magic players don’t step up, they’re going home early this year. The Hawks, however, can improve in a few areas as well. They have a tendency to lose focus and not put games away when they’ve got a commanding lead. Oh and they also shot 12-for-20 from the foul line in their Game 4 win. True, Joe Johnson nailed four key free throws in the closing minutes for the victory, but a better performance at the charity stripe throughout the game may have guaranteed that it wouldn’t be so close at the end. Look for the Hawks to move on and likely match up with Chicago in Round 2.

WESTERN CONFERENCE

(8) Memphis Grizzlies lead (1) San Antonio Spurs 2-1

That’s right – no misprint. Oh and of course the next game is in Memphis. Boy will that be a pivotal Game 4. If the Grizz can somehow take a 3-1 series lead with Game 5 heading back to San Antonio, who knows what the H might happen. I know I’m probably sounding a little overzealous at the thought of an early departure for Tim Duncan and company, but I, like many, am basically tired of them, so please let me engage in my wishful thinking. But really, watching the Spurs play is sometimes like watching paint dry. The end result is what you want, but observing the journey is painful. Memphis, on the other hand, is young, fast and a tad more exciting. And they obviously have the confidence of knowing that they belong on the same court with the Spurs. Beale Street in Memphis will be rocking for Game 4. If San Antonio evens the series, they regain home court advantage. I don’t imagine they would lose the series if they can square it up with a Game 4 victory in Memphis. But if the Grizzlies can somehow go up 3-1, then they’re at least guaranteed a chance to close it out at home in Game 6 (assuming a Game 5 San Antonio home win), and at that point anything is possible. Zach Randolph has to continue to be a force in the paint, and outside shooters like Sam Young and O.J. Mayo need to keep doing their thing as well. But let’s not also forget that the Spurs’ version of the Big 3 – Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili and Duncan – along with the best coach that nobody talks about (Greg Popovich) have done this a million times, and are probably hiding all kinds of tricks up their collective sleeve that they’ll only break out during desperate times. Can’t wait to see how this series plays out.

(2) Los Angeles Lakers and (7) New Orleans Hornets tied at 2-2

Chris Paul put on a one-man clinic in Game 4 in New Orleans last night, notching a triple-double and turning in one of the best playoff performances his franchise has ever seen. The value that exists in a player as good as Paul is immeasurable, because eventually defenders on the opposing team just collapse on the superstar and leave open other guys just waiting for their own opportunity. If Paul isn’t the league’s best all-around point guard (even better than Rose), then I haven’t written an overly long blog entry that’s making you currently wish you had the last 10-15 minutes of your life back (you mean you made it this far and you’re still reading?! You like me! You really, really like me!). And by the way, I’ll do you one better. As strong as the Hornets have looked with ‘Who the hell are these guys’ types of players like Jarrett Jack, Carl Landry, Marco Belinelli and Emeka Okafor playing way over their heads in the absence of injured big man David West, I’m still not picking against the Lakers. Not only do I think they’re going to win this series, but I unfortunately think they still probably have the best chance in the Western Conference to make the Finals. Don’t be fooled by their apparent vulnerability. They’re not going away any time soon. And Kobe’s ankle isn’t really hurt that badly, despite how grim it looked in the closing minutes of Game 4. He’ll be back with a vengeance for Game 5 in L.A. You see, for New Orleans to have a real shot at winning this series, Chris Paul is going to need to maintain his current level of play in every remaining game. As amazing as he is, I just don’t know if it’s realistic to expect that. I think L.A. wins Game 5 and closes it out either in 6 or 7, depending on how much pride the Hornets have left for Game 6.

(3) Dallas Mavericks and (6) Portland Trailblazers tied at 2-2

What can I say about Dirk Nowitzki that hasn’t already been said about trolls that live under bridges? Okay, sorry, I had to get that out of the way first. Despite the scowl that’s permanently affixed to Dirk’s face, his Dallas Mavericks have fooled us all into thinking that things will be different for Dallas this year. No early-round playoff exit in 2011, no sirree. These Mavs are deep off the bench, Jason Kidd is playing as if he were really about 10 years younger, and Dallas has the ability to turn up the defensive pressure when it matters most. So why did they drop Games 3 and 4 then after bolting out to an impressive 2-0 series lead against a highly talented young Portland team? Because the Rose Garden has been a House of Horrors for Dallas, that’s why. Do the research and see how they’ve performed there in recent years, playoffs or not. It hasn’t been pretty. The Mavs just may have to win this one in 7 games. Of all the first-round series, this is probably the toughest to call. I feel that it could literally go either way. Dallas is known for their premature playoff collapses, but Portland is inexperienced in big moments despite their collection of highly-skilled players. Something tells me Dallas won’t lose at home and might end up pulling this one out in 7 games, leaving them vulnerable against a second-round opponent that’s likely to be better-rested. But who knows – maybe it’s just about matchups and nobody will give Dallas the same fight that Portland has the rest of the way. The heart says Portland, but the head says Dallas. I like the Mavs in 7.


(4) Oklahoma City leads (5) Denver 3-0

This is a fascinating series. Coming into the playoffs, many thought it had the potential to be the best first-round matchup in the west, if not both conferences. But instead, it’s the most lopsided in the West. Just confirms that you never can tell. Great storylines going on here. Denver has played way better since dumping Carmelo for New York and inheriting about 30 percent of the Knicks’ 2010-11 roster (including sharpshooter Danilo Gallinari). They’ve got a nice blend of youth and experience, and they’re an intimidating presence with their toughness, physicality and 50 kajillion body/facial tattoos. Oklahoma City though, outside of the Bulls, is definitely the most intriguing young team in the NBA. If anybody can dump the old guard from out West (Spurs/Lakers) and advance to the finals this year, it’s the OKC Thunder. They’ve got scoring for days (Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook, James Harden, and now, Kendrick Perkins), and if you’ve watched them this year you know they are no slouch on defense (start remembering names like Serge Ibaka and Thabo Sefalosha – difficult though they may be to spell and pronounce). Denver has fought the good fight, but when the Thunder is rolling they’re tough to stop. The Nuggets can prevent the sweep with a victory at home tonight in Game 4, but it would simply be delaying the inevitable. The Thunder are moving on. Oh and they’re the only team to have won 2 games against the Lakers last year throughout the Western Conference Playoffs, so they know how to attack Kobe and company. Would absolutely love to see a Lakers-Thunder rematch this year.