Jenksismyhero

Cats are awful. b****y, finicky, stubborn, untrainable, and lazy. We have two cats and a dog. If my wife didn't enjoy the cats, they'd be outside. One does nothing but leave hair everywhere and refuses to accept basic social boundaries (every morning at 4:30-5 when he's hungry he sits on my wife's head as she's sleeping), the other is a b**** that only enjoys being pet on HIS terms. Oh, and when he's pissed, he s***s in front of the litter box. And even though they're my wifes cats, she's pregnant, so I'm forced to clean the litter. f*** cats.

I didn't care for the whole Golden Gate scene (a bit too unbelievable for me, even in a movie about super smart apes) or Franco's s***-grin at the end. It just felt like a movie where it was really rolling and then just fell a little flat. They had everything set up perfectly but then just failed to give me that one final satisfying scene to link it all up with the originals. I also didn't like how they alluded to the global pandemic in the credits instead of showing a scene or two about it. Maybe that's for a sequel though. Again, I didn't hate it, I just was left with that "um, that was an ok way to end it, but not great."

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 6, 2012 -> 12:40 PM) I can't put Illinois in the same category as a UNC. UNC would be in the top 5, so Illinois wouldn't be in the same category.

Caught Ides of March and Planet of the Apes this weekend. Same review for both - well done, entertaining, but ultimately the ending was unsatisfying. Solid "B."

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 6, 2012 -> 11:32 AM) I'd agree with that as well. Because of the post-Knight problems at IU, I didn't include them in the top schools but all indications are that they are headed back to that point. I'd put Illinois somewhere in the 10-20 range, which is still a "top school." Here's a better argument, what are the top big ten schools ? I'd go: MSU OSU (based a lot on recent success, but no reason they can't continue unless there's another scandal/NCAA violation) IU ILL WIS __________ PUR MICH MINN IOWA __________ NW PENN ST NEB

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Feb 6, 2012 -> 10:28 AM) Illinois is pretty good historically. They don't have the elusive NC, but they have to be by far the best program without one. But I think that's mainly besides the point. I think most Illinois fans think of the basketball program as a sleeping giant. They may be right. Illinois has historically massively underachieved and still done pretty well for itself. It's basically for one reason only, and that's the talent bed it sits on. They can get scraps and still be a top 15 team with relative ease. Chicago is about tied with NYC with being the best basketball hotbed on the planet (EDIT: I looked up some numbers and it appears Chicago is actually the better one). Illinois is the only major in-state program (with apologies to DePaul and Northwestern) and talent should be coming here on a consistent basis. Problem is, it hasn't for about 20 years now, save for the last three years kind of. With the kind of resources Illinois has, yes, there is definite pressure from the fans to compete. They see the in-state talent and figure it should be done with relative ease. Illinois is a top basketball school. The problem is that it's been a revolving door since Henson. Why, i'm not sure. Kruger left for the NBA. I bet he would take that move back. Self left for a dream job in the Big 12. Can't really fault him there. I'm just not sure who is out there that Illinois could get. Shaka not having any ties to the Big Ten and Chicago kind of scares me. And that's taking a flyer on a guy that had success at the mid-major level, but not at the major level. Wasn't that the big knock on Weber all this time?

I was too busy prepping my place for a superbowl party, so I didn't get to watch much of the game. Frankly, I could care less how well they played or how much better NW played. That's a game you simply have to win. No excuses. If I'm Thomas I'm on the phones this week to see what kind of money I can gather for a buyout and a new contract going forward. Problem is this decision will come down to finances. Weber makes 1.3 mil a year, that's fourth to last in the Big Ten. Izzo makes 3.5, Matta makes 2.5, Crean makes 2.2. In other words, if Illinois fans expect them to compete for a top of the line coach, they're going to have to come up with some money. That's something they've never really done before. If you can somehow get Shaka to come AND you can keep Howard, I'm all for it. Otherwise I think you have to fire a couple of assistants, give Weber the end of his contract (next year) and hire an assistant that can take over if need be. Here's what I see happening: they barely make it to the tournament and lose in the first or second round. Everyone calls for Weber's head. Then he pulls in a good recruiting class. He's already got 2 good verbals, maybe he gets Hamilton too. Then what do you do? Risk losing those recruits?

Our boston terrier eats Science Diet lamb and rice with a side of a potato chip every now and again. She also gets an old-dog treat with gluclosamine for joint pain/arthritis because she had a luxated putella as a puppy. Once we started with the treats she's never had it again (4+years...knocks on wood). She never has any health problems and has one of the best coats i've ever seen with a boston. Cheap hint: grab a bottle of the fish oil pills they sell at walgreens in the drug aisles. That really makes the coat shine. I also get into a fight every year with my wife about taking the dog and our two cats to the vet. They're beyond their shots so it's just routine check-ups at this point. I refuse to spend 100-150 bucks or more so they can look at their poop, check their weight, etc. If they have any serious problems I'm sure we'd be able to tell.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 2, 2012 -> 08:24 PM) Knicks are just basically abusing Boozer. Helps when you can take four steps without traveling

Bulls playing well tonight. Knicks are awful.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Feb 2, 2012 -> 03:48 PM) And just how is Wisconsin 'paying for it'? They laid off less than 1% of teachers, had most school budget shortfalls turned around and are on the right path fiscally. They also rid the school boards of the previous requirement o purchase insurance ONLY from a UNION OWNED INSURANCE COMPANY. The moment they actually had to bid their services, they dropped the rates by over 50%. So that means that previously they were sucking off 50% extra from each and every Wisconsin taxpayer that went to a union owned company that had a contractual monopoly with zero incentive to provide value for its services. The state is better off now, with the exception of 1% of the teachers and some union bank accounts. Yeah, but, well, people signed petitions and stuff. So, there.

QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ Feb 2, 2012 -> 03:26 PM) Not sure if this was mentioned before, but the tobacco industry was hammered on second hand smoke. The fact that a smoker is affecting a non-smoker was, and is, a HUGE deal. Drinking doesn't have that same stigma, other than what drinking can CAUSE you to do. But the actual act of drinking doesn't harm anyone around him. I think that was a huge win for anti-tobacco. I think drunk driving certainly harms people. But yeah, I see your point.

QUOTE (GoodAsGould @ Feb 2, 2012 -> 01:18 PM) I think moreso it has to do with money being tight and cigarettes being expensive. I'm sure there are a lot of factors - it's not glorified like it used to be, health risks are becoming more and more clear (and obvious on every pack), the price, the inability to smoke indoors, etc. But I think a substantial part of that is it's not mainstream anymore. If you smoke it's because you smoked before or you know someone who does and for some reason want to replicate that. Alcohol is different. Drinking is now where smoking was in the 60's and 70's.

QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 2, 2012 -> 12:40 PM) I was speaking to why we raised the age to 21 from 18 back in the 1970s and early 1980s. IIRC states would be denied federal road doallars if their drinking age was under 21. But you confirm my point. But to your point, are you suggesting that 18-20 year olds are forced into irrespossible behavior? If they are getting drunk and driving because they can't get into a bar they will then drink less at a bar and not drive drunk? They have to get home from the bar. The best argument I have heard from university presidents for a return to 18 is it drives the drinking underground where there is less supervision. They believe with a lower drinking age they can better monitor kids drinking and when they have a problem they will be more willing to seek out help. The best way to curb drunk driving is to ban liquor ads on television. Stop making alcohol the be all, end all of a fun night out. See also, smoking.

Anyone else watch Downton Abbey? Not sure why I decided to give it a try, probably the historic setting, but I ended up busting through the first season this week (360 minutes split into 4 episodes). I'd recommend it for anyone looking for a new show. Good acting, good writing and some interesting characters.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Feb 2, 2012 -> 08:49 AM) Taj is the better near the rim offensive player and that's what you want in a PF. Not a PF who does 15 foot fade aways. When Boozer takes those shots, especially if they come after Noah sets a screen for Rose, there's absolutely no one within 12 feet of the rim for a rebound. So it's either Boozer makes it, or they're going the other way. That happened repeatedly last night.

Yeah I was gonna say David Lee was a guy that I wanted, and he wanted to come to Chicago. He did well with the Knicks and is doing well with Golden State. Certainly more consistent than Boozer.

Watching this reminded me of this thread. Parents living vicariously through their kids + terrible moral decisions = this:

I have a Nikon D5000 (now slightly upgraded and sold as the 5100) and love it. Canons feel too plastick-y for my taste, at least the one I was looking at (in the same class as the D5000). If I'm going to drop $900-1200 on a camera kit it better feel solid. I'd suggest you go to a store and feel them out first. And I definitely recommend getting the kit at Sams or Costco (or online). You can normal get some of the extras (bag/memory card/tripod) for free with the kit, in addition to the extra zoom lens you'll get. Saves you some money on items you'll need anyway. And I 2nd Ken Rockwell's site, especially for his lens reviews. Very good stuff. Lastly, cameras these days for a beginner are so over-packed with features that pretty much anything you get that's somewhat new (1-2 years old) you'll be able to take great photographs. The new push is always for HD video (a gimmick) and more megapixels. Unless you plan to print off billboard size photos, don't overspend for the MP count. My biggest thing for cameras is shutter speed. The faster you can take a shot, the better the pictures you can get....especially if you're taking pictures of kids.

QUOTE (fathom @ Feb 1, 2012 -> 03:36 PM) One of the reasons it seems college basketball sucks the last few years, in my opinion, is due to Kentucky signing so many of the top recruits. Thus, you basically have a revolving door with that program instead of the top recruits being spread throughout the country. Yeah, same with North Carolina.

That would leave us with Lucas as the only back up guard. If Rose goes down, we'd be screwed.

People forget too that Dee Brown was still expected to go 1st round after the 04-05 season but broke his foot during the pre-draft workouts. He came back his senior year and still did really well (again, winning the Bob Cousy award), but they failed to get out of the 2nd round so his stock took a hit.

QUOTE (GoodAsGould @ Feb 1, 2012 -> 11:56 AM) Anyone that watched the 05 team could tell D-Will was the team leader and ran the offense of that team more than anyone else. Dee Brown was a solid college player but he wasn't Adam Morrison or Steph Curry or anywhere close to their levels. By "anyone" you mean the coaches and media members voting in all of the major awards that year (all-america team, national player of the year, and big ten player of the year/defensive player of the year) the ones Dee Brown won and Deron Williams did not?

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Feb 1, 2012 -> 11:33 AM) who had the better numbers during the title run season? Im just curious, I really dont know. All i know is that people that season were saying "Dee Brown, yea i like him. But man, DWill has come out of nowhere and we really like him" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004%E2%80%93...basketball_team D-Will had the PG body and the potential and the "true" PG skills that the NBA didn't really have. That's why the big debate was who would be better, D-Will, the protypical PG, or Paul, the score first PG.

QUOTE (GoodAsGould @ Feb 1, 2012 -> 11:24 AM) D-Will was much better Dee Brown and it really showed during the tournament... Brown was just more flashy because of his speed. What? You're crazy. Deron had a great tournament, but in terms of stats during their college careers, Dee Brown had better numbers and was more consistent. Even in 2004-2005 he had better numbers and he was an All-American, Sporting News Player of the Year, and Big Ten Player of the Year. Edit: and Big Ten Defensive Player of the Year. 2nd Edit: and in his senior year he won the Bob Cousy award. People just don't remember how awesome Dee Brown was. Deron got the high draft pick and did really well in the NBA, so people assume he was the better college player. But he wasn't.