ThatKidInTheCorner

« April 2005 | Main | June 2005 »

May 26, 2005

The Great T-Shirt Reckoning of 2005

In which I attempt to thin the ever-expanding ranks of the pile of t-shirts in my closet

My t-shirt shelf is three-and-a-half feet tall. I don't know that said shelf was intended for use as such by whichever erstwhile resident installed the shelf system in the closet, but given the space's dimensions (42 in. x 13 in. x 12 in. -- I measured!) and my, ahem, rather significant t-shirt holdings, the poor thing never really had a chance. For the past three and a half years, it's been the proud home of my tower of t-shirts.

And when I say tower, I'm not kidding. The space was full, top to bottom, at all times (and that assumes that at any given moment a solid 5 percent of my total t-shirts are in circulation in a laundry pile or some other drawer or something). Never mind that a "tower" is probably the least efficient way to store the t-shirts (as it means that you only actually wear the 15 that are on top); most of that tower exists more as collection than wardrobe anyway. And it's quite a collection. Though I can't imagine that my t-shirt holdings are so much different from most folks from my age/ education demo, when I thought about it a bit, I realized that I do maintain a number of unsettling risk factors for above-average t-shirt accumulation:

(1) Multiple jobs at start-up internet/ technology companies: with the exception of building semi-useful software, selling consumer products below cost, and bragging to the press, there was nothing that pre-Nasdaq-crash tech companies liked to do more than make t-shirts.

(2) I've been to college and grad school and was in a "social" organization at least part of the time: not only are we going to have a CRAZY party, but we're going to commemorate just how CRAZY it was by making t-shirts! And what's even CRAZIER, sometimes those shirts will feature semi-clever double-entendres about "drinking" and "sex." Look out!

(3) I worked in the marketing department: so even when I wasn't waist-deep in dotcom, I was working in marketing for a consumer entertainment brand. Part of my responsibilities included designing the t-shirts. You can imagine where this is going (I only have, oh, like seven of said shirts).

(4) Proclivity for rec league sports: right, so it isn't so crazy, but I do have more than a few t-shirts from soccer and volleyball leagues around town. They pile up. Though, in all fairness, I'm not much of a runner so at least I avoided having a pile of "2001 Thanksgiving Corporate Challenge 5K" shirts.

Like I said, a tower. Still, everyone has a lot of t-shirts. They're just smarter about throwing away the old ones than I am. But with a Big Move looming on the horizon (more on that when it happens) and an unusual wellspring of OCD for a Monday (really don't know where all that came from), I decided to take a run at the t-shirts. That is, I decided to fell the tower and try to get rid of the shirts that I "haven't worn in six years."

As with (ahem) any large project, your strategy defines your success. If this was all going to work (meaning that I was going to get rid of the lousy t-shirts and keep the good ones), I needed to maintain some guidelines. Of course said guidelines didn't actually emerge until I was midway through the whole thing, but, hey, most of life is just recharacterizing the past anyway. Here's how it worked out:

White Flight: May 23, 2005 was not a good day to be a white t-shirt at my apartment. Purge, purge, purge! Though I held on to a core group of plain white t-shirts (mostly for use as undershirts), if you were a white t-shirt with writing on it, you most likely got the heave-ho (though of course some special exceptions were made -- see below). Sorry, fellas: the organization just decided to go in a different direction.

Perfect Colors: the inverse of the white t-shirt rule was that I tended to keep almost all of my non-white t-shirts. And among the ones I kept, select subrules were in play: (1) you can never have too many orange t-shirts -- never; (2) the brighter the color, the better -- I'm a sucker for bright colors; and (3) if there was any non-white color that I beat up on, it was gray -- with apologies to a certain upstate NY resident, I just don't feel the gray ones so much.

Forgive Us Our Trespasses As We Forgive....: in my earlier days, I had something of an affinity for the t-shirt-with-witticism. You know, the ones that boast some sort of clever and/ or naughty phrase that indicates that the wearer is a happenin' dude with a sly and knowing sense of humor. Yes yes, feel free to snicker. Right. All the "clever" ones were gone, especially the one about the "bad dog"; what the eff was I thinking with that one? (Though I'm going to admit that I held on to "Just Here For The Crack" featuring the crude line drawing of the alien and flying saucer; I have a soft spot for that one.)

Why Do They Call Her Long?: though they might not even qualify for this conversation (since one might classify them in a separate category of garment), it's understood that I kept all my long-sleeved t-shirts. They're too valuable to give up.

NASDAQ Nostalgia: in re: the above comments about having worked at a couple ill-fated dotcoms, I definitely held on to almost all the shirts from former employers, especially the ones that are now defunct. In fact, the more defunct, the better. Honorable mention for those that feature the names of products that are also defunct/ make-no-sense-at-all-and-certainly-have-no-place-on-a-t-shirt. Sales compensation management solutions? What?

Limited Editions: so if fewer than 30 of a t-shirt were made, say, for The Meetings, then I kept the t-shirt -- it's like protecting an endangered species.

The Museum Pieces: I suppose this should have been obvious to me before, but I realized about midway through the process the certain shirts only exist as part of my collection, and are never actually worn. I don't know if that really makes sense, but I just have a couple that are too cool to actually put on: my Hands On A Hardbody shirt (from the actual Nissan dealership in the movie!), my Be The Reds shirt (size XL but completely too small), and my Johny's Luncheonette shirt (home of the famous Sloppy Johny). This all just means I need to get a Lenny's shirt soon.

Righto, thanks for reading. Be sure to check back regularly for more updates as I clean out my sock drawer!

Posted by thatkid at 4:34 PM | Comments (0)

May 22, 2005

Psssssst! Anakin Skywalker is Darth Vader!

In which I try to talk about the new Star Wars movie without ruining it for people who didn't make it on opening day

I suppose there was at least an off-chance I wouldn't see Revenge of the Sith on opening day. Like if they lost all of the copies of the film that were supposed to be shipped to New York. Or if I managed to contract the Ebola virus. Given my current circumstances (those being "Man of Leisure who's been reading every article/ review of the new Star Wars movie as I basked in the radiance of my recent graduation from b-school"), my general geekiness/ enthusiasm for the Star Wars thing, and the fact that I'd seen both previous prequels on opening day despite being gainfully employed, my attendance at a Sith screening was pretty fait accompli.

Right. So we got tickets, day of, for the 7:15 showing on the IMAX screen (which is pretty much the best ticket to get). Whoa. We were shocked; shouldn't we have had to sleep in a tent for a week in our Stormtroopers costumes to get those sorts of tickets? Nope. Our final ticket was purchased through Fandango at 4:30 in the afternoon. No hassles, no worries. And though the theater was pretty full, it wasn't sold out. (I imagine this has something to do with Sith being released on four screens at every multiplex in America this weekend. But still.)

At the risk of ruining it (and I'll try really really hard not to), some reactions to Revenge of the Sith:

It's A Good Thing When They Tell Us That The Bad Guys Are Going To Win: The Empire Strikes Back remains the best movie of the six, in no small part because it was so dark. Han gets frozen, Luke loses half his arm, Darth seeks partial custody of Luke, and the rebels have to turn tail and get the eff out of Dodge. And the best part is that we knew it was going to happen ahead of time. As noted in the title, the Empire struck back. Same thing here -- you know ahead of time that the Sith are going to have their revenge, but you just don't know how much revenge. (SPOILER: It was a lot of revenge. A lot.) Even before I saw a single frame of Sith, I liked that they were telling us the bad guys were going to win. Excellent track record there.

Most Lightsabers Ever!: inasmuch as "George Lucas has enough money that he can make whatever goddam movie he wants and no one can tell him otherwise, even if it means we have to sit through Jar Jar Binks for two hours," I do feel like he's gotten some feedback from the previous two films and applied it as he went along. More specifically, I feel like there must have been a lot of focus group talk about how people really really really liked watching lightsaber fights. Episode 1 had an awesome lightsaber fight at the end, but only really that one big one. Episode 2 not only had a sweetdaddy lightsaber fight at the end (Yoda!), but also a gigantic multi-Jedi, multi-lightsaber fight on Geonosis, as well as the cool shot of all the Jedi kids with their Yoda/ child-sized lightsabers. Sith is all lightsabers, all the time -- lots of duels, lots of fights, and new lightsaber-wielding dudes. The people asked for lightsabers, and the people got lightsabers. LOTS of lightsabers.

Speaking of Lightsabers...: though there were lots of lightsabers in this one, they didn't debut any new designs or colors. No Darth Maul double-sided model; no new color like Mace Windu's purple one. Our crew was actually pretty bummed about this: why not a yellow (like Luke had embedded in his arm in the original Kenner action figure)? An orange? Also, when is someone going to tell me what the colors mean? Why do the Sith roll with the pink? A friend suggested that when you change sides of the Force, your lightsaber should automatically change colors (like in Tron!). NOTE: see here for the best answer I could find; this is also worth clicking.

And One More Thing About Lightsabers: not to give too much away (SPOILER ALERT!), but it's not as sweet to watch a lightsaber fight when the lightsabers are the same colors. Ack just saying. I will now stop talking about lightsabers.

A Very Complicated Cartoon: they're pretty restrained with the space battles in this one, which, at this point, is a good thing. Whereas once upon a time Star Wars movies had the market cornered on spaceships whizzing around and shooting ray guns at each other, at this point digital effects are cheap enough that there were moments when the opening space battle looked pretty much exactly like Battlestar Galactica on Sci-Fi. Even the designs of the ships. Pretty lame. (I think it might have been all the shadows on the ships in this one that made it look like Battlestar Galactica. I think.) Though I did enjoy seeing the inside-the-ship details of cannons firing and things blowing up as two gigantic ships flew past each other and fired at each other broadsides/ old-timey-naval-battle style. Also, perhaps due to the IMAX, I definitely had that cool vertigo effect as the ships dove and twisted. That never gets old for me.

Obi Wan Is Actually Really Good At Being A Jedi: I guess we always knew that he was pretty good at being a Jedi, but he kicks a lot of ass in this one, and seems to do a much better job of fighting than lots of the other Jedi (some of whom seem to have pretty low levels of Jedi powers).

Speaking of the Jedi: without going into it too too much, I definitely feel like I get the Jedi a lot more now. That is, I see where they're coming from, why they have their rules, and what they're trying to do. Also, whereas in previous incarnations they seemed pretty infallible/ unkillable, it was cool to see how they could screw things up too. And they totally screwed things up. So they're not perfect either.

Speaking of Getting Things More Now: whatever one will say about George Lucas and these stories (the dialogue is atrocious, he has no idea how to write a love scene, etc.), you really have to hand it to him in re: plot. As in, as boring as the first two movies could be with all their politics and nonsense, he really pulled the whole thing together with Sith: the first two movies make a ton more sense now, and the earlier three actually do have a legit backstory. It's actually very satisfying, epic scope and all that. Tin ear for dialogue, blah blah blah, but he knocks the plot thing out of the park.

Proto Toys Everywhere!: so, I know this is just a serious geek sort of thing, but, errr, I, errr, thought it was really cool how all the ships/ toys in this movie looked like variations on the ships/ toys from the original Star Wars movie. As in, they showed us a lot of ships/ toys that were supposed to be the earlier models of the ships/ toys from the original three movies. Yeah. I totally ate that up.

SPOILER: Anakin Is A Cheap Date: without offering too big a sequence on this topic (since it's essentially the central issue in the film: "How did Anakin become Darth?") or ruining too much, I think I can safely say that while I understand the reasons why Anakin became Darth, I don't think said reasons were effectively communicated by the dramatic narrative of this film. That is, I could write them down as a a little list, and they are all satisfying reasons that resonate with what we know about Anakin's history and personality as well as the more general things we know about the Jedi, but I don't think the film really hit it on the nose. And that's pretty big, since it is the Big Question in the whole six-movie series. They could have used another scene on the topic at the very least (assuming that the actors and dialogue weren't going to improve in the existing scenes). I'll stop now.

Some Coma/ Amnesia/ Secret Twin Sort Of Thing: so when they say "Darth Vader" for the first time, a teenaged girl in the row behind us gasped and started whispering to her friends. At first, I thought she was trying to be funny in a "DUH!" sort of way, but the volume of whispers exchanged between she and her friends indicated some splainin was happening. This girl didn't know that Anakin was Darth! I mean, that isn't a geeky sort of thing; casual observers of pop culture should have a pretty decent chance of knowing why we're following this Anakin guy around. Or, at the very least, you expect that the sort of person who shows up for opening night of the final Star Wars movie would know who Anakin was. And that's when I realized that there is a subset of kids who probably go to opening night at the multiplex every single weekend regardless of the film (the same girl was probably at the House of Wax the week before). And that's why I don't go to the movies so frequently.

The Verdict: you know, I guess I was expecting the Single Greatest Movie Experience Ever That Would Rekindle My Childhood Wonder At The Marvels Of Star Wars; I didn't get that. Parts of it were weak, parts were slow, and the CGI doesn't look special anymore. All that said, I really enjoyed the film. Things make sense for me now, and I understood everyone's emotions. This one was just a lot more heavy/ serious than any of the others, and it actually resonated with me -- I guess I was invested enough in this universe that the emotions worked. The bad guys won. By a lot.

If I had to nail down a single reason why this one worked for me (certainly more than the other two prequels), it was that each of these movies has left me really fired up to find out What Happens Next. That is, I wanted to continue with the story and see how things worked out. None more so than this one -- the ending was long and serious, and there were a lot of corpses on the ground by the time the credits rolled. As noted, the bad guys had won, and I was pretty disappointed about it (as said bad guys were pretty evil/ awful dudes). But instead of waiting three years for another prequel, I now get to watch the rest of the story unfold immediately on my Star Wars, Empire, and Jedi tapes. And that's pretty sweet. They should have been selling the DVD Boxed Set in the lobby. Seriously. I would have bought it right there.

So there you go: Star Wars movies make me want to watch more Star Wars movies, and this one made me like the ones I have even more/ purchase new copies of things I already have. Makes sense to me -- good work, Lucasfilm.

(Or maybe that's just the Force talking....)

Posted by thatkid at 6:21 PM | Comments (0)

May 17, 2005

Deportivo La Camena CF Season 5 Review

Double Cup Glory For Young Camena Squad While Domestic League Championship Continues to Elude; Changes Expected

As he surveyed the remains of a half-empty training room at the Sorry Perhaps(tm) 153 Center the day after the final game of Deportivo La Camena CF's fifth season, a 3-0 win over Borussia Dortmund that clinched a second-place finish for Camena in the League D Championship, veteran midfielder Park Ji "Parkie" Sung, 27, had a look on his face that -- if not quite smug -- was certainly very satisfied. "If you had asked anyone before the season if they thought we had a chance to win two trophies this year, playing on Level 6, they would have laughed at you," he explained, shaking his head, "I guess we surprised some people."

Indeed, given the vast investments in younger players made by club technical director Rob Freewer in last summer's close season -- over 30,000 points -- many expected this to be something of a rebuilding year for Camena. And although the club began the year with a mostly veteran lineup, highlighted by high-profile signings like Thierry Henry and Ronaldinho, by mid-season a cadre of younger players had infiltrated the starting lineup and proved very difficult for Camena's erstwhile starters to displace.

"It is remarkable the contribution that the younger players have made. We expected some production from Franco [Zola] and maybe Youri [Djorkaeff], but to see a Eusebio blossom so quickly was a shock," said Park.

To observe that Zola, Djorkaeff, and Eusebio (ages 19, 20, and 18, respectively) were effective during Camena's run to victories in the Division 1 Cup and WEFA Championships is something of an understatement. As the season wore on and some of the older legs on the team began to wear down, it was these young players, along with Les Ferdinand, George Besti, Paolo Maldini, and Hristo "California" Stoichlov who were able to deliver results in an increasingly crowded fixture schedule. That these young players scored five of the six goals (two each for Eusebio and Ferdinand, and one for Zola) in the 6-0 WEFA Championship final drubbing of Real Madrid is a testament to their emergence as the nucleus of a team that should be strong for seasons to come. Remarkably, the play of these youngsters has rendered 22-year-old Wayne Rooney -- arguably the club's best player over the final third of the season -- something of an Old Man on the team, and has left Freewer with some tough personnel decisions for this close season.

Though Freewer has been reluctant to make any public statements about his off-season plans, sources close to the team expect some major changes. Given the club's current wage bill (a whopping 25,782), and the size of the roster, it seems extremely unlikely that the club will hold on to a number of veteran players. Among those almost certain to go are strikers Kuranyi and Charisteas and midfielders Lee Chun Soo and Cha Du Ri. Yet there have also been rumors that the team is looking to sell highly valued stars like Thierry Henry, 30, and Adriano (the leader scorer and assist man in the D1 Cup), 26, as well as prized goalkeeper Peter Cech, 24.

That the club can even consider selling off such proven veteran producers is a testament to the development efforts of the club's ace Head Coach Jon LaPadua. LaPadua's offseason program undeniably accelerated the development of the younger players -- and paid huge dividends for the club as the season progressed. LaPadua, along with assistant coaches Calbert A. Quickvipa and Rich Supla, built a team that was able to use its athleticism and technical skill to more than make up for its gaps in experience.

Though the team played mostly in a 4-4-2 alignment, it was willing to change formations and tactics as necessary. In an interview last week, LaPadua hinted that the team might look to experiment even more in the coming season. "Yes, it is true we have had success with the 4-4-2, but with the personnel we now have and our goals for the coming season, we might have to rethink some of our plans," said LaPadua. "This team thrives on scoring goals, and we need to be flexible."

Camena will now be able to enjoy a reputation as Cup specialists, after this season's Cup double and a victory in the previous season's WEFA Masters Cup. Unfortunately, their success in the Cup competitions has perhaps overshadowed their continued frustration in the League. The team finished a best-ever second in the table this season with 59 points (18-5-7), but were a full 13 points behind League Champions Bayer Leverkusen (72 points, 23-3-4). Leverkusen, behind infuriating young striker Landon "Landycakes" Donovan, seem to be the team to beat, and there is no doubt that the Camena - Leverkusen fixtures this coming season will be charged affairs.

Deportivo La Camena also failed to secure any of the individual player honors in the League, but many close to the club have tipped young Gianfranco Zola as perhaps the team's best candidate for Player of the Year honors. "Certainly Rooney was outstanding for Camena this past season, and Eusebio showed flashes of potential, like that chip [Eusebio chipped the keeper against AC Milan in the WEFA semis to clinch a spot in the WEFA Championships final], but clearly the engine that makes this team run is Zola," explained an unnamed source. "The other players respect him, his fitness is strong, and he's not even close to the prime of his career yet."

Given the club's recent success, few have been shocked by the club's ambitions off the field. With 82,583 sitting in the club's coffers, the club's supporters are keen for the team to be active in the transfer market. But more than that, Camena are eager to establish the club as a leading global sports brand. On the recommendation of head coach LaPadua, the team will embark on a pre-season tour of Australia and the Pacific Rim. Camena have secured a new equipment sponsor and will debut redesigned kits for the coming season, though Sorry Perhaps plc is expected to continue as official team sponsor. Club Marketing Director Abigail Q. Cleveruba is committed to maintaining the club's traditions while embracing a new generation of marketing and sponsorship opportunities -- opportunities that could power the club for years to come.

In the meantime, Deportivo La Camena CF are settling into their off-season training regimen and focusing on the season ahead. "We have had success, yes, but there is much left to accomplish," said coach LaPadua, "We still have some tricks up our sleeve, and we look forward to taking another run at the domestic title."

If you'd like to know more about Deportivo La Camena CF, be sure to check out The Official Winning Eleven Nation or just stop by the apartment. If you'd like to learn more about actual FC Camena, you'll need to talk to these guys.

Posted by thatkid at 5:49 PM | Comments (0)

May 11, 2005

You're Not Wrong, TO, You're Just An ________

In which I cut TO some slack before explaining just how badly he blew it in Philly with his offseason nonsense

So that Terrell Owens guy is pretty tough. Played in the Super Bowl on a broken leg, against multiple doctors' orders. Had nine catches for 122 yards in the loss. He played with grit, determination, and passion. He had done pretty well in Philly, PR-wise, until that point; the Super Bowl thing was going to put him over the top, in "Most Heroic Performance Ever" sort of territory. Hell, I was even set to buy myself a fresh number-81 shirt (in midnight green, to complement my white number-5 shirt) for the upcoming season.

And then it all went wrong. He switched agents (trading his longtime partner for NFL superagent Drew Rosenhaus) and announces that he wanted to renegotiate his contract. That would be the seven-year contract that he signed last year. Right. Errr, a little, umm, bold, but he did bust his ass in the Super Bowl and risk his health and whatnot. Fair enough. That his superagent had a reputation for holding players out of camps and playing hardball was troubling, but hey, if you want more money, it seems wisest to secure the services of the guy who has a reputation for playing hardball.

Until that point, the people were uneasy about TO, but still on his team. Philly is a union town. There's no love for management there -- remember, this is the place that held public demonstrations more than once in the past ten years to try to influence the decisions of Eagles management. TO played hard in the Super Bowl. While other prominent Eagles (Messrs. Reid and McNabb) were concillatory after the game (offering lots of "We tried our best"-style platitudes), TO was fuming -- the guy was pissed off he lost. We like that sort of thing.

And, in a more general sense, TO's decision to demand more money just one year into his seven-year contract is actually pretty fair. The NFL has, by far, the most management/ ownership-friendly labor agreement of any of the four major sports (NOTE: I'm still counting hockey, even though they don't actually have a labor agreement, or really even a league). In the sport where the careers are the shortest and there is the highest potential for injury, there are no guaranteed contracts. That is, as soon as you even seem the slightest bit broken, management can kick your ass out the door. Goodbye. Thanks for crippling yourself on our behalf.

From a macro perspective, what Drew Rosenhaus and his cadre of high-profile clients (about 90 players) are doing is trying to shift the balance of power in the NFL labor agreement. The demands to renegotiate existing deals (with the threat of a holdout as their negotiating leverage) are essentially the players' version of the salary-cap cut. That is, if the owners can cut us on a moment's notice when we play below expectations, then we can ask for more money when we play above expectations. The Rosenhaus players are essentially casting themselves as a separate labor union, not bound by the rules and conventions of the current agreement. To me, it makes economic sense. The NFL labor agreement is brutal. When labor is faced with unfair or unequitable working conditions, they're allowed to organize themselves and demand better conditions. These dudes make A LOT of money for owners (Did you know that NFL owners can turn a profit without selling a single game ticket? Each team gets $100 million from the national media deal this year; the salary cap is just over $80 million. Look at that!) and they have a right to demand a bigger slice.

The problem is, of course, that there already is a union, and there already is a labor agreement. The fact that Rosenhaus has been so successful in recruiting players to his cause perhaps suggests that there is more friction looming for the NFL's labor pact than the commissioner and head of the NFLPA would like to let on. But with 90 players on his team, Rosenhaus is becoming a more and more powerful force -- it'll be interesting to see how it all pans out in the next couple years (hopefully they won't do something crazy and ruin a season like the other sports have more recently done).

In that context, I actually thought the people in Philly might be on TO's side in this whole thing. And they might have, had TO only kept his piehole shut. But no. TO talked to Len Pasquarelli at ESPN and in explaining why he wanted more money, took some potshots at Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb, claiming that he (TO) wasn't the one who got tired in the Super Bowl.

Uh-oh.

The impact of that statement was swift and decisive. The media had been giving TO a free ride until that point. So had the Eagles. Then the character assassination began. Little by little, the Eagles began leaking stuff to the papers about TO. The Philly papers ran a poll asking Philadelphians if they thought TO deserved a new contract (they didn't) and placed the results, complete with quotes from several Average Joes about how they wish they made millions playing a game, above the fold on the front page of The Philadelphia Inquirer. That would be the front page of the whole paper, not the sports section.

Why all the hubbub? TO crossed a line with the McNabb comments. It's not as though the town is above criticizing McNabb (though in general they really don't appreciate what they've got in number five), but that wasn't the actual problem with the comments. The problem was that the comments signalled that there might be unrest within the team. That is, if TO and McNabb aren't getting along, it might be slightly more difficult for the Eagles to win the Super Bowl. The people would have been more than happy to let TO have some more of the owner's money, but once he's starting saying things that impact the public perception of the Eagles' chemistry (and thus, their performance on the field), look out. We are NOT cool with that.

In fact, for a guy as media-savvy as TO (or at least as skilled in self-promotion), this whole experience has got to be just crushing. The Eagles, and specifically Mr. McNabb and Mr. Reid, have put together a virtuosic media performance in the past couple weeks. The Birds have had holdouts before (we miss ya, Duce) and they've dealt with them without major incidents. As Mr. Reid has explained, every successful team has holdouts. (Look at the Patriots.) Part of the business. We can all deal. And Mr. McNabb has indicated that he would never get involved in another player's business matters (are you listening, Brett Favre?). All class. All business. Can't argue with it.

But TO couldn't leave it at that. He had to run his mouth. He's like your drunk friend who's started an argument with the biggest dude in the bar and just as you're about to drag him away shouts that said biggest dude's mother will perform certain sex acts in exchange for certain appetizers and BAM, now you can't leave. Everything would have been cool if he had just left the bar, but no, he had to keep talking.

And here we are. The Eagles have said that they aren't going to renegotiate his deal. Came down from the top this morning. And McNabb has said that if anyone wants to talk to him about the Super Bowl, they should call him and talk to him like a man. So what we're staring at here is two more months of TO speculation, a possible holdout, and a big pile of crap until the season starts (I'm already cringing at the thought of two months of reporters asking McNabb if TO has called him yet).

You wonder if TO had managed to keep his mouth shut if they could have worked something out. Couple bucks to keep him happy, reward him for the Super Bowl, and we're back to work, no problem. But no, can't happen now. We're too far along already. Now Philly fans have to listen to the told-you-so's from all the TO haters. Ugh. Keep it. TO is a great player, and he was a great guy for the Birds last year; he just isn't as media-savvy as he thinks, and he completely underestimated the Philly sports media. Those folks are vultures, and they feed on stuff like this. Worse still, the current Eagles administration is as adept in handling the media as any sports franchise in Philly has ever been. Ever. They're maestros, and they're giving TO a harsh lesson in the politics of sports in Philly. TO, you might have gotten your money and another shot at the Super Bowl. Now, unless you swallow your pride you'll be lucky to play at all this year.

You're not wrong, TO. You're just, well, Walter Sobchak.

Posted by thatkid at 11:36 AM | Comments (0)

May 6, 2005

CAPS LOCKED

IN WHICH I EXPLORE THE EFFECTS OF CAPITAL LETTERS IN ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS VIA EXTENSIVE USE OF SAID CAPITAL LETTERS

SO ALREADY THE PAGE LOOKS PRETTY WEIRD.

IT'S THE SAME ALPHABET. SAME CHARACTERS. SAME LETTERS. SAME WORDS. SAME LANGUAGE. SAME FONT.

YUP. AND I HATE IT.

LET ME BE THE FIRST TO ADMIT THAT I ACTUALLY DO HAVE A VISCERAL REACTION TO AN PAGE FULL OF CAPITAL LETTERS (ESPECIALLY IN AN E-MAIL -- HISS!!!). A REAL, ACTUAL, PHYSICAL REACTION. I SEE A PAGE FULL OF CAPITAL LETTERS, AND MY BLOOD PRESSURE RISES. IT'S REALLY UNCANNY. IT'S AS THOUGH I'VE BEEN CHALLENGED TO A DUEL -- I SEE THE CAPITAL LETTERS, AND IT'S LIKE SOMEONE IS GETTING UP IN MY SHIT. YOU TALKIN TO ME? WHY YOU GOTTA USE THE CAPS? IT'S ACTUALLY TOUGH TO TYPE THIS, IN THAT I KNOW HOW IT'S BEING READ. I DON'T MEAN TO BE THIS AGGRESSIVE; I'M ACTUALLY IN A RATHER PLEASANT MOOD. BUT THE TONE IS IMMEDIATELY IMPACTED BY THE CAPS. AND NOT FOR THE BETTER. YOU READ THE CAPS, YOU THINK I'M A JERKFACE.

AT THE SAME TIME, CAPITAL LETTERS, GENERALLY SPEAKING, DON'T BOTHER ME. PUT THEM IN A PIECE OF ADVERTISING, ON A MARQUEE, THE COVER OF BOOK, A SIGN, THEY'RE FINE. DON'T EVEN NOTICE THEM. WHEN I SCRIBBLE NOTES ON PAPER, I SWITCH BETWEEN UPPER- AND LOWER-CASE LETTERS SEAMLESSLY -- THEY'RE ALL THE SAME TO ME IN MY ERSTWHILE CATHOLIC-SCHOOL-TRAINED PENMANSHIP. BUT WHEN THEY INVADE A CHUNK OF TEXT THAT I'M READING, WELL, THAT'S WHEN THE TROUBLE STARTS. AN E-MAIL, A WEB PAGE -- YUCK. AWFUL.

SO THIS IS THE POINT AT WHICH, WERE I AN ACTUAL REPORTER/ JOURNALIST, I WOULD SEGUE INTO A SERIES OF EXPLANATIONS FOR WHY I SEEM TO BE ALLERGIC TO READING CAPITAL LETTERS IN TEXT. FIRST I WOULD GIVE THE TOPIC A CATCHY NAME, LIKE "THE CAPS-LOCK PROBLEM" OR "THE PROBLEM WITH CAPS" OR "CAPTAGION!" -- YOU KNOW, SOMETHING ALMOST-BUT-NOT-QUITE CLEVER. I WOULD ASSEMBLE QUOTES FROM PROMINENT COGNITIVE NEUROLOGISTS (IS THERE SUCH A THING AS A COGNITIVE NEUROLOGIST? IS THAT THE RIGHT TITLE? OH WELL. I'M NOT A JOURNALIST!) ABOUT HOW OUR EYES AND BRAINS TRANSLATE VISUAL IMAGES INTO INFORMATION. I'D PROBABLY ALSO TALK TO SOME READING SPECIALISTS WHO COULD OFFER SOME KEEN INSIGHTS IN RE: HOW WE LEARN TO READ, AND HOW THE CAPS-LOCK PROBLEM COMPARES TO OTHER READING AND LEARNING DISABILITIES. I WOULD THEN WEAVE THE SCIENCE-Y DESCRIPTIONS INTO SOME QUOTES FROM THE SORT OF SEMIOTICS GEEK WHO HAS COMPLICATED OPINIONS ABOUT HOW ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS ARE CHANGING THE FACE OF LANGUAGE AND WRITING. AND THEN I WOULD END WITH SOME PITHY QUOTE AND SUMMARY SENTENCE THAT CONTAINED SOME SILLY PUN OR FIGURE OF SPEECH.

(IN FACT, THE CLOSEST I'LL COME TO ANY SORT OF ACTUAL RESEARCH HERE IS TO NOTE THAT I HAD TO GRADE A STACK OF EXAMS THE OTHER DAY AS PART OF MY TEACHING ASSISTANT RESPONSIBILITIES AND A BUNCH OF STUDENTS MADE THE EXACT SAME BIZARRO ERROR: THEY HAD TO MAKE AN EASY INITIAL CALCULATION TO GET THIS ONE NUMBER, 104.05, THAT THEY NEEDED TO USE THROUGHOUT THE REST OF THE PROBLEM. EXCEPT STUDENT AFTER STUDENT KEPT TRANSCRIBING "104.05" AS "104.5" AND GETTING THE REST OF THE PROBLEM WRONG. IT WAS UNNERVING. THEIR BRAINS REALLY LIKED SEEING "*.5" AND JUST DIDN'T WANT ANYTHING TO DO WITH "*.05." IT WASN'T AS THOUGH THEY GOT THE FIRST PART WRONG -- THEY WOULD GET THE FIRST PART CORRECT AND THEN JUST TRANSCRIBE THE NUMBER INCORRECTLY. CREEPY. AND I THINK THAT MUST BE THE SAME SORT OF THING AS CAPTAGION.)

IN ANY CASE, I'M NOT A REAL JOURNALIST. NOT EVEN CLOSE. IN LIEU OF "USEFUL INFORMATION" I'VE INSTEAD ASSEMBLED A LIST OF POSSIBLE EXPLANATIONS FOR EXCESSIVE CAPS USAGE IN E-MAIL OR ON WEB PAGES; THAT IS, WHEN WE SEE ALL CAPS IN TEXT, WHAT DO WE GUESS THE WRITER WAS THINKING? WHAT MIGHT POSSESS SOMEONE TO USE ONLY CAPITAL LETTERS? ARE ANY OF THESE ACTUALLY LEGITIMATE EXCUSES FOR GOING ALL-CAPS? MY LIST:

WHY ARE YOU SHOUTING?: THIS IS PROBABLY MY FIRST INSTINCT WHEN I SEE THE CAPS. AND IT MAKES SENSE, SINCE LOTS OF PEOPLE DO SELECTIVELY DEPLOY THE CAPS TO INDICATE EMPHASIS AND VOLUME (I MEAN, I LOVE DOING THAT). THUS, WHEN WE READ THE TEXT IN CAPS, WE ASSUME THAT THE WRITER MEANT US TO IMAGINE THAT THESE WORDS ARE TO BE SHOUTED. GOT IT.

YOU WANNA MAKE SOMETHING OF IT?: AS MENTIONED ABOVE, THE ALL-CAPS LOOK IS VAGUELY CONFRONTATIONAL -- AS THOUGH ONE'S BEING INSULTED (SPAT UPON, REALLY) BY A FRAGMENT OF TEXT. THE CAPS DO RAISE THE TEMPERATURE IN THE ROOM; IT'S THE DIGITAL EQUIVALENT OF T'ROWING HANDS. AND IF YOU'RE IN THE MIDST OF AN E-MAIL ARGUMENT, IT'S A SUREFIRE WAY TO ESCALATE THE CONFLICT. YOU CAN SEE THIS BEING EXCEPTIONALLY USEFUL IF SAID E-MAIL ARGUMENT HAS PRODUCED A LENGTHY THREAD OF BACK-AND-FORTH (IN NORMAL TEXT)...AND THEN JUST AS IT'S ABOUT TO GET REALLY NASTY, YOU BUST THE CAPS ON THEIR ASS! (HAD TO BE DONE; APOLOGIES.)

ASIAN DAWN HAVE ISSUED A COMMUNIQUE: I FEEL LIKE ANY TIME I SEE OLD-TIMEY TRANSCRIPTIONS OF TELEGRAPH MESSAGES OR PRINTED OUT MILITARY ORDERS IN MOVIES THEY'RE ALWAYS IN ALL-CAPS. ALSO WHEN MARGINALIZED POLITICAL GROUPS ISSUE COMMUNIQUES, IT'S A PURELY CAPITALIZED AFFAIR, THOUGH I DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT A COMMUNIQUE IS OR HOW TO ISSUE ONE, AND REALLY CAN'T BEGIN TO UNDERSTAND WHY THE WORD "ISSUE" ALWAYS SITS IN FRONT OF COMMUNIQUE; IT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT ALWAYS WORKS LIKE THAT.

THIS IS MY VERY FIRST EMAIL!!!!!!!!!!: THOUGH THE CONCEPT OF READING SOMEONE'S "FIRST E-MAIL" IS A LITTLE LATE-90S, I FEEL LIKE THE ONES I DO REMEMBER READING TENDED TO BE A BIT CAPS-HEAVY; LIKE THE WRITER DIDN'T YET UNDERSTAND THE CONVENTIONS OF E-MAIL COMMUNICATION. AT THE SAME TIME, IT'S WORTH NOTING THAT ALTHOUGH IT'S GENERALLY MUCH BETTER FORM TO GO CAPLESS THAN ALL CAPS, THE WHOLE "I DON'T USE CAPITAL LETTERS IN E-MAILS" STYLIZATION THING HAS PROBABLY RUN ITS COURSE AT THIS POINT. THE VERY-FIRST-E-MAIL RULE ALSO COMES INTO PLAY FOR E-MAILS WRITTEN BY CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF EIGHT -- THEY GET A PASS.

THEY SPEAK ENGLISH IN WHAT?: IS IT WRONG TO WAIVE THE CAPS RULES IF YOU'RE E-MAILING WITH SOMEONE WHO DOESN'T SPEAK YOUR LANGUAGE? I WANT TO BELIEVE YES, BUT THEN I START TO THINK THAT MAKING AN EXCEPTION LIKE THAT IS JUST A CLOSE COUSIN OF THE CHARMINGLY AMERICAN HABIT OF SPEAKING MORE SLOWLY AND LOUDLY WHEN CONFRONTED WITH SOMEONE WHO DOESN'T SPEAK FANTASTIC ENGLISH. THAT IS, I'M BEING A CONDESCENDING JERK ABOUT IT ALL BY MAKING SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS LIKE THAT, AS IF THE REST OF THE WORLD DOESN'T UNDERSTAND E-MAIL.

AND THAT'S ALL I GOTS FOR YA. THOUGH IN CLOSING I MIGHT LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT YOU SET ASIDE A DAY TO DEVOTE TO CAPS LOCK. PICK A DAY, DEPRESS YOUR CAPS-LOCK KEY, AND JUST ROLL WITH IT. SEND E-MAILS, POST MESSAGES ON DISCUSSION BOARDS, FILL IN FORMS -- JUST GO ALL CAPS, ALL THE TIME. IF ANYONE ASKS YOU ABOUT THE CAPS (AND THEY WILL), JUST PLAY IT COOL. IF THEY PERSIST, THEN YOU GET TO MESS WITH THEM A LITTLE BIT: WHAT? IS THERE SOME SORT OF PROBLEM? YOU DON'T LIKE HOW I ROLL? I CAN'T PROMISE PEOPLE WON'T BE OFFENDED, BUT I CAN PROMISE THAT YOU'LL GET A KICK OUT OF IT (THE ASSUMPTION HERE BEING THAT YOU ENJOY SNICKERING AT PEOPLE, WHICH, AS YOU MIGHT IMAGINE, I SIMPLY ADORE).

Have a good one.

Posted by thatkid at 3:23 PM | Comments (0)

May 2, 2005

The Three-Minute-Seventeen-Second MBA

In which I reveal all the big secrets about what one learns in business school (sort of)

I just finished business school.

(Huzzah!)

At some point in the not-so-distant future, I imagine that there will be time for me to reflect on the things I've learned, the people I've met, and the time/ money I've spent. I'm talking serious, sober reflection -- really deep shit. Meditation, in a trance, a me-and-my-journal-on-a-mountaintop sort of thing.

That time is not now.

Now I'm just happy to be done. And in the absence of deeper meditations on the subject, I'm at least going to ask myself if the time and money I spent were more worthwhile than just buying one of those "Twenty-Minute MBA" sorts of books (they were). Still, if I was putting together one of said publications, what would I include? Thus, in the absence of any Big Thoughts on B-School, I give you the Seven Big Classroom Cliches from my two years -- the people/ topics/ ideas that they just can't get enough of in the MBA curriculum. Here we go:

(1) Sky versus BSB: we spent at least three separate class periods hashing through the details of Rupert Murdoch's aggressive entry into the satellite TV market in the UK in the late 80s. They love this story because it's a nifty illustration of game theory writ large (that is, involving billions of dollars changing hands). So they get to draw little two-by-two matrices and talk about strategic entry deterrence and Nash equilibria and how the two parties engaged in an expensive war of attrition until they gave up and merged into what is now known as BSkyB. It's a cool story, no doubt, but I feel like another possible "answer" to this whole thing is "Rupert Murdoch just might be a stubborn greedy bastard." (Said answer was not discussed in class.)

(2) Jack Welch Can Control The Tides And Poop Ice Cream: as you might expect, the cult of CEO personalities is pretty strong at B-School. Everyone wants to be one of these mononym corporate titans: Rupert, Sumner, Gates, Jobs, etc. But no corporate titan looms larger than Jack Welch. What a leader! Look at how he motivates people! Marvel at his attention to detail! His skill in identifying and nurturing talent! Ugh. Enough. Yes, he was very clever, and he seems to charm the pants off interviewers, but the genius labels are a bit much. Or, at least, they get boring. If we wanted fawning profiles of CEOs, we could have just gotten a subscription to Fortune; or just bought one of said dudes' stupid management books.

(3) The iPod Is The Most Genius Invention Of All Time: it isn't enough that every student has an iPod, that they talk about their iPods and compare decorative carrying accessories. No. We also have to hear about how brilliant a product it is from professor after professor after professor. Steve Jobs is a genius! He's a genius! There isn't a small amount of "professors trying to get down with the young people" inherent in the praise; they think they're being "cool" and "with it" by complimenting a popular product. iPod is a beautifully designed and marketed product. It's best in class. And guess what -- it's storage. Storage is cheap and commoditized (and getting cheaper and more commoditized every day). Unless the iPod learns how to check my e-mail (Treo) and play video games (PSP), we're all going to forget about our iPods REAL soon.

(4) Satellite Radio Is The Next/ New/ Big Thing: this is something of a dark-horse entry, but the fact that it was the final exam case for one of my classes and that the CEO from XM came to visit vindicates its place on the list. And you can see why the b-school academics dig on it so much: new technology platform, tricky consumer proposition, gigantic capital investments, huge, well-funded backers, exciting strategic partnerships, market duopoly (which is just fantastic for drawing little supply-and-demand graphs) and charismatic CEOs. They love this stuff. Of course, none of it makes any sense to us at all because we all live in New York and don't have cars. But all that freakin money must mean they're doing something right -- b-schoolers of the future, enjoy the next ten years of the XM-versus-Sirius case!

(5) These Things Go Down! These Things Go Down! It's Too Big!: lots of cases on the airline industry, and lots of juicy topics to cover. You get to talk about pricing, capacity utilization, how they plan the routes, and the impact of deregulation. Pretty rich stuff. They also like to talk about how awesome Southwest is and how they're able to make their airline run so much better than all the others. I wish there was a more clever answer to that question, but there really isn't; the big "trick" in running a successful airline seems to be, AHEM, avoiding unions at all costs. That is, if you can screw over labor, you'll do just fine. (And it only took two years of expensive graduate school for me to figure that out!)

(6) Internet? Is That Thing Still Around?: repeat after me (your smuggest and/ or smarmiest tone is not essential but is encouraged): everything that happened in the late 1990s related to the growth of the Internet was a complete sham and smart people like business school professors (and people who worked at gigantic boring companies or in finance) knew that it was all bogus and that those smarty-pants dotcom people would get their comeuppance, which is exactly what happened when NASDAQ crashed so maybe you all should have listened to us in the first place. Never mind the businesses that did survive (and are now thriving) and the part where the Internet has transformed the way the world does business and consumes media -- anyone who's interested in learning about those companies (much less working for one of them) obviously wasn't listening when we told them that we told them so. NOTE: I want to return to campus and give a guest lecture about the nature of comeuppance and "telling people so" when the hedge fund and real estate markets implode. I don't think that's asking too much.

And of course, the granddaddy of them all...

(7) L-T-C-M: right, so we only went over this one in, oh, five different class modules. LTCM = Long Term Capital Management, this hedge fund that spectacularly exploded in the late 1990s despite having all sorts of rocket-scientist/ Nobel-prize-winning types involved (this is why the book about LTCM is called When Genius Failed). As bored as I was by the fifth class discussion of LTCM, I can't blame the professors for using this story: tons of the students go into finance, most would love to have their own hedge fund, and they all think that they're geniuses who are going to make gazillions of dollars by being smarter than everyone else (Look at me! I went to business school! I shall own luxury automobiles and have sex with high-end prostitutes!). The LTCM story is also very sobering for the finance professors, because it demonstrates that even the heavy hitters with complicated computer models and PhDs can screw up -- big time (and all finance professors secretly want to invent a computer model that corners the market). So, in general, it's a pretty good story, and one that's certainly valuable to this audience. I just didn't need to hear it so many times.

And Then The Things They Don't Really Talk About: remarkably little discussion of Wal*Mart, which would ostensibly be a great b-school sort of topic (cool supply chain, clever expansion, success in an industry where margins are slim). I think it's big-city/ blue-state/ liberal media bias. Also, no one really talks about the video-game biz, which you think would be pretty rich as a topic (competing standards, network effects, huge growth, etc etc); I would guess not many professors are gamers. And, honestly, I actually could have used more data about the QSR (quick-service restaurant) industry; perhaps that's a bit passe at this point? Essentially, I wanted to know more about why Taco Bell does so well.

Oh, and, right, just like at business school, I almost forgot the most important (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) part of the curriculum:

The Commitment to Values and Ethics: Enron was bad. Very bad. Don't go and do that or you might get in a lot of trouble, heaping shame and scorn on your family and graduate school. If it can at all be avoided, try to not steal from millions of innocent people. P.S.: only losers get caught.

Posted by thatkid at 3:55 PM | Comments (0)