Archive for June, 2009

Colorado Bound

We’d been thinking that we wouldn’t head out to Colorado this summer — what with the New One and all — but seeing how much fun the Hobbit had with his grandparents, and knowing how much better life was for the rest of us when there were more hands than ours to share the load, we’ve changed our mind. We’re heading for Colorado after all.

We leave in a week.

While we’re anticipating a rather miserable 3-day drive, we’re anxious for the good times when we get there. I’m hoping for at least a little time to write — perhaps on the way, but very hopefully in the relative quiet once we get there — and we’re all looking forward to whatever adventures we have with friends and family.

Of course, we’re not at all anxious for these interim days of packing for what will likely be a 30+ day trip. Not only will that mean a lot of general stuff to take — we are, after all, now four folks and a dog — but there’s always the difficulty of packing for what is currently an unpredictable itinerary.

Will I get a chance to stalk trout on a clear, high mountain stream? If so, I must take fly-fishing gear.

Will I be doing any camping? If so, I need a whole set of backcountry gear.

Will I be needing to fix a broken suspension in the mud? If so, I need a few more tools than I normally carry.

Decisions, decisions, decisions.

On the plus side, one thing I don’t have to worry about this time is being out of contact for the month. Go iPhone!

4 Comments


Editorial Enigma

Not long ago I sent out one of my latest essays to a Prestigious Journal. The article is on Tolkien, which is fun, but it also happens to be one of my favorites. (Though I confess that my favorite article is usually the last one I wrote.)

Anyway, today I got this message from a member of the Prestigious Journal’s staff:

I am writing to let you know that we have received reports on your essay from two consultant specialists. Since the readers did not concur in their recommendations, we have sent the essay out to another reader.

This is fascinating to me. Good journals, you see, put submissions first through one “slush” pile. Once that pile has been combed through, and an article is deemed a potentially decent piece of work, it is sent out to readers — experts in the article’s field who review the work and determine its suitability for publication (peer review).

The way I read the cryptic message above is that the two peer reviewers must have been diametrically opposed on their responses to my work. One must have said it should be published at once, while the other suggested it be burned.

The story of my life in a nutshell, I daresay.

Here’s hoping that reader #3 likes it.

No Comments


Cable Modem Install

We got high-speed internet via the cable company (Comcast) today.  It was a bit tricky since we weren’t existing cable customers — we continue to get our television over the air — but we decided to ditch DSL for two significant reasons:

  1. Cable was cheaper, and
  2. DSL went out any time it rained threatened rain.

I had to reset my wireless router and what-not, but the switch is done and (obviously) working great.  Between this and dropping our landline to get a cellphone our household has been a whirlwind of crazy changes lately.

I think we’re about through it, though. Next up will be cracking my knuckles (literally, no doubt) on the Jeep.

No Comments


Beach Living

Spent part of this oppressively-warm day on the Isle of Palms, sitting on the long, lovely beach, kicking waves, relaxing, and watching the Hobbit play happily with his grandmother — who has thankfully given us a respite from some of our parenting duties.

It was truly wonderful.

Of course, I also played with the new iPhone while I was there (raise your hand if you’re shocked, eh?). Put in charge of the New One for a bit, I sat in the shade and answered some business email (mostly Paper Golem stuff). Quite awesome. Then, just for fun, I tried to take a picture of myself and the wee bonny bairn using the device’s camera. One of my first phone-camera shots — and certainly my first trying to aim at myself — and it was not very successful:

iPhone Self-portrait: Elanor and Me on the Beach

iPhone Self-portrait: Elanor and Me on the Beach

Still, it was a good day. And tomorrow Sherry and I will continue the joy by seeing a movie… alone… in the theater.  When the heck was the last time we did that?!?

Thanks, Mom!

2 Comments


Now an iPhone Owner

I bought a cellphone an iPhone today.

No joke. Not only have I succumbed at long last and joined the cellphone zombie horde, I decided to go in with a bang by picking up the cutting-edge, just-released-today 32GB iPhone 3GS. And I have to say: it is extraordinary.

But that’s not all. We also bought another cellphone (a beautiful little Samsung) for the Wife. Plus, we dropped our landline.

That’s right, folks. We went all in. Starting no later than Monday, if you call our phone number you’ll get Sherry’s cellphone (my iPhone has a super-double-plus-secret new phone number). We’re a little daunted by the whole thing, to be honest, but we’re also excited. This makes a lot of sense for our lives.

I’m sure I’ll have more to say on the matter, but I simply must repeat that the iPhone is extraordinary. My iPod Touch was amazing enough, but this new iPhone is drool-inducing. I mean, I clicked a button and told it to play me a song and, well, you know, it did. It was like being on Star Trek. (Alas, though, beaming won’t be available until the 4G.) I opened up Google and the screen suggested I just speak my search rather than type it in. Sure, sure, I thought. So I tried it. Lord help me, it worked. Again and again.*

The whole thing is just astonishing. I’m certain that the various parts aren’t really new to the cool kids in school (or the very uncool geeks), but the way they come together so seamlessly and speedily on the iPhone is a sight to behold. I can’t wait to play more with it!

* Added bonus: I learned that if you speak my name to Google, it returns my website. I feel quite strongly that this kicks ass.

3 Comments


3-TE Offense – The Future of Football?

A couple days ago, one of my students asked me how I thought the Denver Broncos would do this coming year. I didn’t answer. One of the beautiful things about the NFL, of course, is that one never knows what will happen on the proverbial “any given Sunday,” so I’m not generally keen on such predictions. I’m even more uncertain about the fate of the orange-and-blue this year, though. The so-called off-season has been, well, a little crazy. Coach change. General Manager change. Quarterback change. Pending Wide-Receiver change. It’s enough to make the head spin!

That said, it’s also pretty exciting. Especially given the fact that the regime change is bringing in brand-new systems for both the Offense and the Defense, and that we have very little idea what those will be. Sure, the defense is liable to tend toward the 3-4 alignment, but we can’t be certain what that’ll look like in reality (my guess is they’ll use a strong “Ted” blocking linebacker system, using the run-stopping Davis to free up Williams, but we’ll see).

The thing I’m most interested to find out, though, is what our base offense will look like. My guess? Something like this:

One look at a 3-TE offense. The 2009 Broncos?

This is magic.

Perhaps this doesn’t look all that intriguing, but it really is. It’s a 3-Tight-End set, and if implemented with the right personnel it is the thing of nightmares for any defensive coordinator. Let me explain.

The key to this offense — and a large part of the reason it hasn’t been seen much in the NFL — is having the right set of personnel to implement it.  Most essentially, you need three high-quality TEs who can both run-block at the point of attack and catch balls across the middle or on out-routes.  More than that, at least one needs to have some decent speed and down-field capability.

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the down-field threat Tony Scheffler and the do-it-all-duo of Daniel Graham and Richard Quinn. That last one, you may remember, is a rookie, who was rather unexpectedly drafted by the Broncos at a seemingly high price — almost as if the new regime was determined to pick up a third powerful TE.  ”Who needs 3 TEs?” many people cried out.  Well, this system does, folks.

So that’s the minimum. Ideally, you also have a quick wide receiver who can beat double c0verage even out of the jam, a smart running back with soft hands and solid route-running abilities, and an intelligent, fast-acting quarterback who can read a defense and consistently hit the open man. A huge bonus to the lethality of the system is a wildcard player who can line-up effectively at TE, WR, or RB. And on top of all that you need a coach willing to make the leap to put all this into action on the field.

Here I give you Eddie Royal at WR, Knowshon Moreno at RB, Kyle Orton at QB (hopefully), Peyton Hillis at TE/WR/RB, and young, hot-shot, new-idea, offensive-minded coach Josh McDaniels.

Clearly, I think we’ve got the personnel. Goodie.  So let’s get to this scheme to which they are so superbly suited, okay? Look at the base set again:

I say again: m-a-g-i-c.

I say again: m-a-g-i-c.

Left to right, you’ve got a WR split wide, five o-linemen backed by a QB and a RB in a single-set. The goofy stuff, obviously, is on the right side (now the “strong” side): 3 TEs, each set back from the line. At its most simple, imagine that the offense calls two plays in the huddle.  One is a pass play, one a run play. The offense moves to the line in this set.

What, as a defense, do you do?  Instinct is to see this alignment, which is a “heavy” alignment, as a run play.  Indeed, one would expect the run to be strong-side: to the right, behind those 3 hulking TEs. Most NFL defenses are either 4-3 or 3-4, meaning either 4 linemen and 3 linebackers or 3 linemen and 4 linebackers.  The other defensive players are some mix of cornerbacks and safeties, who are invariably much smaller and faster than the linemen. Seeing a heavy run alignment like this, the defense will likely want to stack the line against it.  4-3 or 3-4, they’ll typically only have 7 big bodies they can throw against the line.  Alas, they’re facing 8 potential run-blockers. Advantage offense. Fair enough, you might say, the defense should swap out a safety for another big body, or at least bring their best-tackling safety to the line to match up with the smallest of the tight-ends (who will invariably outweigh him and outreach him by a fair amount). One way or another, though, your defense is ready to stop the run.

Fair enough. The quarterback audibles to the pass, and you’re statistically screwed.  There’s no way all those linemen will keep up with the three TEs if they break into patterns, not to mention that speedy WR who is likely to be in single-coverage on the outside. And even if you manage to cover all those folks (unlikely, but still…), the RB is simply going to roll out into the left flat and catch a pass, with nobody around to even think about touching him. It’s magic.

Okay, you say.  As a defense you’ll bring in a bunch of smoking-fast defensive backs to protect against the pass, ensuring that nobody is open on the pass play.

Jolly good. The quarterback audibles to the run — or more likely just runs the play, as “run strong” will probably be the default fast-snap call — and this mighty wall of 8 run-blocking madmen flattens all those little defensive backs, leaving the running-back free to scamper his way to paydirt.  Magic.

And that’s just from a simple base set. What happens if one TE — say it’s Graham, playing TE3 — motions over to the left side pre-snap? Now the defense doesn’t even know if the run option is liable to go left or right. If they decide to spread the line to cover both options, you can be sure the run will come straight up the middle for a big gain. What if instead Hillis comes in as TE3 and motions back into a two-back set with Moreno? Now, even if you know the offense will run the ball (which is doubtful), you don’t know which “back” will get it. Or what if Hillis lines up at WR but then motions up next to the left tackle? Egads! Passes or runs can be had in any direction, and the advantage will always go to the offense: they’ll simply audible to the defense’s weakness.

Game. Set. Match.

I didn’t give that curious student a prediction about the Broncos’ season, but if I knew for certain that McDaniels was planning this 3-TE magic, you can be sure my prediction would be closer to 13-3 than 3-13. It is, after all, magic.

It’s also something that we’ll see sooner rather than later.  The time has come for a seismic shift in offensive scheming, and I suspect this is it. It’s only a matter of time until someone, somewhere, will have the personnel and the personality to try it out.

I’m just hoping it’s my Broncos.

6 Comments


Schwarzenegger’s Hamlet

In my last post I included a clip from “one of the two best Hamlets on film.” The second one, in case you were wondering, is this short masterpiece, which comes up at least once every term:

2 Comments


Shakespeare’s Comedies and Tragedies

I’ve been teaching summer school for a few weeks, which is a much bigger drain on my time and energy than I would have imagined, and we’ve now reached the point in the term where we delve into Shakespeare.  Due to a failure on someone’s part — not sure where — the play I like to teach in my British Literature Survey course, King Lear, didn’t get ordered.  So I’m forced to teach the play included in the Norton Anthology: Twelfth Night.

On the one hand, this isn’t a tragedy. Sure, I’m accustomed to teaching King Lear, but a little variation can be a good thing. It does save the students from the cost of another book ($7?), and Twelfth Night is a great play in its own right. Plus, while some students may have read Lear in high school, I feel fairly confident that not one read Twelfth Night.

On the other hand, this isn’t a tragedy. Twelfth Night, that is. Unlike the sublimely tragic Lear, it’s a comedy. And as I’ve begun reading over the play in preparation for tomorrow’s class, I’m finding that it is this generic fact that troubles me the most as I think about teaching it (something I’ve never done).

I seem to recall someone saying that Homer divides the world: there are folks who love The Odyssey, there are folks who love The Iliad, but no one loves both. It’s a grossly simple generalization, but one can see a shred of truth in it. And a similar over-simplification might apply to Shakespeare: there are folks who love his comedies, there are folks who love his tragedies, but no one loves both. If that statement, too, holds any water, I’m finding I know for certain that I’m in the tragedy camp.

It’s not that I don’t enjoy his comedies (and Twelfth Night might be his most supreme accomplishment in that regard). I do. In fact, given the choice of seeing a performance of Midsummer Night’s Dream or Hamlet, I’ll go for the comedy nine times out of ten. Ask me to list the top-3 Shakespeare plays I’ve attended, and I can tell you without hesitation that Stratford Festival performances of Midsummer and Taming of the Shrew are right up there (the third would likely be a mesmerizing rendition of the rarely performed Troilus and Cressida, also at Stratford). I just don’t enjoy reading the comedies as much as I enjoy watching them.

Quite the opposite holds true for me when it comes to the tragedies: I don’t tire of reading Othello, but I’ve never seen (in person or on film) a performance of the play that really hit home. Ditto Lear. And Hamlet? Fuhgeddaboutit. Always good on the page, rarely good on the stage. Even that performance of Troilus that I loved so much wasn’t superior to the text at all. It was just so brilliantly shocking (again and again) that I was enthralled. (It also didn’t hurt that it was a close-stage production and I was in the front row on the right wing: actors’ outfits would literally brush my knees as they ran on and off the stage, and at one point I could have jumped up and clubbed Achilles in the back of the head during one of his grand speeches.)

What does all this mean? I don’t know. Probably not much other than the fact that I’ll be a bit out of my element tomorrow as I jump around the room, from desk to desk, acting out the cross-dressing sex-confusing comedy that is Twelfth Night.

But, then again, who wouldn’t be?

As a thank you for reading this far, I give you a clip from one of the two best Hamlets on film: the one slipping in and out of Stoppard’s film of his exceedingly wonderful play, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead:

No Comments


SetPageWidth