Sweet 16 update

My mascots system has not been stellar.  I took big hit in the first round when my upset-special, West Virginia, went down in the first round.  In fact, the entire Midwest Region is a total loss.  In that region, there were only three wins – total, and none in the second round.

The mascot system has got me eight of the 16 teams into the third round.  Three of my elite eight teams are already gone.  Three of my final four teams are still alive, and I had West Virginia in the championship.  It is clear that this bracket is not going to shock the world. 

Here is the updated Sweet 16:

Midwest Region: 

Wildcats def. Cardinals, Spartans def. Jayhawks.  In this region, the Michigan State Spartans would emerge in the Final Four. 

West Region:

Boilermakers def. Huskies, Tiger vs. Tiger is a draw, the higher seed are the Memphis Tigers.  I’ll go with Memphis into the Final Four

East Region:

Muskateers def. Panthers, Blue Devils def. Wildcats. The Duke Blue Devils emerge in the Final Four.

South Region:

Tar Heels def. Bulldogs, Sooners def. Orange.  The Tar Heels win the region.

Final Four:

Blue Devils def. Tar Heels, Spartans def. Tigers.  Blue Devils are the national champions.

Leave a comment

Filed under Sports

“Not in Illinois”

My favorite commercial of all time:

In case the link above doesn’t work, here is a description:

A policeman is writing a ticket to a car.  There are North Carolina bumper stickers on it.  Cut to the policeman getting back in the car.  A voice from the point-of-view camera asks, “What did you get him for?”

The policeman responds, “Doing 36 in a 35.”  A Champaign County patch is seen on his arm.

“36 in a 35?  That’s a little harsh.”

The policeman responds, with jaw clenched, “Not in Illinois.”

The video cuts to clips from the final few seconds of the NCAA championship game between Illinois and North Carolina in 2005. 

So, is giving someone a ticket for going 36 in a 35 too harsh?  Not in Illinois.

1 Comment

Filed under Sports

Bracket Recap

So, looking at my bracket, which is based on which team’s nickname would in a fight, a few things pop out at me. The No. 1 seeds did not fair well. Only one made it to the Sweet 16, and two of them – The Pitt Panthers and the Louisville Cardinals were knocked out in the first round. Considering no 16 seed has EVER won a game, I’m thinking this is quite the long-shot.

I had to revise something earlier. In the West region I hit a problem with Bear vs. Tiger. I had to go with Tiger. To be honest, I’m not sure why. Then in the regional final there would be Tiger vs. Tiger. In my post I mistakenly called the Mizzou Tiger the higher seed, but realize that the Memphis Tiger is a 2-seed. Then in a controversial call I went with the Tiger over the Boilermaker even though the Boilermaker had already defeated a Cougar and a Panther. No real explanation, just my gut – a tiger seems bigger and meaner than a cougar or panther.

REVISED FINAL FOUR:

Duke

North Carolina

West Virginia 

Memphis

-West Virginia is the only real odd pick out of that bunch, and the Blue Devils, named for a World War I fighting unit, would pull out the victory.  

 

I have entered this bracket into the ESPN contest.  When Pitt and Louisville go down early, you might see me on Sportscenter as the new bracketologist.

Leave a comment

Filed under Sports

2009 Mascot Bracket

So, for the last twenty years or so I have been filling out NCAA tournament brackets.  When I was about 13 I came within a last second shot of winning, but settled for fourth place.  That is the closest I have ever come to winning.  I stopped doing brackets for money about three years ago – but still enter into free contests, and still get my ass handed to me.  So instead of making predictions which have almost no credibility based on my track record, I decided to fill out this year’s bracket based on a system my brother and I came up with about 10 years ago.  Put simply, the concept is, Which mascot would win in a fight?

There are a few basic tennets of this system:

  1. Predatory animals defeat non-predatory animals – its the food chain, right?
  2. Predatory animals defeat humans without weapons.
  3. Humans with weapons defeat all animals.
  4. Humans with weapons defeat humans without weapons.
  5. In battles between two humans with weapons, most advanced weapons win, e.g. gunpowder defeats iron.
  6. Battles betwee two predatory animals, the bigger, meaner one wins.

These are basic rules.  It gets tricky when you start to consider the following:

  • Supernatural entities – These things will typically defeat any animal and most humans, but godly humans will win.
  • Weather systems – Depends on the severity.   A hurricane? pretty tough.  A green wave? not so much.
  • Colors (how do you defeat the Orange? With an eraser? How do you even fight the color orange to begin with?  New rule – Immobile inanimate objects lose to anything that moves.  There might not be knockout, but when you go to the scorecards, the moving object would get some points for trying).

So, here it goes:

MIDWEST:

Play-in game: Morehead State EAGLES def. Alabama State HORNETS
16 EAGLES def. 1 Louisville CARDINALS (This is the first time in history that a No. 1 seed has gone down. I haven’t looked yet, but I’m not confident about the TAR HEELS either).
9. Siena SAINTS (depicted by a Saint Bernard) def. 8. Ohio State BUCKEYES
5. Utah UTES def. Arizona WILDCATS (see rule #3 – humans with weapons vs. animals)
13. Cleveland State VIKINGS def. Wake Forest DEAMON DEACONS (this is a tough call, because a deacon could presumably get a weapon, but there is nothing about a deacon that is inherently armed.)
15. Robert Morris COLONIALS def. 2. Michigan State SPARTANS (see rule #5 If you have seen the movie 300, you might disagree, but COLONIALS would have more firepower.)
10. USC TROJANS def. 7. Boston College EAGLES
3. Kansas JAYHAWKS def. 14. North Dakota State BISON (see rule #1. Very tough call, it is hard to imagine a hawk pecking a bison to death, there’d probably be no knockout, but Hawks would win on the cards).
6. West Virginia MOUNTAINEERS def. 11. Dayton FLYERS (see rule #4)
SECOND ROUND:Saints def. Eagles – similar to Jayhawk vs. Bison, but if the dog could get one good bite, it would be curtains for the Eagle)
Utes def. Vikings – rule #5
Colonials def. Trojans – rule #5
Mountaineer def. Jayhawk – rule #3
THIRD ROUND
Utes defeat Saints – rule #3
Mountaineer def. Colonial – rule #5
REGIONAL FINAL
Mountaineers def. Utes

EAST:

16. East Tennessee State BUCCANEERS def. 1. Pittsburgh PANTHERS (A historical second No. 1 seed goes down)
8. Oklahoma State COWBOYS def. 9. Tennesee VOLUNTEERS – rule #5 (this took some research. It turns out the name Volunteers comes from the War of 1812, when Andrew Jackson got a bunch of volunteers to fight the British. Cowboys though, lasted well into the 1800’s, and presumably would have better weapons).
5. Florida State SEMINOLES def. 12. Wisconsin BADGERS – rule #3
4. Xavier MUSKATEERS def. 13 Portland State VIKINGS – rule #5
2. Duke BLUE DEVILS def. 15. Binghamton BEARCATS – miscellaneous rule. Duke used to be called the Methodists, which is kind of cool, but not very tough. Some think it could actually refer back to a French military unit from World War I, back when the French actually were tough.
7. Texas LONG HORNS def. 10. Minnesota GOLDEN GOPHERS – Neither are predatory, but if forced to fight, there is a clear favorite.
3. Villanova WILDCATS def. American U. EAGLES – rule #6
6. UCLA BRUINS def. Virginia Commonwealth RAMS – rule #6
SECOND ROUND
Cowboys def. Buccaneers – rule #5
Muskateers def. Seminoles – rule #5
Blue Devils def. Long Horns
Bruins def. Wildcats – rule #6
THIRD ROUND
Cowboys def. Muskateers
Blue Devils def. Bruins
REGIONAL FINAL
Blue Devils def. Cowboys

SOUTH

1. North Carolina TAR HEELS def. 16. Radord HIGHLANDERS – rule #5 (A highlander is a Scottish warrior from the middle ages. The term Tar Heel came from soldiers in the Civil War, who presumably had something more deadly than a Claymore).
8. LSU TIGERS def. 9. Butler BULLDOGS – rule #6
5. Illinois FIGHTING ILLINI def. Western Kentucky HILLTOPPERS – rule #4 (the Illini were native Americans that presumably had weapons. The Hilltoppers are just a bunch of guys that moved the school up to the top of a hill).
4. Gonzaga BULLDOGS def. Akron ZIPS. – (This will be the Zips vs. the Zags, but Gonzaga’s official nickname is the Bulldogs. The Zips are actually named after the zipper, which was invented in Akron, OH. The mascot is a kangaroo, which would probably crush a Bulldog, but we’re going with nicknames – and a zipper would not defeat anything, unless a school became known as the Ben Stiller’s Franks and Beans)
2. Oklahoma SOONERS def. 15. Morgan State BEARS – A Sooner would have a shotgun.
7. Clemson TIGERS def. 10. Michigan WOLVERINES – This would be an awesome fight, but I’ll take the Tiger.
14. Stephen F. Austin LUMBERJACKS def. Syracuse ORANGE – anything beats a color, except maybe a zipper.
6. Arizona State SUN DEVILS def. 11. Temple OWLS – ASU might be tough to beat.
SECOND ROUND
Tar Heels def. Tigers
Fighting Illini def. Bulldogs
Sooners def. Tigers
Sun Devils def. Lumberjacks
THIRD ROUND
Tar Heels def. Fighting Illini
Sun Devils def. Sooners
REGIONAL FINAL
Tar Heels def. Sun Devils (this is not exact science, but the Sun Devil looks like a guy with a douchy mustache in a Noid costume, carrying a pitchfork. A Tar Heel would shoot him).

WEST

1. UConn HUSKIES def UT Chattanooga MOCS (I am still not sure what a Moc is, but from the logo, it looks like a bird. Some logos show a bird driving a train, which is just weird.
8. BYU COUGARS def. 9. Texas A&M AGGIES – An Aggie is a farmer, which is not intrinsically armed. A cougar would maul an unarmed farmer.
5. Purdue BOILERMAKERS def. 12. Northern Iowa PANTHERS – This is a close call, but the Boilermaker has a huge hammer, and could connect on one good swing.
4. Washington HUSKIES def. Mississippi State BULLDOG – Another close one, but a huskie is a little bigger and more agile.
2. Memphis TIGERS def. 15. Cal State Northridge MATADORS – A Matador is a human with a weapon, but he is used to fighting impaled bulls, not full strength Tigers. Think Siegfried and Roy. Tigers win.
7. California BEARS def. Maryland TERRAPINS – A Bear would have a hard time getting the knockout, but he would win on the scorecards.
3. Missouri TIGERS def. Cornell BIG RED – Again, colors always lose.
6. Marquette GOLDEN EAGLES def. Utah St. AGGIES – Again, unarmed farmer is defeated by predatory animal.
SECOND ROUND
Cougars def. Huskies
Boilermakers def. Huskies
A classic battle pits Tiger vs. Bear. I really do not know who would win.
Tiger def. Golden Eagle
THIRD ROUND
Boilermaker def. Cougar (if he beat a Panther, he could beat a Cougar)
Tiger vs. Tiger or Bear (this is a real conundrum)
REGIONAL FINAL
Boilermaker would be defeated by either a Tiger or a Bear, the hammer would not be enough. But which? I’ll go with the highest seed, and take the Mizzou Tiger.

FINAL FOUR
West Virginia Mountaineers defeat Missouri Tigers
Duke Blue Devils defeat North Carolina Tar Heels

CHAMPIONSHIP
Duke defeats West Virginia.

5 Comments

Filed under Sports

Sorry Albert, I don’t believe you

My new Sports Illustrated came in the mail today.  On the cover is Albert Pujols, slugger for the St. Louis Cardinals.  The headline reads, “Albert Pujols has a message: ‘Don’t Be Afraid to Believe in Me'”

Albert Pujols on SI

Sorry Albert, I have nothing against you personally.  I might actually believe that you are clean – but I’m not giving you the benefit of the doubt.  I want to believe you are clean – you are an amazing player.  I lived in St. Louis for three years and marveled in your greatness.  You are the only player I have ever watched that actually surprises me when you make an out.  You are so good that I actually expect a hit every time.

There are no signs that you are, or ever were, on steroids.  Yet you did sort of come out of nowhere.  You have always been a huge man, yet you do sort of look smaller on the cover of this issue.  Maybe you are clean – and I hope you are, but I still don’t believe you.  And you have no one to blame but yourself – and your union.

I assume you’ve heard the saying, “Once bitten, twice shy.”  Well, I was bitten when I believed Mark McGwire say that bottle of chemicals in his locker was just a supplement, and I was bitten over and over again each time I drove by the sign that read Mark McGwire Expressway just north of Busch Stadium.  I was bitten when I believed that the reason for the increased home runs in the late 90’s was because of “hard balls.”  I was bitten again when owners called Ken Caminiti and Jose Canseco embittered liars.  I was bitten (how many times is that now?) when Rafeal Palmeiro wagged his finger and angrily declared “Let me start by telling you this: I have never used steroids, period. I don’t know how to say it any more clearly than that. Never.”  And I was bitten when Alex Rodriguez made himself out to be the great anti-Barry with Katie Couric.  So I guess after all the times I have been bitten by the owners, media and especially by members of your union, I’m more than twice shy.

You might be clean, but you are not blameless.  Where was this indignation when Barry Bonds’ hat size went from melon to globe? Where were you when your former teammate, he of the cartoon-like forearms that were built on something more than spinach, was declaring, “I don’t want to talk about the past”?

There is plenty of blame to spread around in this whole steroid mess.  The owners probably turned a blind eye to it as Sammy and Mark rescued the game from the despair of labor disputes and a cancelled World Series.  The media droped the ball as they gawked at the home runs while ignoring the signs.  But the players – the clean ones – are as much to blame as anyone.  They were the ones that really, undeniably, knew what was going on.  They were the ones that were most directly being negatively effected by the cheaters.

So now you clean players want to say, “It wasn’t me – He did it.”  Sorry, it doesn’t work like that.  As far as I’m concerned – you’re all guilty.  The whole era is tainted – not just Barry’s numbers, but yours too, Albert.  Because it was you, Albert, that had the power to prevent the steroid era from happening.  If the union cared about the clean players, then it would have acted to make testing happen to protect their integrity.  Yet, the union continues to drag its feet.

You want me to believe you?  Then demand that your union leadership be fired – now.  Demand that Bud Selig is fired – now.  Demand random blood testing – now.  Demand full season suspensions for first offenses – now.  Do that, and maybe I’ll believe you.  Until then, you, and no member of your union, deserves the benefit of the doubt.

6 Comments

Filed under Sports

MM

No, this post is not about my daughter’s favorite candy.  Earlier this week The Fat Pastor had its 2000th visitor.  The Fat Pastor is not crashing anyone’s server at this point, but 2000 is pretty cool.

My busiest day was still the day I emailed all my friends with the link, but February has already become the busiest month.  The Fireproof conversation and the story involving Will Deuel’s struggle with the Board of Ordained Ministry were two spikes – with over 60 hits on those days.

I started Fat Pastor to talk about two main things – the fact that I am fat, and my opinions as a pastor.  In the last month or so more of my postings have been about theology than about fitness.  To tell you the truth, I’ve kind of dropped the ball with my struggle to become the Fit Pastor.

I went about two months strong, then got busy during Christmas.  Then I got sick.  Now I’m in CPE, which means I have to be at a hospital 35 hours a week while I am a full-time pastor.  This has not left me much time to go work out.  I had set a goal to run a 5K race in March.  I’m not sure that is going to happen, and I am pretty disappointed by that.

As of this moment I have 2021 hits.  I’ve been enjoying this, and I hope readers have enjoyed it too.  

Thanks, and God Bless,

Robb McCoy, “The Fat Pastor”

Leave a comment

Filed under Blogging

Fireproof stirs something

My last post, about the movie “Fireproof,” has been one of the most successful posts I have made. By successful I mean a couple of things – my object with this blog is not to convince anyone of anything. I am not trying to tell you how to feel or think or believe. I am simply sharing some insights or thoughts I have about a variety of topics. My goal is to start conversations, or to help people think of things in ways that they hadn’t before.

To me, a successful post is one that: a. a lot of people read, and b. people think about and react to. On an objective level, this can be measured by the number of visits and the number of comments.

My fireproof post was one of the most successful posts on both counts. Now, the term “a lot” is relative. Anytime one of my posts goes over 50 hits, I consider it “a lot.” So far, the Fireproof post has had 63, and has a chance at becoming the most viewed post in this blog. It also has brought forth several comments, including a running dialog. To me, this is fantastic.

It seems clear that this movie has hit a chord with a lot of people. Those that like the movie claim that its message is powerful and has been inspiring to people in the context of their marriage relationship. The message (apparently, I still haven’t seen it) is that God must be in the center of a marriage. I certainly believe in that, and have preached that on more than one occasion.

On the other side is the fact that Kirk Cameron is the star of the movie. Some Christians believe him to be a good representative of all that is wrong with American evangelical conservative Christianity. In this, I mostly agree. I am not completely familiar with his work, but I find the movie “Left Behind,” which thrust him into his current role within some Christian communities, to be dangerous and antithetical to the Gospel of Jesus Christ as I understand it.

So, where does this leave us? Should I ignore the movie, or even actively try to dissuade people from seeing it, for fear that it might inadvertently lead them down paths I would certainly want people to avoid? Or should I see the movie and use it as an evangelical tool to guide people in Christian marriage?

As usual, when I am faced with a decision that appears to boil down to options A or B, I choose option 3. I have determined that I am going to see Fireproof. So as not to support the production of it financially, I am going to try to borrow it from a library. After watching it, I will be better able to enter into a conversation with those that have experienced grace from it. But I am probably not going to be putting up movie posters or host a community showing.

3 Comments

Filed under Christianity, Media

Is Fireproof safe?

It seems like I can’t turn around without seeing something about the movie “Fireproof.” I have heard from so many people that, “You just have to see this movie – it is so good.” Before you go out and check your local listings, know that Fireproof is not going to be at the theater anytime soon, and I’m not really sure if it ever was.

From what I can gather from the posters I have seen advertising various showings at local churches, the title has a double meaning. Apparently the main character is a fireman, but the movie is really about how to protect your marriage (thus making it, fireproof). Usually when someone tells me how great this movie is and tells me to rush out to see it with my wife as soon as possible, I just smile and say, “Oh yeah, I’ve heard of it.” I try to hide my utter lack of excitement.

The reason for my tepid reaction starts with the male star, Kirk Cameron. I loved him in “Growing Pains,” but I feel like his career has taken a turn for the strange. He has become the face of Evangelical Christian media, resurrecting (excuse the pun) his career with the movie “Left Behind.”

I’m sorry, but I have a strong distrust of anything vaguely attached to anything that is vaguely attached to “Left Behind.” I find the theology of Tim LaHaye so abhorrent that, unless Cameron condemns the books as perverting the Biblical narrative in such a way that is exploitative and dangerous, anything he does is tainted to me.

So, I have avoided “Fireproof.” I have realized though, that I need to see this movie. As a pastor in a church where couple might go and see it on their own, I have to be able to respond in an informed manner. Just hiding my head in the sand will not make this movie go away.

Plus, to avoid it completely is to fall into the classic liberal trap of hypocrisy. I claim to have an open table, and an open mind. I want to be able to learn from differences and not demonize people that simply disagree with me. I want to walk humbly with God, which means that I have to allow that sometimes I might not be fully right, and Tim LaHaye might not be fully wrong.

So instead of calling “Left Behind” the most dangerous theo-babble that has been spewed in the last half century (because it could quite literally lead to nuclear war and environmental devastation); I should instead engage those that claim “Left Behind,” with earnest discussion and try to learn from them.

Our divergent ways to understand and interpret Scripture might leave us with little common ground, but hopefully we can confirm “There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; [or liberal or conservative] for all of you are one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28, bracket added by me).

I should not hide from “Fireproof.” There might very well be some good points to it. I doubt I will agree with all of it, but maybe it will make me think for a moment. Maybe it will remind me, just once, to be kinder to my wife. Maybe it will help me enter into a conversation with someone. Maybe it will open up a relationship that wasn’t there before, and that is reason enough to see it.

7 Comments

Filed under Christianity, Media

Site of the Week: The Last Page of the Internet

This page is totally pointless, but it made me laugh out loud. It is the last page of the internet, found at http://www.wwwdotcom.com (it is funnier if you read it out loud).

1 Comment

Filed under Blogging

Prayer in schools: No thank you

A state judge recently ruled that an Illinois law mandating a moment of silence in public schools is a violation of the separation of church and state. I applaud the decision.

Prayer is an important part of a spiritual life, and I wish that more children had a regular prayer life. Heck, I wish that I had a more regular prayer life. I do not, however, feel that it is appropriate for a public school to have a time set aside for “prayer and reflection.”

Students should be allowed to pray in school, and unless school has changed a lot since I was there (which it probably has), there are plenty of times when a student can engage a prayer life. Saying a small grace before lunch, saying a prayer of thanksgiving during recess, praying for guidance before a quiz or a test, or getting to school early to pray before class starts, or on the bus ride, or while a teacher hands out worksheets – all of these times are perfect opportunities for anyone to pray.

A mandated moment of silence for prayer and reflection, however, is not. I even believe that a moment of silence is a good thing. Allowing kids to take a few moments to pause, allow their brain to slow down, or even wander periodically during the day is a good thing. Most brain studies have shown that the brain needs rest too. If the law had simply required a “a moment of silence,” that might have been okay, but I’m not sure that is matter of state lawmakers to decide. Every teacher should allow their students moments of silence, with or without a state law.

I have nothing against prayer in school, I have nothing against moments of silence in school. In fact, I am a proponent of both. What I am against is the government mandating either. School teachers are trained to teach academics – math, reading, writing, music, art, physical education. They should not be teaching their spiritual practices or their religious beliefs. Do their religious beliefs inform their teaching? Of course, but I do not want my daughter to be taught how to pray at school.

That is what church is for. Separation of Church and State should be something that all religious people should demand, because I do not want the government telling me how and when I can or should worship and pray. When the government starts mandating religious doctrine, it will inevitably be dumbed-down, watered down civic religion that replaces country with God.

I am all for prayer in school. Students and teacher should be allowed to pray as much or as little as they want, but a school is not a house of prayer.

For those that are outraged because their child has been deprived of a moment of silence, I suggest that instead you take this as an opportunity to pray with your child – today – right when they get home from school, and again before dinner, and again before you go to bed, and again when you wake up in the morning. Pray at home, pray at church, and even teach your child the right times to pray at school. We cannot get enough prayer in our lives, and in our world. Pray without ceasing. Please, do not ask our government to tell us when to pray. It’s just un-American.

2 Comments

Filed under Christianity