Ctrl BG: A Shortcut to Financial News 12/21

After MUCH drama, the fall of the auto industry in the US has finally been avoided- at least temporarily anyway. In the end, Bush signed over $17.4 to Chrysler and GM on Friday in return for non voting warrants and more oversight on executive pay etc. In the end, they made a full circle and the money will be coming from the TARP fund, which brings up the really intriguing question of whether the government has opened the pandora box and now other industries will be lining up to get a share of the rest of the TARP fund. Paulson has already asked Congress to release the rest of the $350 billion TARP fund early, when just a few days ago he said that it will not be necessary. Just when we thought we figured out how the TARP is going to work, they change their minds. This does not bode well for the government, because it makes them look like they have no idea what they're doing. Maybe they don't! On the other hand, the wider purpose of TARP is to support the financial market stability, and I daresay, it will probably not be very stable if the auto industry went bankrupt!

On the sidelines, the Madoff scandal continues to unfold, revealing many influential individuals exposed to this fraud. The S&P cut the rating of 11 US and EU banks, including Bank of America, Barclays Bank, Citibank, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase Bank, Morgan Stanley, Royal Bank of Scotland, UBS and Wells Fargo Bank. I guess if ratings must be cut, at least there is safety in numbers. What are you going to do when everyone goes down?

Outside of the States, it looks like the land of chocolate and waffles is not doing very well. Belgium's attempt to bailout Fortis got frozen as Prime Minister Yves Leterme tendered his resignation after having reportedly politically meddling to sway a court ruling. Apparently this is the third time their government collapsed. I had no idea.

The Girl With The Short Hair

Last year I went from that was down below the middle of my back, to a really bad short japanese-boy-rockstar cut. My hair grows fast so while I was mortified & stuck with pinning it back and trying to tie it up in all sorts of ways, with ribbons and clips, it eventually grew back to past my shoulders by September of this year. Being stuck with thick, thick hair I got fed up and went to go get it cut again into a straight across, above the shoulders/longish bob.

Then, I went home and chopped it all off to have it super short in the back, with an A-line cut in the front. Kind of like Victoria Beckham, but less extreme and shorter. How does it feel? Totally awesome. Here are some cuties that might inspire you to cut it short.




The best part is that you figure out fun ways to do your hair, it's just easier to take of! Best part? If you can work the curling iron and get a bunch of curls, it's completely adorable. It definitely becomes a deciding factor on how you style your outfits.

What are your thoughts on girls with short hair?

As for my next hair cut? I'm definitely going to go for a Shannyn Sossamon look.


Image Source: Garance Dore

M.U.S.E.

NEWBORN

beautiful song....

Twilight side effect

I am currently writing Breaking Dawn...
...the final book of My Twilight Saga...well thats what they call my story...

I assumed u have read Eclipse then, the 3rd book...

All 3 books are like diary to me, except that they are not personal anymore. i decided to tell the whole world , my story...Our Story from my side of the story...

At this point , u should have known about my feeling toward Jake...my best friend...

Oh how I love him...I love him to bits...and he have known that since the first day we met...
He was my sun when my day was impossibly dull and dark...
I loved him...but how could i hurt him by loving him yet not choosing him?
I loved him...but i loved Edward more...

Edward Edward....Edward is the love of my life ...the love of my existence...
Without him...how could i live?
I remember the day when he left me...
I never imagine myself get through that kind of nightmare again....
i could say it was like living in a vacuum...no sound no light no air no nothing....
except for me....but knowing he existed somewhere in this world, was enough....
enough to keep me sane and alive...

But now...I can't believe this!
he's being overly protective! i AM strong...maybe I'm not the strongest...
but still...
i am able to protect myself, for crying out loud...

I wondered why i choose him over Jake... Ha!
Jake would not shield me from any excitement...

Edward...he didn't even let me hunt for mountain lion...instead he brought me to Alaska and hunt for some penguin.....ooo cute penguin but there are my food after all..but i hated those stinky fishy smell... Besides I don't think I like hanging out with his fan, well you know who!

Okay, stop whining...
I think he's back....I'd better be going...
He still owes me something...
And before that,I have to call Jake and ask for updates...I miss her already...

P.S. I Love Edward...

Love Always
Bella

Read Eclipse, borrowed the book from LK, ba this is due to my lack of patient, couldn't wait any longer...abis stock...so i just borrowed LK's book, and lend her my Breaking Dawn as an exchange...
Now am reading Breaking Dawn...damn...how i hope this book will never end...

Oh ya sorry for my "wanna-be- bella" or "wanna-be-stephenie-meyers" behaviour...
I thought maybe i could get over this twilighters behaviour so that i can be normal twilight reader by writing that....ooo cukup la....

Sorry i dont have editor.....so u'll find a lot of hang kang english....buttt BIARRR....

So Long People....

`*~*~*~*`

Copied this from a forwarded email sent by my friend....

And Hope u haven't seen them yet...

Have a good laugh....=))

Comic 1

Comic 2

Comic 3 Comic 4
Comic 5
Comic 6

Comic 7
hahahaha...budu ooo kan....

Little Frivolous Somethings

When I was a kid, Christmas was about finally getting that one toy I've wanted all year long. When I grew older, it was about finally getting that one big fashion item that I've been craving for since all season. Now that I'm a bit older and (hopefully) wiser, I'm beginning to think that maybe that perfect Christmas gift is not about getting that big ticket item, but about getting that little frivolous something that will make you smile. Because really, I'd like to be present when a big ticket item is bought for me- just in case anything goes wrong. Besides, you'd be really broke if you bought something big for everyone you loved!

When I say frivolous, I do not mean something completely useless. It has got to be something that I would actually use, that little something that I've been meaning/wanting to buy but have put it on the backlog because there are more practical things on my list (like toothpaste, vacuum cleaners and Tweezerman tweezers- though if all else fails, these would not be a bad idea. At least they're useful!). Here are a few things on my backlog:
Essie nail varnish set. I am a HUGE fan of professional nail varnish (they go on SO much smoother and chips less!), Essie in particular. One can never have too much nail varnish, because they come in so many different colors and your favourite ones will start to dry out and coagulate after a while. I am especially loving this little gift set from Essie, because it encompasses all the classic colors one MUST have in their repertoire. They are also in delightfully small bottles that are actually more easy to carry and well, just the right size. I have personally never finished a bottle of nail varnish. Plus, did I mention that they are only $15 (they are usually $6-7 a bottle)!

The next thing on my list, are Shu Uemura fake lashes. Frivolous? Yes, for $20, they can only be used for one night. But fun? Definitely! I'd love to know what it feels like to have ridiculously long and perfect lashes for one night. This would also be the perfect time to give them out, because what better time is there to try fake lashes then New Years Eve? Speaking of New Years Eve, I have a vision. A vision of myself in a simple dress (of undecided color as of now) with a low side bun accessorized with this fabulous piece of purple feather (right). And if that plan should go awry, I can be masculine chic, in this adorable hat (left). I can even use this for Halloween next year! Spending $18 on literally a piece of feather is definitely not practical, but it will definitely draw a smile from me :)
Other random cute things on my list is a munny and a lego Ipod speaker. I don't really need ipod speakers, but I definitely wouldn't mind one that is so small and cute! And actually, I have a Munny. But mine didn't come out as I would like it to, so I'd love a second chance to decorate a Munny (including markers and other decorating materials would also be a nice touch).
Not exactly "little" , but I've always been very intrigued with lomography. I love taking pictures and I'd love to try out the different effects of lomography. The camera is not too expensive at $50 (compared to real digital cameras anyway), but if you factor in film and developing etc, it is actually a very expensive random hobby. Like those polaroids back in the days!

The purple frame (left) is not just a random piece of art. It is a mini DNA portrait! HG and I saw it on CNBC's list of weird gift ideas and our inner nerds are awaken. You really cannot get more personalized than a picture of your own DNA composition. And for someone to go to the effort of collecting your DNA sample and then go have it made.... that's a LOT of effort.

Then there are classes. Cooking classes, dancing classes, it would just be FUN to take a random class with friends even though you will never be able to replicate that 5 layer chocolate cake you just made at home. My friends just did a Christmas Cupcake decorating class, and I am SO jealous, because it looked so much fun. I wish I was there! Sur la Table offers cooking classes for $69 and I'm sure there are lots more similar places that I don't know of yet. Whatever you want to learn, there will be a class for it somewhere!

And last on my list is a really cute and big stuff toy. Something cute so it'll look good on my bed and something big and cushiony so I can lean on it while I read. I know, I am a kid at heart :P 8 more days til Christmas!!!

Image Source: Essie, Sephora, DNA 11 and Urban Outfitters

Oh boy, oh boy

How do you like your boy to look? Mine is the usual jeans and t-shirt kinda guy, but I like a little styled grunge to be honest!

A little flannel can go a long way. Too much flannel can be tacky and "OH LOOK I AM A HIPSTER."

Perhaps a little too trendy with the scarf and all - but nonetheless a rather eye-pleasing outfit! I love the checkered shirt.

I love this. I love the coat. He looks so... historical!

Casual, cute, playful! Lego belt!


Umm...yes, hello and hello.

Boys with style are big in my book - a little character like a neck scarf or a sharp looking jacket can make all the difference. Just enough scruff balanced out by the perfect amount of tidiness. And of course, excellent manners. Chivalry is not dead and of course style for men is alive as ever. Just a few things that make me sigh.

So tell me, how you would you like your man to dress?


All photos by The Sartorialist, which I love and adore. Who doesn't?

`*~*~*~*`

Found this one....and I like it....=)


Enjoy...
fall...fall in love if u want to....
He! He!

Keyword: OTS digression

***

.THINGS I WANT TO DO BEFORE I TURN 30.

--*--Cliff Diving
i got the idea from New moon... i could almost imagine Bella, i could almost imagine myself jump off the cliff ....
--*--Diving
2 of my friends, marie and susi are very excited about this...but due to some reason we still havent pursue our dream...not my dream at first...because im terrified to be in a pool with a group of sharks...give me alot of imagination to make me give up...but after a long decade of waiting to complete our swimming lesson, just so that we can do our 3 days course(if im not mistaken)...diving finally are listed in my dream list....because i cannot wait to swim with turtle...no turtle??? okay the coral is fine with me...--*--Snow!!!
To touch snow...play a snowball game...make a snow man....what else...to take picture while its snowing...haha....sakai...but so what....--*--Ski
learn how to ski....

--*--To dye my hair with bold color
mmmm.....ngam juga yerrr....

oopss...sorry still learning photoshop....

--*--Curl my hair

--*--Travel to US! Italy! Australia! and so on...
Or at least one of these place....Okay I want to travel after i turn 30 as well, but u just have to texperience this before 30 just for the sake of saying ' been there, done that... do u want to see the pictures?'...hehe....

........................and more.....later guys.... later...im sleepy...

p.s. anyone have the sme thing in mind?call me.... hehe...

Smart Notes - December 14, 2008

1. Tom Osborne: Enough Spread, Let's See Some Option

Tom Osborne recently opined on the state of football offenses. And keep in mind that, not only did the guy win multiple championships at Nebraska, his offenses also scored points. Indeed, while much has deservedly been made of Oklahoma's terrific multiple pro-style up-tempo offense, in 1995 it was Nebraska who averaged over 52 points a game en route to a title. Including OU this year, only five teams have averaged over fifty points a game for a season since 1945. So Osborne has a unique perspective on football offenses, the spread, and what could be next.

“You know, people are really obsessed right now with spread offense,” Osborne said. “And I think there are a lot of real great features about it. But I think you’re going to see a team jump up and do really well at something that’s different. For a long time, Oklahoma had a real advantage because the only time you saw the wishbone was the week you played Oklahoma. It was so different from what you were doing.

“Now, although those spread offenses are giving people trouble, you still see it week after week after week. So, as time goes by, defenses are going to get a little better at playing it. I don’t know that anybody will ever shut it down, but they’ll play it better. And then you’re going to see something like what (former Navy coach) Paul Johnson is doing down there at Georgia Tech.” [Flexbone Triple Option]

“That’s something that’s so much different than what anybody’s seeing,” Osborne said. “He’s going to make some waves. He’s taking what they’ve been doing at the service academies for years. And now he’s got bigger linemen. And more speed. Now he can recruit kids he probably wasn’t getting at Navy.

“I’m not saying it’s going to be that type of offense. But there’s going to be somebody who’s going to start doing some things that people just aren’t seeing all the time. And that’ll maybe start another wave of innovation and some different things happening.”

A few points. First, Osborne's description of the spread belies some of the ambiguity behind the term -- he likely has not read my most recent piece on it -- and it's obviously a truism that you can no longer get the advantage of being different if you're doing what everyone else is. Second, Osborne is absolutely right that there are huge advantages to be had by running something that your opponents only see once a year. At one time, this was the spread. Now of course, that's no longer the case.

That point can't be overemphasized though. Every offensive scheme must be able to do a few things: must have ways to get the ball to your playmakers; must be able to get the ball to different guys when the defense wants to take your best players away; must have schemes and counters that attack the defenses you will see, both in terms of fronts and coverages; and it must be able to do all those things without overwhelming your players with information. Easier said than done. It's an added, but not necessary perk if your opponents are not used to seeing it.

And Johnson, at Georgia Tech, has a special perk with his flexbone: normally, if you do something your opponents are not used to seeing, then you too are not overly familiar with it. That is how it was with the early spread teams. Johnson, by contrast, has used his offense for decades and knows all the adjustments and changes. When Georgia Tech ran all over Miami and Georgia, a lot of it came in the second half. Often, it seemed like the defense had two guys defending, say, the pitch guy, or the quarterback, and none on the guy who wound up running for a forty-yard run. The reason for that was because Johnson knows how to vary his blocking and assignments to take away the guy responsible for those players. So when announcers like to say that you play "assignment" football to stop the option that is only partially true. If you do, Johnson figures out who is "assigned" to his guys and blocks them, and then lets the reads take care of themselves. So this is where execution and soundness of an offense meet uniqueness.

But my last point is that I'm not sure if Osborne's narrative is exactly right. It's true that, to some extent, football is cyclical. But it's not exactly cyclical. Defenses do not completely forget; with the internet, they absolutely cannot forget: the answers are all out there. The single-wing stuff is back, but it's also different. In the old-old days, the centers who did the shotgun snaps did not really know how to snap the ball with their heads up, so they were ineffective blockers. So now, with the wildcat and other single-wing variants, the center is now an equally effective blocker.

But the meta-narrative here is passing. Again, this point can be overstated, as passing was not invented in the last two decades (Joe Namath had a 4,000 yard season with the Jets), but there's clearly been a synthesis. I think that it will be unlikely that teams will be completely unable to throw -- or run -- with consistent success. Now, that does not mean the type of "balance" usually spewed on TV (equal carries, equal yards, etc) as I have well documented that the better approach to balance is a somewhat game-theoretic one. But both Florida's and OU's offenses are examples of ones where they use advanced and time-tested concepts -- spread, play-action, quicks, multiple-formations, etc -- to put maximum pressure on the defense. As a football pragmatist, I think that these types of offenses will continue to set the standard. Unlike Osborne, I think using what once was, alone, will not work, without the added ability to pass or evolve.

2. Malcolm Gladwell's "Quarterback Problem"

The famous (or infamous) Malcolm Gladwell, author of Blink, The Tipping Point, and now Outliers, has a very interesting new essay in the New Yorker. The point of the article is about how we could be better at selecting teachers, because we now know that being a good teacher is all about making a connection with kids (who are not always easy to read) and these are skills not easily taught, evaluated, or identified. To illustrate the problem of identifying good future teachers he uses the problem of identifying successful NFL quarterbacks, focusing on a scout's attempt to evaluate Mizzou's Chase Daniel.

But then Shonka [NFL talent scout] began to talk about when he was on the staff of the Philadelphia Eagles, in 1999. Five quarterbacks were taken in the first round of the college draft that year, and each looked as promising as Chase Daniel did now. But only one of them, Donovan McNabb, ended up fulfilling that promise. Of the rest, one descended into mediocrity after a decent start. Two were complete busts, and the last was so awful that after failing out of the N.F.L. he ended up failing out of the Canadian Football League as well.

The year before, the same thing happened with Ryan Leaf, who was the Chase Daniel of 1998. The San Diego Chargers made him the second player taken over all in the draft, and gave him an eleven-million-dollar signing bonus. Leaf turned out to be terrible. In 2002, it was Joey Harrington’s turn. Harrington was a golden boy out of the University of Oregon, and the third player taken in the draft. Shonka still can’t get over what happened to him.

“I tell you, I saw Joey live,” he said. “This guy threw lasers, he could throw under tight spots, he had the arm strength, he had the size, he had the intelligence.” Shonka got as misty as a two-hundred-and-eighty-pound ex-linebacker in a black tracksuit can get. “He’s a concert pianist, you know? I really—I mean, I really—liked Joey.” And yet Harrington’s career consisted of a failed stint with the Detroit Lions and a slide into obscurity. Shonka looked back at the screen, where the young man he felt might be the best quarterback in the country was marching his team up and down the field. “How will that ability translate to the National Football League?” He shook his head slowly. “Shoot.”

This is the quarterback problem. There are certain jobs where almost nothing you can learn about candidates before they start predicts how they’ll do once they’re hired. So how do we know whom to choose in cases like that? In recent years, a number of fields have begun to wrestle with this problem, but none with such profound social consequences as the profession of teaching.

And, if we focus just on football for now, this is an amazing thing. No position is paid more highly in the NFL than quarterback, and no position is more integral to a team's success. And no position receives more scrutiny. And it's a total crapshoot. The studies have been done, and draft position -- the best marker of what the expectations levels are for a quarterback -- has absolutely no bearing on how successful a quarterback winds up. This is scary. It's scary enough for football -- all that money and time spent on what is basically a futile endeavor -- but, as Gladwell points out, it's scary for society that we have lots of jobs where we don't know how to pick how people will be successful.

Now Gladwell's explanation is likely imperfect (he clearly has not read my articles, particularly when he talks about the "spread" that Mizzou runs), though it hits at the general truth: the only way to evaluate how good a quarterback will be in the NFL is to see them play in the NFL. And even then sometimes the light just goes on for certain guys after a period of mediocrity. It's just so hard to say. With baseball, as Moneyball showed, you can model the game to at least tell you a great deal of what you need to know. It's a game largely about hitters and pitchers. We may not know everything, but it gets us far to the end. But football is too complex. Players can't be evaluated solely on statistics. And the traditional scouting method, some kind of gestalt impression where you say "ah he looks good" has been proven unreliable.

We know that Peyton Manning and Ryan Leaf were seen as the undoubted 1-2 picks. Many liked Leaf better. We know Leaf completely failed while Manning has had remarkable success. Do we even know why, exactly though? A fair but unscientific pop psychology hypothesis is that Leaf was too mentally unstable: he had all the physical tools but few of the emotional and mental ones. But isn't it obvious that NFL quarterback is only a partially physical game? I always thought of evaluating quarterbacks as a threshold approach: the guy has to be able to do certain things, to make certain throws, but after that, the physical qualities diminish. Whether a guy throws a deep out with "zip" or as a "laser" is irrelevant if he lacks knowledge, awareness, and a sense of timing.

And do we even know if that hypothesis was right? What about those five guys from 1999? How do you explain Akili Smith and Cade McNown who were apparently dead on arrival? Tim Couch seemed to just fumble through mediocrity into eventual oblivion, but those two guys were right there and had unbelievably short careers. Physical? Mental? Mental in what sense? Couldn't learn the playbook? Couldn't handle the pressure? No timing? No support from teammates? I haven't a clue. I don't know how you glean lessons from those evaluation failures.

A college quarterback joining the N.F.L., by contrast, has to learn to play an entirely new game. Shonka began to talk about Tim Couch, the quarterback taken first in that legendary draft of 1999. Couch set every record imaginable in his years at the University of Kentucky. “They used to put five garbage cans on the field,” Shonka recalled, shaking his head, “and Couch would stand there and throw and just drop the ball into every one.” But Couch was a flop in the pros. It wasn’t that professional quarterbacks didn’t need to be accurate. It was that the kind of accuracy required to do the job well could be measured only in a real N.F.L. game.

Similarly, all quarterbacks drafted into the pros are required to take an I.Q. test—the Wonderlic Personnel Test. The theory behind the test is that the pro game is so much more cognitively demanding than the college game that high intelligence should be a good predictor of success. But when the economists David Berri and Rob Simmons analyzed the scores—which are routinely leaked to the press—they found that Wonderlic scores are all but useless as predictors. Of the five quarterbacks taken in round one of the 1999 draft, Donovan McNabb, the only one of the five with a shot at the Hall of Fame, had the lowest Wonderlic score. And who else had I.Q. scores in the same range as McNabb? Dan Marino and Terry Bradshaw, two of the greatest quarterbacks ever to play the game.

We’re used to dealing with prediction problems by going back and looking for better predictors. We now realize that being a good doctor requires the ability to communicate, listen, and empathize—and so there is increasing pressure on medical schools to pay attention to interpersonal skills as well as to test scores. We can have better physicians if we’re just smarter about how we choose medical-school students. But no one is saying that Dan Shonka is somehow missing some key ingredient in his analysis; that if he were only more perceptive he could predict Chase Daniel’s career trajectory. The problem with picking quarterbacks is that Chase Daniel’s performance can’t be predicted. The job he’s being groomed for is so particular and specialized that there is no way to know who will succeed at it and who won’t. In fact, Berri and Simmons found no connection between where a quarterback was taken in the draft—that is, how highly he was rated on the basis of his college performance—and how well he played in the pros.

Indeed, as we have seen with guys like Brad Johnson or Matt Cassell, apparently playing in college is not even as important as some other, less tangible, factors. As Gladwell points out:

The entire time that Chase Daniel was on the field against Oklahoma State, his backup, Chase Patton, stood on the sidelines, watching. Patton didn’t play a single down. In his four years at Missouri, up to that point, he had thrown a total of twenty-six passes. And yet there were people in Shonka’s world who thought that Patton would end up as a better professional quarterback than Daniel. The week of the Oklahoma State game, the national sports magazine ESPN even put the two players on its cover, with the title “CHASE DANIEL MIGHT WIN THE HEISMAN”—referring to the trophy given to college football’s best player. “HIS BACKUP COULD WIN THE SUPER BOWL.” Why did everyone like Patton so much? It wasn’t clear. Maybe he looked good in practice. Maybe it was because this season in the N.F.L. a quarterback who had also never started in a single college game is playing superbly for the New England Patriots. It sounds absurd to put an athlete on the cover of a magazine for no particular reason. But perhaps that’s just the quarterback problem taken to an extreme. If college performance doesn’t tell us anything, why shouldn’t we value someone who hasn’t had the chance to play as highly as someone who plays as well as anyone in the land?

One answer is that ESPN the magazine is a hyperbolic and bizarre magazine, but there were actual scouts quoted in that article. The view seemed to be that while Chase Patton is not good enough to beat out Chase Daniel, he is instead good enough to be drafted ahead of him. In any event, this is a problem that affects all professions, and all stages of life. We know that what makes someone good in one level cannot be evaluated until you get to the next. Chase Daniel is an excellent college quarterback, and all the debate about the NFL around him is really unfair and beside the point so long as he in college, as it is with Tim Tebow. The answer is no one knows how good these kids will be. It's no referendum on them, nor their spread offenses or coaches, but just different circumstances.

Eventually, I suppose, scouting will finally more approximate a science. But right now, we know, that scouts and NFL teams literally do not know what they are doing when they throw money at guys. Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco look excellent, but they just as likely could have been Ryan Leaf or Cade McNown. This year Green Bay drafted Brian Brohm from Louisville early in the draft and Matt Flynn from LSU in the seventh round. Right now, Matt Flynn is ahead of Brohm on the depth chart: he just beat him out in camp and pre-season. No one could have foreseen that until they all got there. Brohm will be fine, but the Packers both were hurt and helped by their own incompetence at evaluating quarterbacks: they seem to have overvalued Brohm and everyone else undervalued Flynn.

Midway through the fourth quarter of the Oklahoma State–Missouri game, the Tigers were in trouble. For the first time all year, they were behind late in the game. They needed to score, or they’d lose any chance of a national championship. Daniel took the snap from his center, and planted his feet to pass. His receivers were covered. He began to run. The Oklahoma State defenders closed in on him. He was under pressure, something that rarely happened to him in the spread. Desperate, he heaved the ball downfield, right into the arms of a Cowboy defender.

Shonka jumped up. “That’s not like him!” he cried out. “He doesn’t throw stuff up like that.”

Next to Shonka, a scout for the Kansas City Chiefs looked crestfallen. “Chase never throws something up for grabs!”

It was tempting to see Daniel’s mistake as definitive. The spread had broken down. He was finally under pressure. This was what it would be like to be an N.F.L. quarterback, wasn’t it? But there is nothing like being an N.F.L. quarterback except being an N.F.L. quarterback. A prediction, in a field where prediction is not possible, is no more than a prejudice. Maybe that interception means that Daniel won’t be a good professional quarterback, or maybe he made a mistake that he’ll learn from. “In a great big piece of pie,” Shonka said, “that was just a little slice.”

UPDATES: 3. Florida Cut-Ups

Someone passed along some Florida TV cut-ups, broken down by concept. (Again, no blame for music selection.)



4. Pete Carroll - 60 Minutes

Not much to say about this, except that it is inspiring to a nearly unbelievable degree. Do yourself a favor and watch it.