Banker's Hours
Every now and then, I'll hear somebody at work use the term "banker's hours" jokingly. I'm not entirely sure what it means, but based on the context, I'm pretty sure it's a way of making fun of someone for leaving earlier than usual.
For example, if I see Bob taking off in the early afternoon at maybe 2 or 3 (our normal workday ends at 4:30pm), I might say "Hey Bob, keeping banker's hours, eh?" To which he would probably smile politely and make up some excuse for why he's leaving early.
I know, it's pretty dumb, and not that funny, but people actually say it pretty often around here. At least it's better than saying "touch base" all the time. There's this girl who sits near me and I hear her say it every single day. Makes me want to punch someone.
Anyways, what I think is funny is how bankers apparently got the reputation of being lazy and having a short work day, to the point that "banker's hours" actually became a term. Sorry Anuj, it's true.
It also makes me wonder, if engineers make fun of bankers for leaving work early, what do people in other professions say in similar situations? Like if a banker sees a fellow employee going home around noon, would he/she say "hey, keeping Kindergarten teacher's hours, eh?"
Or on the other side of things, say a Japanese businessman wants to leave the office earlier than usual, does he/she have to worry about a colleague making a derisive comment like "hey, keeping electrical engineer's hours, eh?"
Friday, April 28, 2006
Monday, April 17, 2006
Major League Gaming
A while back MTV did that True Life documentary on professional gamers, now it looks like they are going to take it to the next level and have an organized league with TV contracts and everything:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060417/ap_en_tv/video_gaming_tv_show_1
They say it could be the next big sensation, like televised poker in the last few years. I think, if done right, it could be even bigger than that. Could fantasy videogamer leagues be far behind? I draft T-Squared with the first overall pick!
A while back MTV did that True Life documentary on professional gamers, now it looks like they are going to take it to the next level and have an organized league with TV contracts and everything:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060417/ap_en_tv/video_gaming_tv_show_1
They say it could be the next big sensation, like televised poker in the last few years. I think, if done right, it could be even bigger than that. Could fantasy videogamer leagues be far behind? I draft T-Squared with the first overall pick!
Thursday, April 13, 2006
Cartoon Wars
Not sure if anyone else has seen the last couple South Park episodes, where they take on the issue of showing Muhammed (the Islamic prophet, not the boxer) and also rip on Family Guy.
The episodes were pretty good actually. Of all the South Park episodes that try to have some political theme or message, this might be one of the most meaningful and important. At least in my opinion. I won't talk about the political stuff much here, you'll have to watch the episodes yourself and see what you think.
What I did want to talk about was the stuff they said about Family Guy. I know a lot of people love that show, which is cool, but I've tried to watch more than a couple episodes of it, and I just can't really get into it. I think I've mentioned this before on this blog. There are some funny parts, but overall I just can't say I'm a fan of the show.
At one point, I thought I was the only one who didn't "get" Family Guy, especially for someone who likes Simpsons, South Park, and just stupid humor in general. But based on some of the stuff that was said in the South Park episodes, I guess I'm not the only one.
(By the way, if any of you haven't seen the last 2 South Park episodes I'm talking about, and are the sensitive type to "spoilers", maybe you should skip the rest and come back after you've seen it. I really don't think I'm going to "ruin" anything by what I say, but just in case, that's your warning.)
Basically, their criticism of Family Guy is that their episodes have no real plot, and that the jokes are pretty much just random scenarios that pop up with no rhyme or reason. I never realized it before, but after they pointed it out, I do think that is exactly why I don't appreciate the show.
I don't know if every episode of Family Guy is like that, but they made up some mock clips of it in the South Park episode, and those clips were surprisingly dead on with the episodes I've seen of Family Guy. The family's just sitting in the living room, and out of the blue, the dad says something like "hey, remember the time I was ...", and then they go into a flashback sequence where they show that story happening.
Meanwhile none of it has anything to do with anything, it's like the writers just wanted to insert a scene that they thought would make people laugh. You get the feeling that when the writers try to construct an episode, a list of jokes or funny situations or pop culture references are written first, and then they figure out how to incorporate as many of them in half an hour as they can.
To me, it would be like Eminem writing a rap, by first coming up pairs of words that rhyme. Then trying to make sentences that end in those words, and finally to make the song, just put those sentences one after another. It just results in something that makes no sense and sounds awkwardly put together. Not that I have much experience in writing rap songs, but I would think that you should start by deciding what subject to rap about first, and then come up with the best rhymes from there.
I know, I'm expecting too much from a cartoon sitcom, it's not like writing poetry, or directing an independent film about gay cowboys eating pudding. I guess I just can't help but compare it to Simpsons or South Park, two of my favorite shows of all time. In its prime seasons, the writing on Simpsons was as polished and smoothly done as it gets. South Park came along, and it was a lot rougher around the edges and not as cleverly written, but still funny and smart in its own way.
As for Family Guy, I can see how fans think it's hilarious, and even how the random style is part of the show's charm. But personally, I have a feeling I may never really "get" it. I mean, I happened to watch some of Scary Movie 2 on TV the other day, and I seriously think even that had more plot continuity, than a typical Family Guy episode.
I don't remember the exact quotes, but in the South Park episodes, there was a part where Kyle said something to Cartman like: "How can you not like Family Guy? Its humor is right up your alley!". Which set Cartman off: "Don't you ever compare me to Family Guy, Kyle! EVER! I will kill you where you stand!"
Now, I may not get as pissed off as Cartman when people ask me how I can like Simpsons and South Park, but not Family Guy - but I understand.
Not sure if anyone else has seen the last couple South Park episodes, where they take on the issue of showing Muhammed (the Islamic prophet, not the boxer) and also rip on Family Guy.
The episodes were pretty good actually. Of all the South Park episodes that try to have some political theme or message, this might be one of the most meaningful and important. At least in my opinion. I won't talk about the political stuff much here, you'll have to watch the episodes yourself and see what you think.
What I did want to talk about was the stuff they said about Family Guy. I know a lot of people love that show, which is cool, but I've tried to watch more than a couple episodes of it, and I just can't really get into it. I think I've mentioned this before on this blog. There are some funny parts, but overall I just can't say I'm a fan of the show.
At one point, I thought I was the only one who didn't "get" Family Guy, especially for someone who likes Simpsons, South Park, and just stupid humor in general. But based on some of the stuff that was said in the South Park episodes, I guess I'm not the only one.
(By the way, if any of you haven't seen the last 2 South Park episodes I'm talking about, and are the sensitive type to "spoilers", maybe you should skip the rest and come back after you've seen it. I really don't think I'm going to "ruin" anything by what I say, but just in case, that's your warning.)
Basically, their criticism of Family Guy is that their episodes have no real plot, and that the jokes are pretty much just random scenarios that pop up with no rhyme or reason. I never realized it before, but after they pointed it out, I do think that is exactly why I don't appreciate the show.
I don't know if every episode of Family Guy is like that, but they made up some mock clips of it in the South Park episode, and those clips were surprisingly dead on with the episodes I've seen of Family Guy. The family's just sitting in the living room, and out of the blue, the dad says something like "hey, remember the time I was ...", and then they go into a flashback sequence where they show that story happening.
Meanwhile none of it has anything to do with anything, it's like the writers just wanted to insert a scene that they thought would make people laugh. You get the feeling that when the writers try to construct an episode, a list of jokes or funny situations or pop culture references are written first, and then they figure out how to incorporate as many of them in half an hour as they can.
To me, it would be like Eminem writing a rap, by first coming up pairs of words that rhyme. Then trying to make sentences that end in those words, and finally to make the song, just put those sentences one after another. It just results in something that makes no sense and sounds awkwardly put together. Not that I have much experience in writing rap songs, but I would think that you should start by deciding what subject to rap about first, and then come up with the best rhymes from there.
I know, I'm expecting too much from a cartoon sitcom, it's not like writing poetry, or directing an independent film about gay cowboys eating pudding. I guess I just can't help but compare it to Simpsons or South Park, two of my favorite shows of all time. In its prime seasons, the writing on Simpsons was as polished and smoothly done as it gets. South Park came along, and it was a lot rougher around the edges and not as cleverly written, but still funny and smart in its own way.
As for Family Guy, I can see how fans think it's hilarious, and even how the random style is part of the show's charm. But personally, I have a feeling I may never really "get" it. I mean, I happened to watch some of Scary Movie 2 on TV the other day, and I seriously think even that had more plot continuity, than a typical Family Guy episode.
I don't remember the exact quotes, but in the South Park episodes, there was a part where Kyle said something to Cartman like: "How can you not like Family Guy? Its humor is right up your alley!". Which set Cartman off: "Don't you ever compare me to Family Guy, Kyle! EVER! I will kill you where you stand!"
Now, I may not get as pissed off as Cartman when people ask me how I can like Simpsons and South Park, but not Family Guy - but I understand.
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
Cults/Secret Societies
A subject that I seem to be hearing a lot about lately is on cults and secret societies among us. There was the whole Scientology thing, made most public by the recent South Park episodes. I also happened to read Angels and Demons a couple months ago (written by the same author of Da Vinci Code), which talks a lot about secret societies dating back hundreds of years in history. And just this morning, I was reading an article in the Chicago Tribune talking about how most of the sushi restaurants we eat at, get their sushi from a company that is closely connected to a Korean religious cult.
I guess I always believed that these things existed, but never really thought about them much. They made for good stories in movies (like The Skulls) or TV (the Simpsons' Stonecutters episode), but I just figured that kind of stuff was exaggerated for effect. In my mind, either those cults or secret societies used to exist and aren't really active anymore, or maybe they still exist, but don't really have any influence on "mainstream" society.
Now, I'm not so sure that I should take the subject so lightly. The sushi-Korean cult connection was especially surprising, since I love sushi and I go to sushi restaurants pretty often. Last weekend I went to Mirai in the city for the first time, and loved the food, but now after reading the Trib article, all these nagging thoughts are popping up in my mind.
When I was enjoying all those delightful fatty tuna rolls, was I providing financial support to some wacko who holds mass weddings and believes he is the Messiah? Worse yet, what if one day these crazy cult people decide to mess with my food in some mind-controlling or mass poisoning campaign, how would I know? Is it too late, am I already programmed to assassinate the Malaysian president at a fashion show at a later date?
There was also this Scientology article I read a few weeks ago, where this investigative reporter guy joined the group for a week and then reported on his experience. I don't know the credibility of this guy, but some of the accounts are very disturbing. And I'm not just talking about the wild stories they believe in, or the fact that the "religion" was started by a science-fiction writer, it goes way farther than that.
He describes about how everyone who joins has to reveal all their personal secrets, which go into a file that they can bring out to blackmail or discredit the person if they try to quit. Or how they have trained experts available at helping you max out your credit to pay for Scientology "treatments". How once you get sucked in, they can pretty much make you do slave labor as punishments if you piss off any higher ranking members (or as they call it, levels of Operating Thetans).
Then there's the discussion of secret societies like the Illuminati and Freemasons in Angels and Demons. Based on the inaccuracies and misleading facts I learned about when researching Da Vinci Code, plus the fact that it's a fiction novel, I would probably put the least stock in what's in this book.
Even so, I think some of the general "facts" mentioned are worth considering and thinking about. People formed these secret societies for a reason, and the fact that they have survived and perhaps thrived for so long says a lot. They obviously know what it takes to support themselves financially, and assert their interests in the political system.
How much of our banking system is run by those in these secret societies? What about the chancellors and professors at major universities, are they members too? Is it true that our senators, governors, and even our Presidents are members of these societies? Did they get to power because of their secret ties, and are their actions as government officials, bankers, CEO's, professors, etc., heavily influenced by the interests of these societies they belong to?
I don't know if I'll ever get those questions answered, but all the doubts that come up when I think about these things leave me feeling unsettled. I could be paranoid, but if any of it's true, I wonder if I could even do anything about it anyways.
Am I going to shun the entire educational system because I think I'll get brainwashed by cult ideology? Should I boycott all banks and store all my money in the form of gold bars, so that I'm not supporting some secret society? Most importantly, am I really going to stop eating sushi?
The answer is, of course, no way, I love sushi. Gonna keep eating it until I die, whether it's of natural causes or as a victim of religious cult's purging mission. Yes, I guess it's true, as they say, "ignorance is bliss".
A subject that I seem to be hearing a lot about lately is on cults and secret societies among us. There was the whole Scientology thing, made most public by the recent South Park episodes. I also happened to read Angels and Demons a couple months ago (written by the same author of Da Vinci Code), which talks a lot about secret societies dating back hundreds of years in history. And just this morning, I was reading an article in the Chicago Tribune talking about how most of the sushi restaurants we eat at, get their sushi from a company that is closely connected to a Korean religious cult.
I guess I always believed that these things existed, but never really thought about them much. They made for good stories in movies (like The Skulls) or TV (the Simpsons' Stonecutters episode), but I just figured that kind of stuff was exaggerated for effect. In my mind, either those cults or secret societies used to exist and aren't really active anymore, or maybe they still exist, but don't really have any influence on "mainstream" society.
Now, I'm not so sure that I should take the subject so lightly. The sushi-Korean cult connection was especially surprising, since I love sushi and I go to sushi restaurants pretty often. Last weekend I went to Mirai in the city for the first time, and loved the food, but now after reading the Trib article, all these nagging thoughts are popping up in my mind.
When I was enjoying all those delightful fatty tuna rolls, was I providing financial support to some wacko who holds mass weddings and believes he is the Messiah? Worse yet, what if one day these crazy cult people decide to mess with my food in some mind-controlling or mass poisoning campaign, how would I know? Is it too late, am I already programmed to assassinate the Malaysian president at a fashion show at a later date?
There was also this Scientology article I read a few weeks ago, where this investigative reporter guy joined the group for a week and then reported on his experience. I don't know the credibility of this guy, but some of the accounts are very disturbing. And I'm not just talking about the wild stories they believe in, or the fact that the "religion" was started by a science-fiction writer, it goes way farther than that.
He describes about how everyone who joins has to reveal all their personal secrets, which go into a file that they can bring out to blackmail or discredit the person if they try to quit. Or how they have trained experts available at helping you max out your credit to pay for Scientology "treatments". How once you get sucked in, they can pretty much make you do slave labor as punishments if you piss off any higher ranking members (or as they call it, levels of Operating Thetans).
Then there's the discussion of secret societies like the Illuminati and Freemasons in Angels and Demons. Based on the inaccuracies and misleading facts I learned about when researching Da Vinci Code, plus the fact that it's a fiction novel, I would probably put the least stock in what's in this book.
Even so, I think some of the general "facts" mentioned are worth considering and thinking about. People formed these secret societies for a reason, and the fact that they have survived and perhaps thrived for so long says a lot. They obviously know what it takes to support themselves financially, and assert their interests in the political system.
How much of our banking system is run by those in these secret societies? What about the chancellors and professors at major universities, are they members too? Is it true that our senators, governors, and even our Presidents are members of these societies? Did they get to power because of their secret ties, and are their actions as government officials, bankers, CEO's, professors, etc., heavily influenced by the interests of these societies they belong to?
I don't know if I'll ever get those questions answered, but all the doubts that come up when I think about these things leave me feeling unsettled. I could be paranoid, but if any of it's true, I wonder if I could even do anything about it anyways.
Am I going to shun the entire educational system because I think I'll get brainwashed by cult ideology? Should I boycott all banks and store all my money in the form of gold bars, so that I'm not supporting some secret society? Most importantly, am I really going to stop eating sushi?
The answer is, of course, no way, I love sushi. Gonna keep eating it until I die, whether it's of natural causes or as a victim of religious cult's purging mission. Yes, I guess it's true, as they say, "ignorance is bliss".
Monday, April 10, 2006
Who Are The Ad Wizards That Came Up With That One?
Everyone knows that sex sells, and it is no surprise that plenty of commercials have always used sex appeal to sell their products. But one thing I've been noticing recently is that the way that it is used in more recent commercials has kind of changed, at least I think they have.
From what I remember, people used to always criticize beer commercials for always showing regular guys surrounded by hot chicks as they drank Bud Light or Miller Lite (I just noticed that, why does one spell it "Light" and the other spell it "Lite"?). The criticism was that the commercials were misleading and superficial - just because you drink a certain beer, doesn't mean you are going to get a lot of chicks!
I'm not going to argue that the message is stupid, but if you think about the way those commercials presented the message, they were kind of making those suggestions in a "subtle" way, if you can call it that. What they do is show the given situation in the commercial - and then it is up to the viewer to make that connection in their mind, presumably on a subconscious level. They don't come out and just say "hey, if you drink our beer/use our product, hot girls will be all over you", instead they simply show you that scenario and hope that you put it together and figure out the message. Not that it's a huge leap or anything.
Comparing that to some of the commercials I see today, I get the sense that the old advertising philosophy has been replaced by a much more overt, "beat you over the head" approach. Now, we see a guy using Axe body spray, immediately leading to a hot chick in an elevator, his friend's mother, or a bunch of cheerleaders jumping on him. Or we see a guy use a certain kind of aftershave or razor blade, then meets his roommate's girlfriend, who is immediately all over him, rubbing his face and calling him "Francesco". There's even a Harley Davidson commercial where a girl dates a bunch of guys but rejects them all, until the guy in a Harley comes along, and of course he scores with her.
I'm just waiting for a commercial for Microsoft Office to come out, where they show a guy using Corel Spreadsheet or something and getting rejected by every girl in the office. Then he starts using Excel, and all of a sudden the ladies are lining up to pivot his tables.
Whether it's a commercial for body spray, aftershave, breath mints, chewing gum, a motorcycle, brand of whiskey, or whatever it is, the message in these ads are much more clearly stated: "Use our product, and you will hook up." They don't just pose the scenario and let your subconscious mind make the connection, they basically come out and just tell you exactly what to think outright. The message is not just implied like it used to be, it's basically stated in a way that you have to be retarded to not understand.
Maybe I have overlooked old commercials that have done this in the past, but as I was sayinig, it seems like this is more of a recent trend. Ironically, I almost think beer commercials are more tame nowadays than they used to be, more about making you laugh than pressuring you to drink a brand to be socially accepted.
If it is indeed a recent trend, I'm not sure what exactly that says about our country's development as a whole. Does this mean that advertisers have given up on trying to make us think with their ads, by cleverly placing thoughts in the back of our minds? Have they decided that we are all like overgrown children who can be told what to think?
Maybe a more interesting question is, what's worse - when advertisers try to be sneaky and appeal to your subconscious, or when they don't even try to be subtle anymore, and simply make heavily exaggerated claims that can't be backed up? On the one hand, it would be nice to feel like they respect our intelligence enough for them to believe that they have to be clever in their marketing strategy. But then, if it's the same message they're trying to send, then why bother putting up the charade? No point in beating around the bush right?
Everyone knows that sex sells, and it is no surprise that plenty of commercials have always used sex appeal to sell their products. But one thing I've been noticing recently is that the way that it is used in more recent commercials has kind of changed, at least I think they have.
From what I remember, people used to always criticize beer commercials for always showing regular guys surrounded by hot chicks as they drank Bud Light or Miller Lite (I just noticed that, why does one spell it "Light" and the other spell it "Lite"?). The criticism was that the commercials were misleading and superficial - just because you drink a certain beer, doesn't mean you are going to get a lot of chicks!
I'm not going to argue that the message is stupid, but if you think about the way those commercials presented the message, they were kind of making those suggestions in a "subtle" way, if you can call it that. What they do is show the given situation in the commercial - and then it is up to the viewer to make that connection in their mind, presumably on a subconscious level. They don't come out and just say "hey, if you drink our beer/use our product, hot girls will be all over you", instead they simply show you that scenario and hope that you put it together and figure out the message. Not that it's a huge leap or anything.
Comparing that to some of the commercials I see today, I get the sense that the old advertising philosophy has been replaced by a much more overt, "beat you over the head" approach. Now, we see a guy using Axe body spray, immediately leading to a hot chick in an elevator, his friend's mother, or a bunch of cheerleaders jumping on him. Or we see a guy use a certain kind of aftershave or razor blade, then meets his roommate's girlfriend, who is immediately all over him, rubbing his face and calling him "Francesco". There's even a Harley Davidson commercial where a girl dates a bunch of guys but rejects them all, until the guy in a Harley comes along, and of course he scores with her.
I'm just waiting for a commercial for Microsoft Office to come out, where they show a guy using Corel Spreadsheet or something and getting rejected by every girl in the office. Then he starts using Excel, and all of a sudden the ladies are lining up to pivot his tables.
Whether it's a commercial for body spray, aftershave, breath mints, chewing gum, a motorcycle, brand of whiskey, or whatever it is, the message in these ads are much more clearly stated: "Use our product, and you will hook up." They don't just pose the scenario and let your subconscious mind make the connection, they basically come out and just tell you exactly what to think outright. The message is not just implied like it used to be, it's basically stated in a way that you have to be retarded to not understand.
Maybe I have overlooked old commercials that have done this in the past, but as I was sayinig, it seems like this is more of a recent trend. Ironically, I almost think beer commercials are more tame nowadays than they used to be, more about making you laugh than pressuring you to drink a brand to be socially accepted.
If it is indeed a recent trend, I'm not sure what exactly that says about our country's development as a whole. Does this mean that advertisers have given up on trying to make us think with their ads, by cleverly placing thoughts in the back of our minds? Have they decided that we are all like overgrown children who can be told what to think?
Maybe a more interesting question is, what's worse - when advertisers try to be sneaky and appeal to your subconscious, or when they don't even try to be subtle anymore, and simply make heavily exaggerated claims that can't be backed up? On the one hand, it would be nice to feel like they respect our intelligence enough for them to believe that they have to be clever in their marketing strategy. But then, if it's the same message they're trying to send, then why bother putting up the charade? No point in beating around the bush right?
Tuesday, April 04, 2006
One Ring To Rule Them All
Thanks to Chras's getting of tickets, and Anuj's driving/mini-grill, we had our first White Sox tailgate of the year, before watching the Ring Ceremony and the second game of the season vs. the Indians. It was a terrible game (Sox got blown out 8-2), a lot colder and windier than we expected, but everything else was perfect.
It's not often that you get to see your team receive its championship rings in person, but that was exactly what we got to see. Getting to remember the feelings of last year's run was great enough in itself, but I think the Sox promoters really did a great job of making it special. There was the cool highlight videos playing on the big screen, the free "replica" ring given to the first 20,000 fans to the stadium (it's nicer than it sounds), and the F-16's flying over the stadium after the national anthem, which were all very nice.
But the best moment for me the introduction of Aaron Rowand. If I had a favorite player from last year, it would probably have been Rowand, for his amazing defensive plays and just overall hustle. So of course I was sad when they traded him in the offseason. I won't write a whole long tribute for him like Dee Brown, but it was definitely cool to see him make it back for the ring ceremony. Judging by the crowd's reaction, I think a lot of other Sox fans felt the same way too.
Anyways, I won't write that much more about the experience, having already written plenty about the Sox last year. So here are some pictures (taken by my new phone, in case you were wondering):
Thanks to Chras's getting of tickets, and Anuj's driving/mini-grill, we had our first White Sox tailgate of the year, before watching the Ring Ceremony and the second game of the season vs. the Indians. It was a terrible game (Sox got blown out 8-2), a lot colder and windier than we expected, but everything else was perfect.
It's not often that you get to see your team receive its championship rings in person, but that was exactly what we got to see. Getting to remember the feelings of last year's run was great enough in itself, but I think the Sox promoters really did a great job of making it special. There was the cool highlight videos playing on the big screen, the free "replica" ring given to the first 20,000 fans to the stadium (it's nicer than it sounds), and the F-16's flying over the stadium after the national anthem, which were all very nice.
But the best moment for me the introduction of Aaron Rowand. If I had a favorite player from last year, it would probably have been Rowand, for his amazing defensive plays and just overall hustle. So of course I was sad when they traded him in the offseason. I won't write a whole long tribute for him like Dee Brown, but it was definitely cool to see him make it back for the ring ceremony. Judging by the crowd's reaction, I think a lot of other Sox fans felt the same way too.
Anyways, I won't write that much more about the experience, having already written plenty about the Sox last year. So here are some pictures (taken by my new phone, in case you were wondering):
Sunday, April 02, 2006
Dee Brown
The other night, I was watching Dee Brown compete in the three point contest for college seniors, leading up to the Final Four, and it occurred to me that it would be the last time I'd see him in that Illinois #11 jersey competing on the court. I thought it would be a good time to write a goodbye for my favorite player of all time.
Since I started following Illini basketball, there's been a lot of good players. No doubt that Dee is among the best of them, but I don't think anyone could say that he was the best on the court. Up until this year (the weakest Illinois team during his 4 year career), Dee Brown has never been the best player on the court. For one, his backcourt partner from day one of stepping on campus as a freshman, ended up being the #3 overall pick in last year's NBA draft. But even if you don't count Deron Williams, he also was far behind Luther Head, now on the Rockets, and Brian Cook, now on the Lakers.
Dee's never been our greatest 3 point shooter, rebounder, passer, or dunker. He was usually the shortest guy on the court too, which is kind of a problem when you play basketball. The one thing he was known for was being fast, with the nickname "one-man fast break". But being fast alone doesn't explain how he got to be so popular.
It's impressive, if you think about it. Growing up around here, everyone's favorite player was Michael Jordan, no question about it. But that makes sense because he was by far the best player in the league. Yes, he had the personality too, but if he wasn't the runaway MVP every year, he wouldn't have been as universally worshipped.
Some people just have that extra charisma that you can't necessarily explain. Dee is obviously one of those people. It's not like other players haven't worn headbands before, or worn long socks, but so many of us have come to almost seen it as a Dee Brown trademark. Other players have popped their jersey for the camera in the past and gotten criticized for taunting - when Dee does it, people love it so much that it ends up on the cover of Sports Illustrated:
I guess what I'm saying is, there's no single thing about Dee Brown that makes him my favorite player, and such a great representative of our University. I loved watching a lot of Illini players over the years, and I was always sad to see each one of them go. Not only the future NBA players I mentioned before, but also guys like Marcus Griffin or Sean Harrington too. And if you ask me, nobody was more exciting to watch on the court than Frankie Williams. Even this year's other senior, James Augustine, for all his frustrating foul trouble, will be missed a lot for his flashes of brilliance and how he seemed to win the opening tip every single game.
And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Dee is a god or anything. He's had his share of frustrating moments, taken his share of terrible shots, and I can't argue with people who say he's overrated, because he probably does get more credit for some things than he deserves.
I don't know if he'll succeed in the NBA, either. Not only because of his height, but his shot is too inconsistent and his midrange game is too weak at this point. At the same time, he has so many intangibles that I wouldn't be surprised if he worked his way into a star. Right now it doesn't look good though.
But when all is said and done, I don't think I'll miss any player more than Dee. We will get players with more talent, who will put up much better numbers and may even lead us to a National Championship someday, but nobody can ever replace #11. Goodbye, Dee, and good luck in the NBA. Whether you make it or not, you'll always be our beloved Illini.
The other night, I was watching Dee Brown compete in the three point contest for college seniors, leading up to the Final Four, and it occurred to me that it would be the last time I'd see him in that Illinois #11 jersey competing on the court. I thought it would be a good time to write a goodbye for my favorite player of all time.
Since I started following Illini basketball, there's been a lot of good players. No doubt that Dee is among the best of them, but I don't think anyone could say that he was the best on the court. Up until this year (the weakest Illinois team during his 4 year career), Dee Brown has never been the best player on the court. For one, his backcourt partner from day one of stepping on campus as a freshman, ended up being the #3 overall pick in last year's NBA draft. But even if you don't count Deron Williams, he also was far behind Luther Head, now on the Rockets, and Brian Cook, now on the Lakers.
Dee's never been our greatest 3 point shooter, rebounder, passer, or dunker. He was usually the shortest guy on the court too, which is kind of a problem when you play basketball. The one thing he was known for was being fast, with the nickname "one-man fast break". But being fast alone doesn't explain how he got to be so popular.
It's impressive, if you think about it. Growing up around here, everyone's favorite player was Michael Jordan, no question about it. But that makes sense because he was by far the best player in the league. Yes, he had the personality too, but if he wasn't the runaway MVP every year, he wouldn't have been as universally worshipped.
Some people just have that extra charisma that you can't necessarily explain. Dee is obviously one of those people. It's not like other players haven't worn headbands before, or worn long socks, but so many of us have come to almost seen it as a Dee Brown trademark. Other players have popped their jersey for the camera in the past and gotten criticized for taunting - when Dee does it, people love it so much that it ends up on the cover of Sports Illustrated:
I guess what I'm saying is, there's no single thing about Dee Brown that makes him my favorite player, and such a great representative of our University. I loved watching a lot of Illini players over the years, and I was always sad to see each one of them go. Not only the future NBA players I mentioned before, but also guys like Marcus Griffin or Sean Harrington too. And if you ask me, nobody was more exciting to watch on the court than Frankie Williams. Even this year's other senior, James Augustine, for all his frustrating foul trouble, will be missed a lot for his flashes of brilliance and how he seemed to win the opening tip every single game.
And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Dee is a god or anything. He's had his share of frustrating moments, taken his share of terrible shots, and I can't argue with people who say he's overrated, because he probably does get more credit for some things than he deserves.
I don't know if he'll succeed in the NBA, either. Not only because of his height, but his shot is too inconsistent and his midrange game is too weak at this point. At the same time, he has so many intangibles that I wouldn't be surprised if he worked his way into a star. Right now it doesn't look good though.
But when all is said and done, I don't think I'll miss any player more than Dee. We will get players with more talent, who will put up much better numbers and may even lead us to a National Championship someday, but nobody can ever replace #11. Goodbye, Dee, and good luck in the NBA. Whether you make it or not, you'll always be our beloved Illini.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)