UC Berkely 21; UCLA 29

Thought I'd get some thoughts down on this one before I get too drunk to remember what happened:

• UCLA won this game despite both the coaching staff and the officiating. Every decision Karl Dorrell makes is the wrong decision. He's simply in over his head as a game coach. How on earth do you burn a timeout to set up a fourth and one play, then run the crappy "try to draw them off" BS that they ended up running? The man is not a good head coach, and he should have been fired right after that play.
• The officials were awful. First they needed 10 minutes to review a play that never should have been reviewed in the first place. They called UCLA for an offensive pass interference call that even the guys in the truck couldn't find on a replay. They handed Berkeley a touchdown on a play where Desean Jackson never actually caught the ball. And somehow six referees didn't see a trip in full speed that a million viewers did. It was the most obvious trip call I've ever seen. It cost UCLA a first down, possibly a touchdown, and almost the game.
• The run defense was awesome. They dominated Justin Forsett for the majority of the game, and Berkeley really only ran the ball well out of the shutgun. The run defense was one of the major difference makers today.
• There's something about Pat Cowan that just makes the team play better. I can't explain it. Apparently it doesn't come through in practice. It may have nothing to do with his physical ability, but there's something about the way the team plays when he's in the game that works better than when Ben Olson is in the game. I really like Ben Olson, and I was jazzed when he committed to UCLA, but the team simply moves the ball better with Cowan. And it's probably just coincidence, but the defense seems to have played better when Cowan's been in there as well.
• Berkeley is a very good team, but they run a pro-style offense, which the Bruins can handle. It's the tricky stuff that gets them, and today, the defense won the game. Although the turnover battle was relatively even, Berkeley's were bigger, and obviously the ATV interception return at the end was the difference. The Horton pick was nice, but unnecessary.
  
• I don't have the numbers in front of me, but it seems that one big difference today from what we've seen lately were negative plays, or a lack thereof. Cowan excelled today in two key areas: he didn't turn the ball over with ill-advised throws, or tipped passes that become picks, and at worst, he got the ball back to the line of scrimmage. It's a little thing, often overlooked, but there's a big difference between 2nd and 10 and 2nd and 15, especially with their limitations when it comes to gaining yards in chunks. Cowan gets the ball back the line of scrimmage, and that makes a big difference.
• Like or not, the Bruins are 4-0 in conference, though they close with their three toughest games. I'd love for them to win the Pac 10 and go to the Rose Bowl, but it probably means Dorrell will come back. I'm not sure how I feel about that. I mean, I want him gone, but I can't root for the Bruins to lose. Maybe they'll face the Illini, who will then kill UCLA and get Dorrell fired. That may be the best possible end to the season. I could live with that.
  

The Raveonettes: A Quick Recap

1. First time I've been to the Empty Bottle. Strange little configuration, but really intimate, and the sound was very good. Parking wasn't too bad either, and the beer was relatively cheap.
2. Two opening acts. The first, Gliss, was kind of SoCal psychedelic rock, sort of droning at times. Power trio, in which pretty much all three members played every instrument at one point, though I don't think the girl ever played guitar. They played for about 45-50 minutes, which was about 10-15 minutes too long in my opinion.
   
3. Nicole Atkins & the Sea followed, and she's really hot. She's also got an excellent voice, bordering on classical trying to sing pop, but she makes it work really well. Her set was shorter, and apparently cut off by about 5-10 minutes as the hour was running late. It was almost midnight by the time she finished. I'm definitely going to check out her stuff, though. New album next week, and she'll be on Letterman. Her somewhat Rat-Pack era crooning complemented the Raveonettes' style really well. Also, I didn't take this picture.
   

4. You pretty much know what you're going to get with the Raveonettes. The songs are rarely going to last more than three minutes. You're going to get 50s-60s surf rock/motown style melodies. You're going to get two part harmonies sung by Sune Rose Wagner and the lovely Sharin Foo. And you're going to leave the place absolutely dripping in feedback. It's not a particularly difficult formula. Everything you hear will sound like something you've heard before, perhaps even earlier that night. But there is something to be said for knowing your gameplan and sticking to it. They do what they do incredibly well, and they pack a ton of energy into an hour and twenty minutes.
5. When I first saw them a few years ago, they had a full band. They also demolished my earlier skepticism with an amazing set that's still one of the highlights of all of the live shows I've been to over the last few years. Tonight they had only the two aforementioned members, plus a drummer, whose name I can't locate anywhere, who stood behind only a tom and snare like the drummer in those old Jesus and Mary Chain videos (not sure if that was Bobby Gillespie or not). She also programmed the machine that piped in the bass, as there was no bass player. Economical lineup for a tour undertaken to preview the new material. Hopefully they'll have the full crew again when the support the new album, do sometime in the next couple months.
   
6. The incomplete and out of order setlist is really incomplete and out of order this time, since I don't know much of the new stuff, and I'm writing this the next day. The memories fade. Here it is:
1. Remember
2. That Great Love Sound
3. Noisy Summer (really great live)
4. Let's Rave On
5. Chain Gang of Love
   
6. Attack of the Ghost Riders
7. Do You Believe Her
8. My Tornado (I think)
9. Black Satin
10. Blush
11. Lust
12. Love in a Trashcan
13. Red Tan
14. Here Comes Mary

They played a couple more than that, but I can't remember which ones. Disappointed they didn't play either Twilight or You Say You Lie, which were really off the charts the last time I saw them play. They also didn't play Heartbreak Stroll, which I like a lot.

As it turned out, they went on late enough that I probably could have caught New Pornographers again at the Metro, and made it over to the Empty Bottle in time for the Raveonettes' set and still found a good spot to stand, but such is life, I guess. Also, Nicole Atkins was a bit of a revelation, so that's a silver lining. Looking forward to the new material.

New Pornographers: A Quick Recap

This is for the Thursday, 10/18 show at the Metro. Due to my inability to read a calendar, I also have a ticket for tomorrow night's show (10/19), but I won't be going due to the Raveonettes being in town. Anyway:

• The most awesomest part of the evening was seeing the lineup take the stage. I wasn't even sure if Neko Case would be on the tour. She usually is when they play their main Chicago show, but she's got her own deal, and Kathryn Calder can pick up the slack, as she did at Pitchfork. But Neko played, and that wasn't even the best part. The band was in Full Bejar tonight. Wasn't sure I'd ever see another set with him, but apparently he's on this tour. Dan Bejar is pretty freaking awesome, though I don't think he was too jazzed about the Metro being smoke free.
• Honestly, I've heard them play a little tighter. After the first Bejar song (Myriad Harbor, I think, but that could be wrong), Carl Newman's vocals sounded a little off for some reason, probably mic related. Also, he forgot the words to part of song early in the set. Can't remember which one (it's not like I take notes or anything). Still, they know how to entertain. So even at less than their best, they're still fantastic.
• Speaking of Kathryn Calder, she really provides a nice visual distraction. Not that Neko is anything to sneeze at, but Kathryn Calder is really enjoyable to look at. I was about 10 feet from the stage, more or less in the middle of the room, and by the time NP went on, I had maneuvered into an area where I could see the whole stage, except for maybe Todd Fancey.

• I'm not really one for a lot of audience participation. I like to move around a bit and enjoy the beat, and sometimes I'll sing along quietly to myself, but I don't usually go in for stuff like handclapping and whatnot. But I've go to admit, I clapped along to Spirit of Giving in the "Cloud prayer Mary, come on" part. I just got caught up in the total Bejarness of the evening.
  
• Emma Pollock was really good, and I'll probably be downloading or buying her debut CD at some point. I never really listened to the Delgados, but I like her solo stuff a lot. And she's got a bitchin Scottish accent.
• Here's the incomplete and out of order setlist. They opened with "All things...." and the last three songs in the setlist are in order. That was the encore:
  

1. All the Things That Go to Make Heaven and Earth
2. Mass Romantic
3. Electric Version
4. The Laws Have Changed
5. Testament to Youth in Verse
6. Twin Cinema
7. Use It
8. Bleeding Heart Show
9. Jackie Dressed in Cobras
10. Sing Me Spanish Techno
11. My Rights Vs. Yours
12. All the Old Showstoppers
13. Challengers
14. Myriad Harbor
15. Go Places
16. Adventures in Solitude
17. Spirit of Giving
18. Execution Day
19. From Blown Speakers
20. My Slow Descent into Alcholism

Personal disappointments include failures to play Graceland, Ballad of A Comeback Kid, and everyone always wants to hear Letter From an Occupant. Also, any additional Bejar would have been appreciated. Oh, and Mutiny I Promised You. But it's tough to complain about an hour and half set, and 20 songs. They always give everyone their money's worth.

Spoon: A Quick Recap

1. First time at the Riviera. It's right around the corner from the Aragon, and they're both very convenient for me by train, which is nice. It's kind of like the Vic, only bigger. Not so much side to side, but it extends back farther, and the balcony is larger. But if you get their early enough to see the opening act (I was there about 10 minutes before they started), you can get up pretty close on the main floor.
2. Ponies: They were OK. Better than Liars. Somewhat entertaining, but I was tired, and I just wanted Spoon to start.
3. Spoon, not surprisingly, were very good. They've been at this a while now, and they now how to put on a good show. They played for about an hour and ten minutes, left briefly, and did a three song encore.
4. Interestingly, they played the initial set album to album. Nothing from Telephono, which is kind of a bummer, but they played two from Series of Sneaks, and then proceeded to go through each album playing three to six songs before the set ended. As such, the out of order setlist isn't as out of order as usual.
   
5. Incomplete and out of order setlist:
1. Utilitarian (opened with this)
2. The Minor Toughs
3. Anything You Want
4. Me and The Bean
5. Fitted Shirt
6. Small Stakes
7. Stay Don't Go
8. Someone Something
9. Vittorio E.
10. Johnathan Fisk
11. Beast and Dragon Adored
12. I Summon You
13. I Turn My Camera On
14. Two Sides of Monsieur Valentine
15. Don't Make Me a Target
16. The Ghost of You Lingers
17. Don't You Evah
18. Rhythm and Soul
19. You Got Yr Cherry Bomb
20. Black Like Me
    
21. The Underdog
22. Chicago at Night
23. The Way We Get By (closed with this)

I would like to have heard My Mathematical Mind and Finer Feelings. And I'd love to someday hear them do stuff off of Telephono. I have a feeling that people who have discovered Spoon recently would be surprised at what their early stuff sounds like, especially stuff like Not Turning Off, Nefarious, and Government Darling. Would like to have heard Car Radio and The Guestlist/the Execution from Sneaks as well. But there's only so much time.

Interpol: A Quick Recap

1. The Aragon Ballroom sucks. Sure, it's nice looking inside, but the acoustics are downright awful. I knew this, of course, after seeing the Pixies there about three years ago, but we were way in the back, so I was willing to give it the benefit of the doubt. Tonight I was in the center, about 15-20 in front of the mixing board, and about 30 feet from the stage. The sound still sucked.
2. Liars - sorry but I just couldn't get into these guys. I'm willing to forgo structure at times. It can work. For me, it didn't work with these guys.
3. Interpol, sound problems aside, put on an entertaining show. Nice effects on stage. Good timing of the set. They played for an hour, a good mix of all three albums, and did a three song encore. Good stage presence, as one would expect from a band with their experience. Not a ton of rapport with the crowd, which kind of fits their image, and also is more what one would expect in a bigger venue. Remember, I don't go to places this big very often. Capacity is 4,500 people. By contrast, the biggest venue I visit more frequently is the Vic, which holds less than 1/3 the people that the Aragon holds, and even that's a bit large for my tastes.
   
4. Here's the incomplete and out of order setlist:
1. Untitled
2. Obstacle 1
3. PDA (they closed with it)
   
4. Say Hello to the Angels
5. Stella Was a Diver and She's Always Down
6. Evil
7. Narc
8. Take You on a Cruise
9. Slow Hands
10. Not Even Jail
11. C'mere
12. Pioneer to the Falls (opened with this)
    
13. No I in Threesome
14. The Scale
15. The Heinrich Maneuver
16. Mammoth
17. Rest My Chemistry

Ultimately, though, it was worth it. It was the first time I've seen them, so I can't complain. Off to the Riviera tomorrow for Spoon.

More Coming Attractions

Interpol @ The Aragon - October 11th
"Mammoth" from Our Love to Admire


Spoon @ The Riviera - October 12th
"You Got Yr Cherry Bomb" from Ga Ga Ga Ga Ga


New Pornographers @ Metro - October 18th
"My Slow Descent Into Alchoholism" from Mass Romantic


The Raveonettes @ the Empty Bottle - October 19th
"That Great Love Sound" from Chain Gang of Love


Rogue Wave @ Double Door - October 24th
"Publish My Love" from Descended Like Vultures

Notes from a lost weekend

I was at home in L.A. over the weekend for the UCLA v. Notre Dame debacle. I don't really want to say very much about anything, but:

• Karl Dorrell may be the dumbest person on the face of the earth. What kind of idiot takes a freshman, walk-on QB and 1) makes him go with an empty backfield on 4th and 1, and 2) makes him throw for a first down on 3rd and 6 from his own five yard line against a team that is pretty pathetic, and could not move the ball on offense? He should have been fired right after that play.
• People can second guess Mike Scioscia all they want, but the only true mistake was not having Jered Weaver plant one in David Ortiz's ear, followed up by a fastball in Manny Ramirez's ear. They both should have gone down, and gone down hard. Until someone pays a heavy price, expect Vlad to keep getting drilled.
  
• I'm not going to dwell too much on the loss. I think the Red Sox are an excellent team, and probably better than the Angels when the Angels are at full strength. When the Angels are less than full strength, the Red Sox are a lot better, and unfortunately, the Angels were less than full strength. That's not an excuse, but it would have been nice to see both teams with their full line ups intact.
• As they currently line up, with no changes, the Angels are still the best team in the West, and outside of someone making a major splash, they will be the odds on favorite to win the West again next year. It will be interesting to see what they do in the off-season. There will be calls to get a big bat, and those people won't be wrong. Still, if they can get a full season out of Juan Rivera (assuming they bring him back), that will be a major upgrade at DH/OF. I expect progressions from Kendrick and Kotchman, regressions from Figgins and Cabrera, and roughly the same from everyone else.
  
• I won't say he's a key for next year, because I think they'll win the division regardless, but next year is probably a make or break year for Ervin Santana. He's got the ability. The question is whether he can put it together. There's nobody waiting to take his place. He's got no excuses.
  
• Thanks to the Kings for providing a crappy ending to a truly shitty day on Saturday.
  
• At least the Cubs lost. And the Illini won.
  

On the Plus Side, It Didn't Take Long

The Angels picked up where they left off in 2005, unable to mount any offense, but you've got to hand it to Beckett. He was very impressive. They can talk all they want about making him work, but the guy was firing strikes all night, and the only thing you accomplish by taking pitches is getting yourself behind in the count. We've all seen the Angels struggle against mediocre pitching before, but that wasn't the case tonight. Remember, Beckett has a pretty stellar post-season history, so it's not like they got shut down by John Garland.

Still, the offense certainly didn't inspire confidence. They haven't really seen Dice-K yet. Usually you figure that matchup goes to the pitcher, but anything can happen.

With luck, Rivera will be able to play the outfield on Friday, allowing either Willits or Izturis to head to the bench. Either would have been preferable to Aybar in a pinch hitting role tonight.

Other positives: Lackey sharpened up considerably after his rough start, which couldn't have surprised anyone. But it's a reason for optimism if they can get this to a fourth game. Of course, that means Beckett again, but at this point, I'd take it. Santana also looked terrific in his relief role. The off-day tomorrow could be huge in that it will allow him to pitch in game five if a) Escobar's shoulder doesn't hold up, or b) the Sox force him into 100 pitches through five innings, both or which aren't particularly improbable.

And hey, they lost game one every time in 2002. Not over yet.

A Fine Series Preview

Or at least, a fine example of a preview that picks against the Angels, yet is still well thought out and researched, and concludes that, surprise, a team with a better record and a much better run differential is better than their opponent. Contrary to some people who have their heads up their asses, I'm not the Pollyanna you may have thought I was.

Baker's preview is flawed with respect to the rosters he cites. Colon, Matthews, and Bootcheck will not see action for the Angels. But I think he best sums up the problems I have with certain other Angels bloggers is best summed up here:

Focusing on what they don’t do is a mistake that is often made when analyzing the Angels

All anyone asks for is balance. The Angels may not be as good as the Red Sox. They may be just as good. They may be better. But regardless of how they match up with the Sox, they are a very good team. A team that has good pitching, and despite certain individuals' love affair with peripherals, they finished fourth in the AL in runs scored. Not over a week. Not over a month. Over 162 games.

The best news, of course, is that this evening, they'll line up and play the game, and all of the whining can cease until after the series is over, when I'm sure Rob will point out how he was right about everything, win or lose.

Playoff Eve

As long time readers will no doubt already know, I'm nothing if not the most optimistic fan who's ever donned an Angels cap in support of his team. So before this gets started, let me warn you, I don't actually pick the Angels to win every single game. I mean, in most of the early round games they aren't even playing, so I have to choose between the teams that are. And you may want to sit down for this, but I actually think the Angels might lose a game or two. Crazy, I know.

But anyway, here goes:

Division Series

Cubs in four: I honestly couldn't care less about the National League, and despite the fact that I live in Chicago, I know almost nothing about either team. Still, it seems as if the Cubs are hot, and and I just can't buy into a team with a negative run differential on the season going very far.

Phillies in five: This has the potential to an amazing series, and a purists nightmares. hitters parks galore, and two teams who ended the season on fire to charge their way to the playoffs. Again, National League, don't really care. But this one might be fun to watch.

Indians in five: The Yankees offense steps up in games two and three to bring the Yankees to the verge of the ALCS, but the Indians find another gear in the last two games to take the series. Though I'll admit, part of me wants to see the Yankees win, with Alex Rodriguez leading the way. The guy one of the greatest players of this generation, and he's unfairly maligned for his performance in clutch situations. I wouldn't mind seeing him shake that.

Angels in four: They lose game one when Lackey falls victim to the Lackey inning. But Escobar dominates in game two, and Weaver and the pen hold off the Sox in game three, setting up Lackey's revenge. Yankees and Red Sox go home, giving the NHL a minor ratings boost as the country stops caring about baseball, except for the Cubs.

League Championship Series

Cubs in five: A surprisingly easy series as some guys do some good things for the Cubs, and some other guys do some not so good things for the Phillies. Sorry, but I really don't care for the National League.

Angels in seven: I really want to pick the Indians in this series, but I've been told that "Anything that casts doubt on the Angels is enough to get Seitz going." Because it's getting kind of late, I don't want to get myself going, so I should probably pick the Angels in this one. I think Ervin Santana will have to prove his mettle at least twice in this series, once as a starter and once as a reliever. I also have a hunch that Casey Kotchman will put up big power numbers, like three or four homers in one series, including one off a lefty. I have no basis for that, other than a hunch. But the Indians have played the Angels really tough all year, and in the games I've seen, they don't appear to be a team that can be out-smarted.

World Series

Angels in five: I'm kind of torn here, and really in the whole playoffs. Not who I want to win, or think will win. Rather, I'm torn over how I want the Cubs to lose. Would I prefer a four or five game thrashing, dashing the hopes of Cubs fans everywhere almost before the series gets started? Or would I rather the Cubs suffer another Bartmanesque collapse, putting half the city (my half) into a three week state of shock, one night likely to be broken by either the awful Bears or awful Blackhawks? It's a tough call. If you could guarantee me that the Angels would win in seven, my dream would be for the Angels to overcome a ten run deficit in the the night, sending the game to extra innings. In extra innings, the Cubs would take the lead every inning, only for the Angels to come back and tie the game again, until finally, a Reggie Willits grand slam gives the Angels a one run victory in the bottom of the sixteenth. Of course, such a loss would undoubtedly make Cubs fans more insufferable than they already are, and almost as insufferable as they'd be if they one the thing.

But ultimately, if I'm watching this series, I'd rather see a merciless drubbing. Double digit victories every night, except for one bone that we'll throw to the Cubs. Either way, hopefully my Angels hat will be good for free beers on the Southside next year.

So that's your forecast from the most optimistic Angels fan in Angels fan history.

Three Times in Four Years

The Angels won three division titles in the first 30 years of my life. They've now won three in the last four. I know when it comes to blogging the Angels, I've kind of been a bit negligent this season, and I have no real explanation for that, other than apathy. But rest assured, I've followed this team as closely as all the others, and though the clinch was a bit anti-climactic (yet what we'd all hope for - a week without pressure before the playoffs), it feels good to be an Angels fan tonight, much as it has for the last five years.

We're all extraordinarily fortunate to be Angels fans at this point in the team's history. We're witnessing the era of an owner who, if not perfect, is certainly as close as a baseball owner can be to perfect. We have a GM and Manager, both with their flaws, but both incredibly well suited to running this club at this time. I grew up when Tommy Lasorda was managing the Dodgers, and it seemed like he was there forever. Before him, it was Walter Alston. All the while, the Angels were cycling through managers like there was no tomorrow. Gene Autry, God bless him, ran the team like there was no tomorrow as well, constantly mortgaging the future for the present. And while they almost succeeded, the success was always fleeting, ultimately leading to the dark ages between 1987 and 2001.

But fate has finally smiled on us, and today we get to root for an organization not only dedicated to winning today, but tomorrow as well. We have an owner dedicated to providing not only a quality team, but a quality entertainment experience. We have players we don't have to be ashamed of rooting for. At least 15 spots on the post-season roster will go to players who have never worn a different major league uniform. And the best part? No matter what happens over the next month, the team should be just as good next year.

So enjoy this one today. Relax for a week. Maybe pop open a bottle of this stuff like I just did, and gear up for October. Congratulations, Angels.

New Big Thing

This guy is freaking incredible. I am in love with the music of Simple Kid. Vids below. New Song of the Day post over here. Get in on the ground floor.

Embarrassing

Karl Dorrell should be fired before the team gets on the plane home. This football program is an embarrassment. I've been easier on him than a lot of people, but this is pretty much the last straw.

If this is the best they can do with 20 returning starters, he has to go. And he should go now.

Coming Attractions

September 17th - BRMC @ the Metro


September 25th - Metric @ the Metro


September 27th - Gruff Rhys @ Schuba's


October 3rd - Earlimart @ Schuba's


More to come. six or seven more in fact.

So....

...Is Stanford that bad or UCLA that good? I'm guessing a little bit of both. The offense looked very good. Indeed, Ben Olson threw for five touchdowns, and if his 289 yards sounds less than impressive, it probably because as a team, the Bruins ran for 338 yards, 195 of which were accumulated by Khalil Bell. They were extremely efficient, averaging about eight yards per play. Olson found nine different receivers, none of whom were Osaar Rashaan.

On the other side of the ball, for the first few drives that I saw, I was left unimpressed. Of course, I happened to miss a good first quarter, and tuned in during the lackluster second quarter - or rather, Comcast pre-empted the beginning of the game to bring us Cubs post-game. The line wasn't getting a ton of pressure, and Trey Brown made some nice break-ups that were borderline interference, which isn't to say he was lucky they weren't called. Rather, the point is that college officials, especially Pac Ten officials, suck, and they'll often call interference on those plays.

But in the second half, the defense really picked up. Stanford never got anything going on the ground, finishing with only 52 yards for the game. T.J. Ostrander had Bruins in his face for much of the game, and his 330 yards passing were more a function of one big play, and a UCLA offense that put enough points on the board to force Stanford into a game of catch-up.

Ultimately, it's an excellent start. It's hard to judge just how good a team is before they play a few games, at which point we can evaluate their opponents as well. And with Michigan's huge blunder, and Notre Dame's embarrassment, the Bruins aren't likely to make a splash in the media. But they'll move up in the polls, and they've done nothing to show that they are somewhere other than where they belong. The defense faces a sterner test next week against BYU at the Rose Bowl.

Petty Theft

The Angels should not have won tonight. They should not have been able to spot Seattle five runs in the first inning and still win going away. But somehow you just had the feeling that if Moseley could come in and get hold Seattle down, they might just get a few runs off of Jeff Weaver. And if they could keep it close in the late innings, well, you never know.

And I don't want this to read like an I told you so. If the Angels had traded for Mark Teixeira, I certainly would have welcomed him with open arms. But when you look at how the Angels won this game, you have to ask yourself if maybe Bill Stoneman knows what he's doing. Over the last few years, the Angels have had a very good farm system, and there have been calls at one point or another to trade any and all of their prospects, some of whom have seen the bloom come off the rose.

Two of the players that whose names have been bandied about are Jeff Mathis and Kendry Morales. Forced into action because of injuries, they combined for five hits, three for extra bases, and four runs tonight. Dustin Mosely, who likely would not have pitched tonight if Joe Saunders had been dealt, threw 5.1 scoreless innings, allowing the Angels to creep back into the game before breaking it open in the 8th. Sometimes, a team goes a whole season without losing a starter *cough*Mariners*cough* and organizational depth is worthless. But that's rare, and the teams that win have guys that can step in and produce when a starter goes down. The Angels would not be where they are right now without the contributions of Willits, Aybar, Morales, Saunders, Moseley, Mathis, and Bootcheck, none of whom were expected to provide much support.

The Angels have now won the two games they needed to win. The Mariners have the pitching matchup in their favor tomorrow, but little Weav may have what it takes to leave Seattle with a sweep.

By the way, the big bat that people wanted so badly? I'm not saying it wouldn't have helped, but let's not forget, the Angels are still fourth in the AL in runs scored. Last time I checked, that's pretty good.

A Response

To this post at Rob's site, which is really kind of pathetic. But since the chances are pretty good that he'll delete the response I left in his comments, so here it is:

Wow, I'm flattered to know I've warranted a special post. I'll break character and actually post this response on my blog, since you'll probably delete it. Not exactly why you can't let what I wrote speak for itself, but so be it.

It's funny that I'm accused of personal attacks when it was you that called me an asshole for simply agreeing with another poster that the constant negativity coming from you was getting tired. And this is coming from someone who has been pretty negative in the past. Just ask Matt. But even I couldn't keep up with you on that front.

And accusing me of reading things into your posts, well, it's pretty pathetic. Sorry, but when you say "I won't say [Weaver] failed to do his job" common sentence construction suggests that the writer is implying that there's a case to be made for exactly that.

I'm not allowed, apparently, to suggest the Angels are anything less than a playoff team.

I'd be careful around matches, because you're likely to set fire to all of these strawmen that you've taken such care in building. Has anyone made such a suggestion? Hell, I'm not sure if the Angels are a playoff team. Hell, I've got tickets for five or six concerts in October, and it would make my life a lot easier if the Angels were left out. But I'm not sure how whining about it and worrying about it post, after post, after post adds anything constructive to the discourse. Most Angels fans can read the standings. Most people on Halos Heaven watch every game, and they can tell when the Angels are playing well and when they aren't. And it's not particularly fun to beaten over the head with posts about their poor performances, let alone be reminded of those poor performances EVER AFTER GOOD PERFORMANCES! Christ, I get the impression that when you buy a bottle of water, you immediately dump most of it out just so you can claim it's half empty.

I don't know what it is about this season, but it's certainly been worse than the last few. It's just been near constant negativity about every aspect of the team, all the way down the minors. And I still like some of the things you do here. Certainly the minor league updates (aside from the commentary) is more informative than BA's prospect report when it comes to Angels prospects. But your unique ability to not only see the negative in virtually everything, but find it inspiring enough to write about is particularly grating. And believe me, I'm not the only one who thinks so.

But it's your site. You can wallow in your own misery to your heart's (dis)content. Lord knows I tried to point out how it was bringing everyone down earlier in the season. When Matt did the same for me, I laughed it off and had fun with it. But you seem get more and more defensive. Just don't let all of that misery eat you up inside, because being right isn't worth being miserable, and being wrong makes winning a lot less fun.

Small Town Gets Media Coverage

According to this AP story, the oil boom in an Eastern Montana town has been such a boon to employment that the owner of a local McDonalds in the 5,000 person town of Sidney, Montana has outsourced the drive through window to a Texas telemarketing firm.

Why do I care? My dad grew up in Sidney. It's about five miles from North Dakota and about ninety miles from Canada. My uncle owned an insurance agency that has since been passed to my aunt and cousins. Prior to that, my grandfather owned a clothing shop in town. My aunt and uncle had five kids, and they've added another seven grandchildren, so the Seitz name is fairly prominent in Sidney. It's kind of cool to see the town in the news. I was just back there last summer.

Angels 1; Jays 4

This, in my opinion, was a game the Angels could afford to lose. They were throwing their #6 starter against a former Cy Young award winner, and one of the five best starters in the AL. Throw in the house of horrors that Skydome has been, and the odds were not in their favor.

Halladay overcame a first inning run to basically dominate the Angels over the final eight innings, throwing an extremely efficient 99 pitches, 71 of which were strikes.

On the other side of the diamond, the Jays picked up four runs of their own in the first, three of which were earned, and only two of which, maybe even only one of which ever should have crossed the plate. While Saunders got knocked around by the first couple of hitters, the defense really did him in. Erick Aybar booted a double play ball which saddled Saunders (who had already given up a run) with a bases loaded - none out situation as opposed to a runner on third with two out. A sac fly made it 2-1 Jays. A double made the score 3-1 and put runners on first and third when Greg Zaun hit a grounder to Figgins. Figgins came home to nail Vernon Wells, but Jeff Mathis dropped the ball, loading the bases once again. After a second sac fly made the score 4-1, Joe Saunders settled in and didn't allow a run over the next six innings.

Saunders gave the Angels exactly what they need out of the fourth spot in the rotation, and tonight the bats and the gloves let him down. Erick Aybar in particular struggled tonight, and I can only assume Scioscia wanted to give Cabrera two consecutive days off to let him recharge going into this stretch of 17 games in 16 days. Plus, he's a switch hitter against a tough right hander. In hindsight, it would have been nice to have OC in there, but I can't fault Scioscia.

So they put this one behind them, and hope to come out and do a little better tomorrow. An Eastern trip at this point of the season has notoriously been a killer for the Angels, but they can regain some momentum with a win tomorrow night

From the Department of Underrated

Sometimes a band's back catalog is so good that the later stuff gets overlooked, especially after their flame has flickered. But this is probably one of the best Mary Chain songs that hardly anyone has ever heard.



Still, I always kind of preferred Jim Reid songs to William Reid songs. To wit: