Mourning?

We all know that Prince passed away last week.  Minnesotans seemed to have taken it quite hard.  And why not?  He was from Minnesota, it was a sense of pride that he came from this state.  But it wasn't just the people of this state, but the world mourned.  And is still mourning.  He was a gifted musician and performer.  I did not feel the agony of his passing like the rest of the world seemed to.  I was not a fan of his.  That's not to say I did not like his music or appreciate the influence he had on the musical world.  I say I'm not a fan of his because I didn't listen to his music.  You can appreciate someone's influence without owning or listening to their music.  For me David Bowie's passing was felt more because I listened to him. I suppose that when artists that have made music that I deeply love pass away I will feel that sting for a little bit longer. 

I don't know how to segue into my next thoughts, so I guess I'll just put it out there:  I don't feel much of anything when celebrities pass away.  It sounds cold hearted, but because I do not have a personal relationship with them, I don't feel like going into mourning for long periods of time.  Sure, I'm sad when someone passes away, I'm not that much of a monster, but I don't feel super sad about it.  Does this make me a bad person?  Probably.  I feel bad for the family and friends.  The people that knew them on a personal level. And I understand that if a celebrity or public figure passes away that has had a significant impression on you it can be difficult.  But they have also left their life's work behind.  You will still be able to channel them when you are feeling down or feel like an outcast.  

You will still be able to listen to your favorite song or record.  You'll be able to read the book or poem that your favorite author wrote.  Have a mourning period to be beside yourself with grief. But also have a period of time when you revel in the fact that their work has made a positive impression on you.  Enjoy that song that makes you dance by yourself. Read that chapter in the book that makes you cry. Stare at the beautiful picture someone painted in silence while you contemplate life. 

Musicians, writers, and artists take their emotions and throw them into their work so that we can benefit from it.  The best thing that we as fans can do is to appreciate their work for what it does for us.  How their work makes us feel.  So, while I will be sad for a little while after my favorite author or musician passes away, I will also be very thankful that they left their work for us to enjoy. Forever.

Promotion

Just a quick little post to talk about work.  I always look at my path in retail as humorous.  After graduating college, I couldn't find a job in my field (SHOCKER!) so in an effort to start making money, I started working retail.  Since I graduated in 2004, I have had two jobs.  Both retail.  I kinda gave up on my college field of work although I would love to get back into it.

I started working at a new place on 2013 after leaving my previous employer of eight years.  In the eight years, I went from an hourly team member to department manager within a year because they wanted to promote hard workers.  Makes sense.  After reaching that department manager level, the promise of promotion and training was always there, it just never came to be.  And I wrote about this when I went to my new employer.  You can only deal with so many blocks in the road before you give up on trying to move up the ladder.  

So I took my work experience to a new place.  A smaller company at the store level and as a whole.  It is much more my speed.  I moved from one department to another after a year and a half overseeing the former.  And to no one's surprise, I absolutely CRUSHED IT in my new department.  No hubris, it's straight facts.  And within less than a year of running my new department, I was given a new opportunity.  

A promotion!  I am now a supervisor within my store.  I will be overseeing the logistics processes of our store.  My brain is wired for it.  I jokingly say the German part of my brain has taken over and will be compartmentalizing everything and keeping it all in line and in order.  This opportunity kinda fell into my lap as the previous supervisor moved away.  But I have earned the opportunity through hard work, which is how it should be, yes?  Promote based on experience and work ethic.  That's what I think.  

Like I said, I look at my work path in retail as humorous.  I never really thought it would end up being a bit of a career.  But I've been at it for twelve years or there abouts.  And after all this time, I have been given a leadership chance.  Which my wife jokes is scary because 'they know it's you, right?'

Visual Reading

I have recently found myself drawn to comic books.  I don't know why and I don't know how, but I just find them much more enjoyable than novels at the moment.  Maybe it's because comic book movies are very popular right now.  From X-men to the Avengers to Deadpool, it is gaining momentum every time a movie is successful.  Even television shows are popular.  Arrow and Daredevil are two that I watch through Netflix.  Part of it might also be because it is multi medium.  You have the story telling and plot points, but you also have the visual aspect of it.  My wife jokes that it sure does take me a long time to read a comic, but I enjoy reading the dialogue and then looking over the illustrations for full context of the subject.  Plus, I only read a little bit at a time.  I can't read for hours on end like she can. 

I was never really into comics as a kid.  I had a few.  Mostly random X-Men comics that you could find at a bookstore.  Had a couple of 'What If...' comics.  I did have the death of Superman when it came out.  I hadn't ever read any Superman comics before or since, but I just remember thinking I had to have it.  So I think my brother and I went half in and bought it together.  It is more than likely still at my parents house.  I have no clue. 

For a long time, I read non-fiction books, and while interesting, they were mentally draining.  Sure, you learn a lot about a subject that you are interested in or know little about, but it just isn't always enjoyable.  I'm not in school anymore, I don't really need to learn.  I still have and read non-fiction books.  I have a couple on my shelf right now that I am excited to read, but every time I look at them I give out a bit of a sigh thinking 'that's gonna take a long time to get through.'.  Even fiction novels seem like slow reading to me.  

So, below is my very modest collection of comics and graphic novels.  It started out with 'Watchmen'.  I read my brother's copy several years ago and gave it back.  But then I wanted to re-read it because I felt like there were some things that I just missed in it.  And I thought that while it would be just as easy to borrow it again, it would be a nice book to own.  That way I could read it whenever I felt the need to.  Then 'The Walking Dead' came to be.  Once I got the first and second compendium, I wanted to keep with the theme.  So I anxiously waited for the third one to come out.  And sure, I could just start going out and buying the chapters as they are released, but I like having the big collections.  Just how my mind works.  And thanks to the successful Netflix show, I have really taken interest in Daredevil.  The three that I have I bought for my birthday.  They are the run that Frank Miller did in the late 70s and 80s.  After reading the first collection, I am looking to add as much as possible.  Going back to the very first one and adding everything in between.  This is where sites like Amazon come in handy because you can find literally anything you want.   

What I have found is that collections are the way to go, especially if you are interested in a comic or graphic novel that has been out for a long period of time.  Or if you aren't up to having tons of little comics lying around.  Plus, I'm not going to be running out every couple of weeks to update my collection.  I would rather have these big books versus hundreds of small ones sitting around.  It's all together in binding.  You don't have to try keep going back to the bookshelf once you finish one and then find the next once.  With collections you can just keep turning the pages.

I think that the one problem with comics is that there are just so many.  And I'm not just talking titles, because we all know that, but plenty of comics books have been out for decades.  DECADES.  Daredevil started in the 1960s.  So if you want to read everything that has been published, you are going through sixty years of publication.  So you have the amount of time titles have been out, but then you also have different story arcs, alternate versions, crossovers, all kinds of things.  And that's the cool thing about comics.  In one universe you can have certain characters that are dead, but are brought back in other universes.  Unless it's the 'Walking Dead'.  Once you're gone, you stay gone.  There is no alternate universe.   

Flipping Out

As of late, and it might be because there's no real news, the baseball world is concentrating a little too much on bat flips.  For those not familiar with bat flips:  when a batter has a big hit or a big home run in a crucial point of a game, they toss or flip the bat out of their hand instead of tossing it down to the ground.  It's a way of showing off basically.  This topic will split a room of baseball fans.  The question is:  why aren't batters suppose to do this?

The big argument against it is that it shows up the pitcher that they just got a big hit off of.  That it's disrespectful.  If that's the case, then why is it okay for a pitcher to show up the batter when he gets a strikeout?  Why is it okay for the pitcher to pound his glove or hop off the mound when he gets out of a bases loaded jam?  Doesn't that show up the batter?  There is no retaliation if a pitcher shows up a batter is there?  It's not like a batter can chuck his bat, helmet, or batting gloves at the pitcher.  But batter beware if you flip your bat after hitting a 435 foot home run to take the lead in a game.  The next pitch might find your rib cage.

It is not disrespectful to the pitcher.  These players are human, can't they show some emotion?  A little bat flip or bat toss isn't the end of the world.  If you think Jose Bautista or Bryce Harper doing a little bat flip is outrageous, search 'Korean baseball bat flip' on YouTube.  Let me tell you, these little bat flips will seem tame.  The big controversy last post season was Jose Bautista.  Everyone knows the bat flip.  But did they watch the game?  Did they see Texas take the lead in the top of the 7th?  Did they see the emotions start to amp up?  The reason for the bat flip was because the game was so tense and that home run gave the Blue Jays the lead again.  Emotion is allowed.  They are human.  But you had players coming out of the woodwork saying that Bautista was disrespectful and showed up the pitcher. He had been around for a long time and is a respected player in the game.  This was his first postseason series and you're telling me that Jose Bautista cannot show emotion at that point?  Now, if he does this every single time he hit a home run, you might have a bit of an argument.  But when he hits home runs, he puts his head down, runs the bases, and celebrates with his teammates.  There isn't jumping up and down in the batters box, there isn't any staring down the pitcher.  In my mind, He has earned the right to bat flip.  

In football, you see small celebrations all the time.  Probably twenty times a game you see a guy stand up and signal first down after a big play.  Is that showing up the defense?  Not really.  There are celebrations in the end zone after touchdowns.  The NFL has worked to curtail excessive celebrations with the entire team dancing for an extended period.  But it's fine if a player does a dance or spikes the ball.  In basketball you see players flex their muscles and let out screams after monster dunks.  You see them throw up three fingers when three pointer is scored?  Is that showing up the opponent?  Not if they flex their muscles and then turn around and go back to the game.  If they stand above them and stare them down, that's taunting and maybe a foul?  I'm not sure.  Everything seems to be a foul in basketball.  In hockey, there's small celebrations.  Nothing major unless the team wins a playoff series.  But you still see some celebratory jumping into the glass after a goal.  Or going down and touching the ice as they skate away.  That doesn't mean the player is going to get slashed or punched in the mouth the next time he is on the ice.  

It's funny to listen to older players talk about how there weren't any type of antics back in the day.  Oh really?  There's pictures and video of Mickey Mantle bat flipping after home runs.  Babe Ruth calling his shot isn't showing up the pitcher?  If that isn't showing up the pitcher, I don't know what is.  He was saying 'doesn't matter what you throw, it's leaving the park'.  Was there outrage when this happened?  Pete Rose ruined Roy Fosse's career in an All Star game by running him over to score a run.  Is that not disrespectful?  It was an exhibition game.  There is photographic evidence of Al Kaline doing bat flips.  Who cares?  We are all human, we are allowed to have emotions.  

I think that there is a fine line though.  If your team is down 8-1 in the 9th inning and you hit a solo home run and bat flip, that's neither the time nor the place.  If you stand in the batters box watching the ball sail over the fence for an extended period of time, that's showing up the other team.  Especially if it's a no doubter.  If it's close to the foul line, I understand that.  But more often than not, the players can tell if it's leaving the park.  There is a time and place for everything.  And knowing that is part of being a professional.  I think asking players to keep their emotions in check every single moment of every single game is asking a bit much.  

32>64

March Madness is here!  Fill out your bracket, research college basketball programs you have no idea where they're from!  Non-basketball fans head for the hills!  I don't get too excited about it because I am not big on basketball, but I do fill out a bracket every year.  Just because it's fun to do.  I've done it a few times for money, won once and lost another time.  Nothing major, I think I won thirty or forty dollars in the pool.  I watched close to no basketball this year, so it was fun to go just by the numbers.  I picked Kansas over Michigan State to win the tournament.  I usually do not do well in picking, but like I said, I do it for fun. 

It seems like each year when the bracket is announced, there's grumblings and rumblings about teams that didn't get in or teams that aren't seeded where they think they should be.  The teams that complain about not making it aren't even going to win a game in the tournament, so I have never really understood the anger.  I mean, the teams that don't make it would have a better shot in the NIT as opposed to the national tournament.  It's the whole big fish in a small pond or a small fish in a big lake argument.  Which do you want to be?  And it's always teams that would be ranked 15 or 16 and wouldn't win a game anyway.  Would you rather win a game or two in a lower tournament or get blown out by one of the top teams in the country?  On national television.  It'd be an embarrassment.  In fact, the lowest seed to ever win the whole tournament was Villanova in 1985.  They were an eight seed.  Now, I know we all love it when a Cinderella team wins a game or two.  If anything, the team probably broke your bracket so you're hoping that they continue to win so it does the same to others.  And while it's awesome to see thirteen and twelve seed teams win, it's not good for the tournament.  The tournament needs to move from 64 teams down to 32.  And it would flourish. 

Think about the first round games each year.  You have blow out games.  The 1/16, the 2/15, and traditionally, the 3/14 games aren't even watchable because the lower seed teams are just lucky to be there.  More often than not, the game is over by half time.  I mean, who in their right minds think that Austin Peay has a shot against Kansas?  Or what are the chances that Holy Cross doesn't lose by fifteen points or more against Oregon?  The 7/10 and 8/9 games are always fun and great to watch because the teams are so evenly matched.  The games, as a whole, do not start to get good until the second round, and that's if the majority of the higher seeds move on to the next round.  If you shrank the tournament from 64 to 32, you would have more competitive games from start to finish.  The lowest seeded teams would be an eight seed. 

Look at the four eight seeds in the tournament this year:  Colorado, Saint Joe's, USC, and Texas Tech.  While they are not traditional basketball powerhouses, they are (Saint Joe's notwithstanding) big name schools.  And with big name schools comes larger viewing audiences.  And with larger viewing audiences comes more revenue.  So you have big name schools near the top of the tournament seeding, but outside of their fan base, who is going to watch a game that is over by halftime?  There are 32 college conferences and each team that wins their conference tournament, gets in to the national tournament.  If the idea was to have the top 32 teams in the country in the national tournament, you would have to do away with these automatic bids.  The runner up of the ACC or Big East tournament is more often than not better than, say, winner of the Patriot League.  If you went just with the automatic bids making it into the tournament, you still aren't making it more watchable.  You could have a team with a losing regular season record go on a hot streak and win a conference tournament and get in, but a team that lost eight games all season and lost a quarter final game would be out?  No, that wouldn't work. 

What they would have to do in order to make a 32 team national tournament work is to get rid of automatic conference tournament winning bids and go with overall record.  Just take the top 32 teams in the country based on record.  Regular season record.  You would have the best of the country playing.  The low seeded teams would have a legit shot at winning games and making deep runs into the tournament.  I think that the one major thing that the NCAA would have to take into consideration is scheduling.  Especially the non-conference scheduling.  Just like with college football, basketball teams schedule some easy games at the beginning of the season, it's almost like preseason for professional sports.  You know, if you have a Big 12 school schedule a few Pac 12 or Big East teams in the early part of the season, there's nothing wrong with that.  Those conferences are on the same level.  However, if they start scheduling the bottom feeders of the MEAC conference, then you have to take a look and put a stop to it.  I don't argue against big schools scheduling one or two games against in state smaller schools.  It helps out the smaller schools because of the money that is involved, just like in football.  But you can't pad your record, that's just not cool.

Will this ever happen?  Hell no.  Why not?  Because, despite the fact that half of the first weekend games are nearly unwatchable, they're still on television.  They are still people taking time off of work (seriously) to try and watch as much as possible.  So why mess with a good thing?  My argument is that it really isn't a good thing, because most games aren't interesting.  You may see that a really low seed has a shot near the end of a game and you might turn the channel to watch it, but you haven't been watching the whole game.  Because who thinks a fourteen seed is going to beat a three seed?  Delusional fans, that's who.