The Top 6 Scripted Guilty Pleasure Shows

We've all watched a TV show before and wondered, “What the hell am I watching this crap for?” I tend to avoid things like reality television, game shows, or anything Tyler Perry has ever made, so my guilty pleasure shows are all actual scripted shows that in one way or another are a guilty pleasure. I will be spoiling potential plot twists in the shows below so read at your own risk.

6. Lost – I don't even really know where to begin with Lost. It's half the best show ever created and half the stupidest thing I've ever watched. It seems like everything the show does well it also fails at.

It's one of the more dramatic and suspenseful shows I've ever watched but it's also the most overdramatized thing maybe ever on TV. By the 6^th and final season of the show every time the scary music would cue and the LOST emblem came across the screen I'd roll my eyes. I don't know if I can think of a show that has tried to make it's introduction be as dramatic as Lost and it's a powerful vehicle in the beginning of the show but loses its luster by the end.

The acting is also completely hit or miss. Michael Emerson (Ben) and Terry O'Quinn (Locke) are some of the best TV actors I've ever seen but the show also had Harold Perrineau (Michael) and Evangeline Lilly (Kate) who might be the worst of all time. Every time Michael or Kate were on screen it's a painful experience and Kate is one of the key characters in the show for some reason I still can't figure out.

I've never seen a show like Lost where one week you can think it's fantastic and then the next think it's the worst show you've ever seen. The writers were convinced they needed to keep the viewer “lost” so the writing ended up being either legitimately intriguing or unnecessarily complex. A lot of this had to do with the flash-backs (or flash-forwards) that focused on a different character each episode. The Locke, Jack, Ben, Sawyer, and Desmond flash-backs were always awesome TV but unfortunately there were flash-backs for Michael, Kate and the rest of the mediocre cast as well.

I would attempt to analyze the plot of lost but it's just too much effort. It's convoluted and not very good, okay? If you go into the show knowing that there's going to be a lot of things you're going to have to explain by just saying, “the island is magic,” then you'll enjoy the show a lot more than trying to analytically break down each plot hole.

Lost is awesome and terrible at the same time, and it's most definitely a guilty pleasure show. At no point do you think, “Wow this is really all starting to make sense and come together.” It's definitely a pretty stupid show and has a million plot holes but it's one entertaining ride.

5. Sons of Anarchy – My friend recommended I watch this show and after seeing all 4 seasons, I'm not sure why I like it. I can't relate to any of the characters and find most of the things going on in the show to be absolutely stupid. Something about SAMCRO keeps me coming back for more despite all this though.

The main issue I've had with Sons of Anarchy so far is that I don't see why anyone would find these bikers cool at all. Outside of Jax, every character in the show is pretty stereotypical “biker dude.” Somehow these douchebags get all these hot girls to come to their bar and get involved with Mexican cartels and stuff. It just doesn't make any sense at all but I can't stop watching.

Google Images

These guys are such douches but I can't stop watching

Also, you mid as well skip the 3^rd season of the show because it's just a pile of crap. They go to Ireland in one of the stupidest plot turns I've ever seen and basically put all the drama that had been building in the first 2 seasons aside. It's like a gigantic sidebar from the rest of the show and it's not only terribly done, it's retarded.

The 4^th season is much better and I'm for no reason eagerly awaiting the 5^th season. Even though I don't really like any of the characters or relate to what the show is about at all, I can't stop watching.

4. Law and Order SVU – I can't say I religiously watch this show like some others do but I've seen enough episodes of this with my girlfriend to safely say it's a guilty pleasure show. They should change the name of it to Stereotypical Victims Unit because pretty much every episode of it is based on some ridiculous stereotype or something that has come straight out of a sensationalized media headline.

Yes, it doesn't make any logical sense or actually follow what real law enforcement would do, but it is extremely funny and entertaining to watch. There is usually an absurd plot twist coming from out of left field and it's almost always entirely implausible. It's not the worst show on TV but I can't say I ever watched SVU and said, “Wow this is quality TV.”

I don't know why this show appeals to me at all considering I hate cop dramas for the most part. There's something about just how absolutely ridiculous every episode is that you can't stop watching. You know it's stupid and implausible but you just can't stop.

It also has Ice T, and he's just amazing. It's not that he's a good actor or anything but literally everything that comes out of his mouth makes me laugh. He's hysterical and worth the price for admission by himself. If a show with Ice T isn't a guilty pleasure show then I do not know what is.

Google Images

Ice T is the man

3. Weeds – Weeds might be the worst show on TV right now. It's extremely disappointing because its first 2 and debatably 3 seasons are great. It started as a satire of the suburbs by portraying Nancy Botwin, a widowed mother who starts selling weed as a last resort to maintain her family and suburban paradise. While she may be doing something illicit she always seems to be doing it to support her family. The writers decided this just wouldn't do and wrote themselves into such a corner that they burned down the entire suburb that they lived in and basically started the show over again.

This apparently meant completely changing the show and re-characterizing Nancy. She suddenly makes decisions that are selfish, slutty and antagonistic to the rest of her family. Instead of somehow showing that this illicit life had changed her and turned her into this selfish monster, the show’s writers decided to try to convince us she’d always been this way. In the first three seasons we have a person who is essentially represented as a flawed but ultimately benevolent character. In the following seasons she makes absurd decisions that appear out of this character and the writers try to retroactively convince the viewer that she’s always been this way. I think the writers just hoped their audience would just be too high to notice any of this.

Outside of completely ruining the main character and destroying the entire premise of the show by moving it out of the suburbs, Weeds also is just implausible and bad. For some reason the Botwin clan can just find where to sell weed no matter where they are and in a matter of days have a weed selling operation up and running. It's like nobody on the writing staff even remotely researched drug dealing, cartels or marijuana at all. Instead they just rely on ridiculous stereotypes and hope their audience is as clueless to this stuff as they are.

I've watched 7 seasons of this piece of crap show and for some reason I have to keep watching it. It's terrible, far-fetched, illogical, and all the characters have not grown but completely changed in an irrational direction. This is a show that started as a satire of the suburbs and had the main character end up marrying the head of a “Mexican cartel” (apparently there's only one according to Weeds) and having his baby. That's all you need to know about this guilty pleasure show.

2. Entourage – This is a show that I almost left off this list but the more I kept thinking about it, the more I realized it's absolutely a guilty pleasure show. It's not good in any way other than showing shots of hollywood actors partying. Who honestly believes Adrian Grenier could be a huge actor? Why did the writers not realize that the only characters we cared about were Vince and Ari? Why did this show suck so bad and nobody realize it until the end?

Seriously, as this college humor video points out every single season of Entourage is exactly the same. Vince is up for a movie and then it flip flops back and forth from him doing the movie or not doing the movie. It always all works out and the show just follows the rest of the characters partying with star cameos in Hollywood hot spots.

Google Images

You absolutely would not be cast in this movie.

The writers also try their hardest to convince you that the other three characters in this "entourage" actually have a purpose but they all seem pretty worthless. I have no idea how E would become a manager in Hollywood without any experience and his only successful actor's career constantly being in jeopardy. Also, his drama with Sloan just seems to be to give him something to do because he doesn't actually do too much managing outside of fighting with Ari.

Turtle is even worse. He basically just fails at every business he ever does and the one time he is successful, he sells his stocks in the company. He fails to prove he's anything without Vince and that only gets further perpetuated when Vince buys the stocks that Turtle sold and agrees to help him with his restaurant. I still don't understand what the point was of any of his storylines or anything that happens in the show. At least Vince's brother Johnny Drama, is actually an actor and does stuff in the show.

Really by the end of the show the only character remotely interesting is Ari and they even decided to ruin his character. Ari is always doing absolutely over the top things to show that Hollywood agents are ruthless dicks that will do anything to help their own career and make money. In the last season he decides to say fuck that and do anything to get his wife back in a character destroying storyline. The show couldn't even let the one good character in the show keep his dignity.

After season 5 of Entourage you realize that every season is exactly the same and that the entire thing is just completely stupid. It relies on star cameos way too much and that's just because all the shows actors outside of Jeremy Piven are completely terrible. It's hard to believe all these good things could actually happen to these douchebags. Talk to most people who like Entourage and they'll tell you they liked it for the celebrities and hot girls. That's why Entourage is a guilty pleasure show. 

1. True Blood – I'm ashamed of myself for watching True Blood. I really should have stopped watching after I dubbed it the “worst show ever” after seeing the pilot. It's almost like the writers know that it's a terrible show and just try to show as much crazy shit at you as possible. It's another show where most of the acting is beyond atrocious and the main characters, Sooki Stackhouse (Anna Pacquin), Tara Thornton (Rutina Wesley) and Bill Compton (Stephen Moyer), are especially terrible. I'm a sucker for science fiction like this though and thus I watch this stupid show.

As of now there are vampires, werewolves, shape shifters, witchdoctors, panther people, witches, fairies, a Maenad, and now even an Efreet. Does this seem like overkill to you? I had to research all the different creatures in this show because there are so many. It's tough to keep track of and it's just getting ridiculous at this point.

Also, True Blood refuses to kill off any character in the show. The only people who seem to die are people who are introduced that season or episode. It's like just when you think one character is gone they come back in some retarded way. For example the police chief retired and completely out of his character and for absolutely no reason at all he had to come back to be ring leader of this anti-vampire hate group. I also thought finally they would kill off Tara, who's manly and just an atrocious character, but they decided to give her a more prominent role.

True Blood is just a convoluted and ridiculous show. I'm not even sure what it's about anymore. It's basically just vampires, sex, and crazy shit. There's also like 15 times per episode where you just cringe because the writing is just so bad. There is actually a scene in it where inbred panther people rape one of the shows only human male characters. With that said, I conclude that True Blood has to be the ultimate guilty pleasure show.

5 Ways to Improve NBA 2k

The NBA 2k series is probably my favorite sports videogame franchise. In my opinion, it's really only rivaled by the MLB: The Show franchise and I just find basketball games more fun to play. It just blows away on pretty much every level anything that EA Sports is offering right now.

This is not to say the game doesn't have its faults though. It just seems that 2k fixes them a little bit every year and in general makes you feel more connected to the game of basketball with each fix. The announcing and presentation are amazing and I just wish that the football games on the market were this realistic and fun to play. Here are a few ways 2k could improve upon this already awesome basketball videogame franchise.

Google Images

This is pretty awesome right? 

1. Passing – Nothing is more aggravating than watching your player throw a pass right into the defender. 2K needs to allow you to choose whether you're throwing a bounce, chest, or lob type of pass. 2K12 added a lot of emphasis on the defense being more in the passing lanes, so this year they need to allow the player to counter this defense.

Also, there's absolutely no reason that when you throw a post entry pass your player lobs the ball 30 feet into the air to let the defender get under it. What exactly is the thought process behind this being in the game at all? It's so frustrating to make this pass and watch your opponent casually steal it from you. I get that they wanted to make post entry not as easy as it has been in the past but this is absolutely a ridiculous way of going about that.

They also added somewhat of a delay to each pass thrown now and that's something that just really has to go. It's basketball, you should be able to reverse the court quickly to find the player the defense rotated off of. This is not the case when you play NBA 2k12 and allowing quicker and more accurate passes could go a long way in making this is a more realistic game.

2. Online Play – I am yet to buy an NBA 2k game where the online play actually works correctly. Even now almost a year after NBA 2k12's release, I still get lag when trying to play a game online. This is just inexcusable and I do not understand why it is never fixed. There's really not much else to say on this one but it is definitely a reason why people buy the game and there's no reason it doesn't work. Online gaming is something every other company has seemed to figure out except 2k Sports.

3. Fast Breaks – The fast break system in NBA 2k12 is simply broken. It's not based on the speed of your player and it is easily the most unrealistic thing in the game. Andrew Bynum should not be able to chase down Chris Paul on a fast break. It'd be one thing if the defender actually made a play on the ball but what happens is your player just gets inexplicably slow and gets pulled into the defender behind him like the defender has his own gravitational pull.

I understand that in previous NBA 2k games it's been a little easy to exploit the fast break and that's why the system is this way. That said, it doesn't make it any less frustrating or unrealistic for the player. I really hope 2k figures out a work around for this system because it's just dumb watching fast players not be able to go on a clear fast break.

4. Post play – Despite improving post play in NBA 2k12 it still has a long way to go before it makes any rational sense. If you have a defender who has literally no post play defense but high defensive awareness and block ratings you can play him at 4-5 with no problem. Dwight Howard should not be shut down by Andre Iguodala. It's just a stupid system and it feels like good post offensive players have never been rewarded in this sports series.

It makes the game pretty unrealistic when the person your playing against doesn't have to account for your post players. Basically the Lakers are Kobe Bryant creating havoc and Andruw Bynum and Pau Gasol just there for rebounding and defense. It's pretty ridiculous when even the CPU when you play against them doesn't throw the ball down in the post when you're playing against the Lakers.

5. Team defense – I would like to actually see rotations and real team defense as opposed to the gravitational pull defense NBA 2k12 has. If you have a player with high defensive awareness in the middle (Tyson Chandler, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnet, etc.) they will just suck up every player who goes into the paint no matter how wide open they are to the basket. Tim Duncan is easily my most hated sports videogame star due to this as he's not nearly the force on defense he once was.

It's ridiculously easy to get into the paint against even the most stingy defenders, but when you get by the original defender you either get an easy basket or you get sucked towards a player with high defensive awareness. It is just frustrating when you burn the defender and go for an uncontested lay up only to have a player warp over from 7 feet away to contest your shot. It's also ridiculous how that unless you have a star player you always miss those shots. I swear you have to be a very good player to ever get a 3 point play in the game.  

A Few Preseason Observations

The NFL Preseason is usually something you should avoid watching. You'll end up thinking players who never even reach the field in the regular season are superstars and that all your starters suck. Let me completely contradict myself and give you a few observations I have had so far.

The Wildcat – Does anyone else think it's hilarious how much publicity the Wildcat offense the Jets are going to implement has received? I get that anything Tim Tebow does is going to be the biggest thing that ever happened but does anyone remember when several teams implemented this offense a few years ago with pretty poor results? Rex Ryan seems to think teams will have to really prepare for it with Tebow as quarterback but I'm pretty sure they'll just assume it's a running play because Tebow can't throw the ball. If the Jets use this gimmick to great success this year I'll be extremely surprised.

Eli Manning and the Giants get no respect – Keeping with the New York theme, I'm a little shocked at how few people are picking the Giants to win the NFC East this year. I get the Eagles have a very good roster and by rule the Cowboys have to be overrated, but I do not see how either of these teams are clear cut better than the Giants. Did anyone watch Eli Manning play last year? In football I always go with the best quarterback and the Giants clearly have that going for them.

The worst part is the analysts point to the Giants losing Brandon Jacobs and Mario Manningham as the reasons they're going to struggle. If you watched the Giants last year you'd know that Jacobs might have been the worst running back in football and that Manningham averaged about one drop/mistake per game. Manningham had a good playoffs and got a big deal because of it. The Giants will not struggle to replace either of these guys. If critics were smart and actually watched the Giants last year they'd know that their offensive line was one of the worst in football last year and their secondary outside of Corey Webster, is question mark. Why actually do research on teams though?

Rash Conclusions – I saw Herm Edwards on Sportscenter and he literally said that after one preseason game he knows both RGIII and Andrew Luck will be elite in the NFL. Again, I do not know how going against vanilla defenses during preseason has anything to do with being a quarterback during the regular season. This reminds me of last preseason when John Beck of the Redskins threw 4 under 10 yard routes and Jon Gruden said he proved that he's the longterm starter of the Redskins on that drive. THESE GAMES ARE MEANINGLESS! Why does only Michael Wilbon see this? I'm not saying that Luck and RGIII won't be good because they'll probably both become very good but come on, they've done nothing yet.

Fights in training camp – Obviously, this was a big deal after the Jets had a brawl in Cortland, New York and the media asked if this team was out of control. Seriously, there I can't think of too many training camps where a fight didn't break out. The Patriots had several this year but you didn't hear about them at all right? These are always non stories trying to get people fired up about their respective teams. It's a competitive sport with like 90 super strong athletes competing for roster spots. Do you really not expect a few fights to break out?

The Browns – I just feel sorry for Cleveland sports fans. They trade up to get Trent Richardson and he has two surgeries on his knee and it will probably be a lingering problem for him at least throughout this season. They draft 28 year old Brandon Weeden and he's just looked atrocious. Oh, and the team was purchased by a Steelers fan. (Not sure that this actually means anything. Would he just run the team into the ground out of spite?) This is a team that's one real exciting player going into the season (Trent Richardson) likely will miss Week 1. Looking at the rest of the team it looks like another real long season for another Cleveland sports team. Has any city had darker times economically and sports wise simultaneously like this? It's getting out of hand.  

There is no Magic in Orlando

The Orlando Magic might be the worst run NBA franchise. Yes, this may seem unfair considering the Magic made the playoffs last year and the finals a few years ago, but this is a team that’s been run as poor as any team in sports. They’ve had Dwight Howard, the best center in basketball, for several years and the best player they’ve managed to put around him is Hedo Turkalou. Now after trying to trade Dwight Howard for almost 2 years, they get absolutely nothing for him.

Before we get into this abomination of a trade, let’s look at their prior moves and contracts. They gave a max contract to the barely useful Rashard Lewis, and then traded Lewis for the completely useless Gilbert Arenas. Then considering Arenas in no way could help their team win, they used their amnesty clause on him eating his remaining salary.

They traded the very productive Brandon Bass for Glen “Big Baby” Davis and Brandon Bass immediately became an essential piece for a contending team with the Celtics. The rumor is that Glen Davis is a friend of Dwight Howard and that’s why the Magic traded for him then gave him a contract extension. (That’s an effective way to build a franchise)

Hedo Turkalou had one tremendous season and helped the team get to the NBA Finals and then they smartly allowed him to be overpaid by the Raptors. Then to replace Hedo they decided to sign Vince Carter, because that’s always a good idea. When that plan obviously failed they traded Carter, Mikeal Pietrus, a 1^st round pick and Marcin Gortat to Phoenix for Jason Richardson and Hedo Turkalou (previously traded to the Suns from the Raptors). Gortat is now one of the best young centers in the NBA and could've been the replacement for Howard but the Magic had to reacquire Hedo Turkalou and his atrocious contract. Jason Richardson is a quality player but we'll get to him later.

Google Images

The only Magic you'll find in Orlando is at Harry Potter World

For how active the Magic have been over the past few years they have almost nothing to show for it outside of an extremely unhappy Dwight Howard and who could blame him?. Now the Magic have finally traded Dwight Howard and Jason Richardson for Arron Affalo, Al Harrington, Moe Harkless, Nikola Vucevic and 3 late first round picks. That's the deal they get after keeping Howard hostage for 2 years!? Are you freaking serious?

How is this deal any better than getting three first round picks from Houston and getting rid of some of their bigger contracts? Hell, I even like the idea of Brook Lopez and MarShon Brooks. I like Affalo but he is not a star player you build a team around and Al Harrington is an overpaid 6^th man at best. Harkless has some potential as well but is he really the type of guy you build your team around? And who the hell is Nikola Vucevic? How do you make a 4 team trade where you're trading one of the best 3 players in the NBA and not get the 2^nd or 3^rd best player in the trade?

This has to be the worst trade I've ever seen. The Magic should've tried to clear cap space and acquire young talent in this trade and this is what they did? Affalo and Harrington have very big contracts and Harkless wasn't even a lottery pick. Also, of all the players with big contracts on their team they managed to trade away Jason Richardson, who's easily the most affordable and the most useful. Every single team in this trade benefitted in some way except the Magic and they were trading the best player in the trade. It's unbelievable that this happened.

It gets even worse though. Weeks before this trade they signed Jameer Nelson, a 30-year-old point guard who hasn’t been good in 3 years, to a 3 year 25 million dollar deal. What in the blue hell is this team doing? Are they trying to rebuild or are they trying to compete by overpaying Nelson, Affalo, Turkalou, Harrington, and Glen Davis to be the core of their team? If you are a Magic fan you have my complete permission to trade in your team and get a new one. This is not a team that deserves to have fans or to be cheered for. They wasted the best center in the NBA and they managed to get just about nothing in return for him. They don't have a lot of cap flexibility and Arron Affalo is probably the only player you can even consider a B/B- player on their entire roster. This has to be some of the worst management of a successful franchise we've ever seen in modern sports.

The Magic will now be remembered as the team that had two of the best centers in NBA history and lost both of them. The team that signed Vince Carter, overpaid Rashard Lewis, and traded for Gilbert Arenas and Glen Davis. The team that put the entire country through this ridiculous Dwight Howard saga and then got nothing in return for him. At least the Magic will be remembered in the history books, but probably not in the way they had in mind.  

The New York Jets: The New “Heels” of the NFL

The media has turned the Jets into the Miami Heat. They're the villains of the NFL now. You're either a Jets fan or you completely hate this team. They have an outspoken and obnoxiously perceived head coach in Rex Ryan and the most polarizing and popular player in the NFL in Tim Tebow. This is a team that is always going to give the media a headline and that's why we've seen ESPN basically relocate their headquarters to Cortland, New York.

Every day there is a new meaningless story on ESPN regarding this team. We all seen the stories, Tim Tebow runs in the rain, Tim Tebow dominates at the goal line, Mark Sanchez gets called Tim, Tim Tebow gets called Mark, and the recent “brawl” and aftermath surrounding it. None of these stories are actually a big deal or even remotely different than what normally goes on during a training camp yet of course the headlines now is, “Are the Jets out of control?”

Getty Images

Mark Tebow and Tim Sanchez

ESPN is about making money and there is a ton of money to be had covering teams people perceive as villainous. Look at how many negative stories that were written about the Miami Heat despite them making two NBA Finals and winning one. Mainstream sports coverage has turned into professional wrestling and the media is always looking for a “heel” to grab headlines because that's what people want to read. (A “heel” for those who don't know, is a professional wrestling term for the wrestler who is perceived from the fans as a bad guy. He's usually doing despicable acts to the good guy wrestler, the “face,” in order to get the crowd more involved in the fake wrestling match.)

Sports fans love being outraged. It's almost the entire point of this blog. Some part of me while being disgusted with sports news coverage, loves hating on it. I'm not alone in this and people love hating on teams and players whether they're the New York Yankees and Boston Red Sox or whether they're Tim Tebow, Carmelo Anthony, and Lebron James. Negative news sells and the Jets were already a guaranteed polarizing and headlining making team and then they added Tim Tebow. Whether you buy the negative news or like hating it you're making organizations like ESPN money and that's all that matters.

It's important to remember as sports fans though that these narratives are as made up as the WWE. They are ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things. They say teams can't win a Super Bowl with the chemistry the Jets have but the Giants won the Super Bowl in 2007 despite multiple fall outs between Eli Manning, Plaxico Burress, and Jeremy Shockey. Hell, Michael Strahan skipped training camp that year and received negative press for it during that entire offseason. Reggie Jackson and Billy Martin literally came to blows in the Yankees' dugout in 77' and the Yankees went on to win the World Series that year. Kobe Bryant and Shaquille O'Neal clearly didn't get along and that didn't stop them from winning three NBA titles with the Lakers.

Togetherness, chemistry, and a winning attitude can be seen as important but ultimately they do not decide who wins games in the end. We focus on them as a society because they are something we can all relate to and understand. Sure, these things can contribute to a team winning but we tend to lean on these things because they are easier to understand than a statistical analysis of the games we love. We rarely ever know exactly what players think about each other and the only way we perceive chemistry is by seeing them play for 2 hours at a time.

We want heroes, we want villains, and we want to think that togetherness and chemistry is what wins in sports. We've been trained to think this way despite the reality of this being a falsehood sitting right before our eyes. We want to read about the Jets being a mess and how impossible it will be for this team to win with all the distractions. This entire situation is not very different than the stories about how the Miami Heat and Lebron James would never be able to handle the pressure on them after “The Decision.”

I will love cheering against the Jets and Tim Tebow but let's not irrationally talk about this team. The Jets didn't fail last year because of being “out of control” but because of atrocious offensive and special teams play. Their defense was one of the best in the NFL yet the Jets as a team were 20^th in points allowed. That plays completely into turnovers, field position and poor offensive execution. Were there some issues in the Jets locker room? Of course there were, but that's never stopped anyone else from winning before and I don't see why the Jets would be any different. These guys are professional athletes, it's required that they like one another to win.

You can either study a team and rationally break them down or you can irrationally allow the media to write your opinion for you. The Jets locker room is not as insane as people make it out to be and while I will make fun of the Jets for trading for Tim Tebow, it's only because he's a horrible quarterback. The one thing I will say about the Jets is they clearly wanted this when they traded for Tim Tebow and hopefully for the sports media, they can continue to play the “heel” everyone wants them to be. I know that's what's going to make money.

5 Thoughts on Team USA Basketball

I've managed to watch all of Team USA's Olympic Basketball games so far. It's been a pretty one sided affair but it's definitely been interesting to watch. Here are a few of my thoughts.

1. Kobe Bryant is not the one of the best players on this team – I'm not really sure what Kobe Bryant is giving the United States outside of leadership right now. He is too slow to really make an impact on defense and he is determined to be a star on offense when he never gets an open shot. I've only seen him hurt this team while he's been on the court so far and I don't think anyone has the balls to tell him that. The idea that he's playing more minutes than Carmelo Anthony, Deron Williams, Russell Westbrook, or even James Harden is ridiculous.

I know this will cause the Kobe defenders to go crazy and claim none of those players are better than Kobe. I'm not arguing that they are. I'm arguing that on this specific team he shouldn't be playing more than those other guys. All he's been doing is taking contested shots and looking out of sync with everyone else. It's really strange to watch.

2. And you thought flopping was bad in the NBA – After watching all of Team USA's games and a collection of the other games, I can safely say that flopping is way worse overseas. Watching Spain and Argentina play is just a painful process as their players just fall all over the court. Manu Ginobli and Luis Scola are on Argentina so you can imagine what that is like to watch. I almost pulled all the hair out of my head during the first half of the USA-Argentina game.

One play of note was at the very end of the 1st half when Lebron James fell down at half court on defense and Ginobli went out of his way to go towards James and proceeded to fall down as if James had just scissor kicked him from the ground. This seemed significant at the time as it made the game a 1 point game going into the half. Don't they give refs a training session on Ginobli before games? It's crazy how many flop calls this guys had go in his favor throughout his career.

Google Images

They seriously don't warn officials about this guy?

The runner up flop came when the replacement point guard for Argentina, Facundo Campazo, just fell down as Kevin Durant came near him when Durant didn't even have the ball on a fast break. I don't even understand how this could've possibly been interpreted as a foul.

3. Dream Team Comparisons are silly – This 92' vs 2012 team argument is just absolutely ridiculous. It's stupid to compare them  because the 92' team played in a much more physical hand checking era and the 2012 team actually has to play against real competition. I hear people saying that the 92' team could actually play defense and the 2012 team clearly lacks in that department, but who did the 92' team ever have to play defense against? Defense is a team concept and just because you have 5 good defensive players on the court doesn't make you a great defensive team.

They are both awesome teams with awesome players on them and we'll never see them play. We don't need to rank them and it's awfully silly to rank them before the Olympics are over this year, don't you think?

4. The lack of big men – Why is Tyson Chandler the only legitimate post defender on this team? It just doesn't make any sense to me. Everyone is criticizing this teams defense and how could we begin to think they'll be a good defensive team when they have Carmelo Anthony and Kevin Durant defending the paint for large chunks of time.

Wouldn't it just make sense to have Joakim Noah, Demarcus Cousins, or even Roy Hibbert on this team? It's not like this team has really struggled thus far but why even remotely have a weakness when you don't have to? I love the idea of having Noah and Chandler just there for defensive purposes. This could be the downfall of this team against Spain but I honestly can't see anyone matching up to the USA. Instead of carrying a useful center, Team USA is carrying Anthony Davis who is only on the team to play during mop up time. It makes no freaking sense at all.

5. No Announcing is the best announcing – Watching the Olympics live without announcing made me realize how completely unnecessary announcing is. It's so much better just hearing the crowd, the players, and basketball bouncing. I feel like I'm more connected to the game this way and that's sad because the entire point of announcing is so the viewer feels more connected to the game.
After having to hear Doug Collins' color commentary during the previous games, it's been a welcome relief.

I'm a little confused to why these games haven't really been on TV or why the announcing disappeared suddenly. Do we really not have enough announcers to do 7 olympic basketball games a day? Is it that challenging? It's the freaking Olympics. I'm not complaining but I'm just confused to what exactly is happening here.

OUYA: A Bold New Direction for Videogames?

When it comes to creativity and innovation, the videogame industry is on life support. I've wrote about this a bit earlier in the month in regards to Nintendo and its new console the Wii U. The only innovation we see in videogames is the innovation in marketing and the way the Big Three (Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo) turn their consumers into fanboys and defenders of their product. If you really think about this generation of videogame consoles, can you honestly name one unique game that couldn't of existed on the prior consoles? 

While graphics have improved, gamers are still subjected to a slew of sequels, remakes, and rehashes instead of genuinely new games. The industry doesn't want to spend the money to make genuinely new games so they live off gimmicks, in-game purchases, downloadable content, pre-order content, trophies/achievements, and really anyway to get you to spend your money in their digital stores.

On the other side of all this bullshit is the new console announced a few weeks ago called the “OUYA.” It's a small project based on the Android operating system with a focus on being cheap, open source, and bringing free-to-play and inexpensive games to your HD TV. It's going to debut next March for 99$, and only after a few weeks, some of the bigger game developers have already announced they'll be releasing their Android based games for it.

OUYA mon!

The best part of the OUYA is the idea of a collaborative console. The entire thing is open source, meaning anyone can change, alter, or do anything they want to their OUYA without voiding an agreement or warranty. This means you actually own the product you buy and can do with it how you please, which is something that drives me crazy about the current consoles. (Seriously, why doesn't my Wii play DVD movies when the games are on DVDs and why can't I legally make it do so myself?) The reason why our phones are completely awesome these days is because of the collaborative and open source nature of their development and the OUYA is bringing this idea to console gaming. It's the games without all the strings attached that come with the modern consoles. 

Google Images

I've got no strings so I have fun. I'm not tied up to anyone. They've got strings but you can see there are no strings on me!

So far, the OUYA has been an internet success and has raised a crap load of money. They have over 45,000 backers on Kickstarter but I worry about this console breaking into the industry because of the negativity that surrounds anything different. Consumers for some reason defend the Big Three with a fervor and passion I will never be able to comprehend. I doubt this console will attract the Call of Duty, Madden, Assassin's Creed, Halo, Gears of War, Grand Theft Auto etc. gamers and the OUYA has already generated a lot of negativity because of this. People don't want innovation or real freedom with their consoles or games, (or anything really) they want to play the same thing they played before with a shiny coat of paint.

The current game industry has carefully created this fanboy culture and it acts as a defense mechanism against anything trying to enter the gaming market. These consumers defend their gaming “brand” and for some reason they don't see that these companies are getting filthy rich off of business practices that are questionably ethical at best. The games could and should be cheaper, and we deserve to be treated like the loyal customers we are. What we have right now is an industry that knows they have loyal customers just because people like videogames, so they do whatever despicable thing that they can think of to make more money. It isn't right, and I for one do not like feeling like a cash cow. Hopefully there are more things like the OUYA that look to change this in the future. 

In general there is this public conception that if something is cheaper or free that it is somehow inferior. The people who are currently supporting the OUYA may not know if it's going to be successful commercially and they probably don't care. Just because something sells does not mean it is actually good. I bet a lot of OUYA supporters are just tired of the the downright awful practices of the current videogame industry and see the OUYA as a vehicle for changing it. I know I do.

How much is Josh Beckett worth to the Red Sox?

According to multiple sources the Red Sox are looking to dump Josh Beckett before the trade deadline on Tuesday. How much have things changed for Beckett in Boston that the Red Sox are just looking to dump Beckett and his remaining 35 million dollars? Beckett is not having a great year  - 4.57 ERA, 1.27 WHIP,  6.81 K/9,  .9 WAR - but he is still an above average pitcher. While his numbers are well below his career averages, Beckett’s WAR still remains the best among the Red Sox starting pitchers.

I rarely buy into baseball clubhouse stability and moods, but how toxic is Josh Beckett to the Red Sox’s clubhouse if they’re going to dump their highest WAR starting pitcher? This is a team 23^rd in ERA and 25^th in quality starts and they’re going to dump their most productive pitcher this season to this point? That says something about where the relationship between Josh Beckett and the Red Sox management is right now.

I’ve been saying all along that I don’t understand what the point of trading Beckett or Lester is right now. Even through their struggles I have more faith in them bouncing back than calling up some random farm pitcher to replace them. Especially in Lester’s case, we all know he is not a 5.47 ERA and -.8 WAR pitcher. Beckett on the other hand is now 32, and been on the decline for a few years now. I’m not sure what he has left in the tank. Despite saying that, unless Beckett is a complete and total detriment to everyone around him, I don’t see the point of trading him while his value is this low.

It is hard to imagine a scenario where the Red Sox actually get a team to give them anyone of value for Beckett. The Red Sox will probably be forced to eat a lot of the money they owe him, similarly to what the Yankees decided to do with A.J. Burnett last offseason with the Pirates. After the struggles A.J. Burnett had the last few season with the Yankees did you ever expect him and Josh Beckett to have the same type of career arc?

Google Images

This earned Beckett an overpriced contract extension

This doesn’t seem like something the Red Sox should do unless they can get someone to outright take the rest of Beckett’s deal. If I’m a GM of a contending team right now I am not trading for a guy on the downside of his career who the team is dumping because he’s a problem in the clubhouse. The Red Sox are probably just testing out the market right now in case there’s a GM who still believes Beckett could be their 2-3 starter in the playoffs, but I can’t see there being anyone who still thinks that.

So the question is, how much is Josh Beckett worth to the Red Sox? Do they want to pay a fraction of what they owe him to pitch somewhere else or do they keep him and continue to overpay him? If they are trying to contend this year, trading away their top WAR starting pitcher while having absolutely no pitching depth, doesn’t seem like a great way to do it. Things have clearly reached a point where the Red Sox have had enough of Beckett, so how does he react the rest of the year if they don’t move him? The Red Sox now might just have to trade him at this point even if it isn’t what’s best for their contending chances.

For a team with the kind of talent that the Red Sox have, the past 3 years have been just been one ridiculous situation after another. Now there’s this situation where if they trade Beckett away they’ll be trading away their best pitcher and if they don’t, they can’t move on from his clubhouse issues. If they trade him it’ll also be sending a white flag to the rest of the team that they're not trying to compete this year. At this point I think Red Sox fans just want him out of town and to be done with him. I for one can’t blame them. 

The Ichiro Star Treatment

The first thing I worried about when the Yankees traded for Ichiro Suzuki was that his name and ego would get in the way of playing him rationally. These worries were calmed when the trade details were released showing that the Yankees indeed told Ichiro that he will bat down in the line up and may not play against lefties once in a while. It seemed like pretty risk free way of trying to “catch lightning in a bottle” for a couple months this summer. Also, the less I have to watch Raul Ibanez attempt to play left field the better.

I didn’t expect Ichiro to be treated like a star, mainly because Ichiro isn’t anywhere near a star anymore. His .261 AVG – .289 OBP - .642 OPS is the worst stat line of anyone on the Yankees not named Chris Stewart. (And Chris Stewart is one of the worst hitters I’ve ever seen) It isn’t just this year that Ichiro has struggled either, since the beginning of 2011 Ichiro has been the worst hitting outfielder in all of Major League Baseball.

Google Images

This is not the "star" Ichiro

Due to this, it’s hard to be too high on this trade because the Yankees absolutely did not land a star player. This is not like when they traded for Bobby Abreu in 2006. I do however, remain optimistic, because of the stories that Ichiro has been just going through the motions in Seattle and that his numbers hitting away from Seattle are significantly better. It would seem like you could do a lot worse than Ichiro being your number 8 or 9 hitter.

Unfortunately for this scenario, Alex Rodriguez had to go and break his hand giving the Joe Girardi the apparent freedom to switch around the order. This had Ichiro leading off for no apparent reason on Wednesday. As I stated before, Ichiro has been the worst hitting outfielder in baseball the past two years, he should in no capacity be leading off for the New York Yankees.

Derek Jeter is batting .311 with a .358 OBP and has been doing a great job leading off all year. Why change that? He’s also a double play machine so any chance you have for him to not hit with a runner on 1^st base is a plus. I cant understand the logic of giving Ichiro more at bats than anyone on the team not named Chris Stewart, Jayson Nix, or the recently recalled Ramiro Pena.

Maybe the Yankees will use their better judgment and not bat Ichiro at lead off but this is exactly what I worried about when the Yankees acquired him. There is no rational reason to bat this guy at lead off outside of his star power. Especially when it means you’re going to drop Curtis Granderson in the order and put Derek Jeter into a situation where he can hit into more double plays.

The Yankees begin a series with the Red Sox tonight in the Bronx and the game is on ESPN. I’m sure this means that we’ll be focusing a lot on Ichiro and talking about how amazing of a hitter this guy is despite the fact that he’s been terrible. I don’t exactly care if Ichiro didn’t want to play in Seattle or didn’t like hitting there, he’s not a star and he shouldn’t be a focal part of this Yankee team loaded with them.

How does Wallace Matthews still have a job?

I think a Fire Joe Morgan type website needs to be started to get Wallace Matthews to stop writing for ESPN New York. Time after time he writes the most sensational and illogical articles. He’s the guy who thought Alex Rodriguez should be traded for pitching before his 2007 MVP season because he wasn’t clutch and the one who completely condemned him and asserted he’d be facing a suspension based on an untrue tabloid story about A-Rod playing poker. It's just unbelievable that he writes about baseball professionally. Today he published “Rivalry? Red Sox haven't earned one,” asserting that the Yankees and Red Sox do not have a rivalry this year.

The Yankees-Red Sox rivalry ain't what it used to be, and there's a very simple reason.

In order for a matchup of two teams to truly be called a rivalry, the teams don't necessarily have to be good. But they must be competitive, at least against each other.

Right now, the Boston Red Sox are neither good nor competitive.

The Red Sox are 1 game under 500 and have a +34 run differential. I’ve stated it before, the Red Sox are not a bad team. They have just had injuries and bad luck, it happens. I don’t understand how you could call this team not competitive, because they’re certainly competitive. Who cares if they have a bad record against the Yankees this year? Newsflash, lots of teams have a bad record against the Yankees this year. 

For the moment at least, the Yankees aren't very good either, having lost five of seven games on their just-concluded West Coast trip, but with nearly 100 games of the regular season already in the books, we can draw one conclusion rather safely: They are better than the Red Sox. A lot better.

No shit, they’re up 10.5 games on the Red Sox. It doesn’t mean the rivalry is dead because that’s not how rivalries work. The Yankees-Red Sox rivalry is probably the oldest and most historic rivalry in sports. It doesn’t just go away because one team has a mediocre year.

It was 20 days ago, just before the All-Star break, when I wrote a column raising the very real possibility the Yankees could sweep the Red Sox at Fenway and put an end to the charade that Boston could still be a force in the AL East this season.

And they came pretty darned close, winning three out of four and heading into the break 9 1/2 games ahead of their erstwhile rivals.

The only thing that has changed over those three weeks is that now, even though the Yankees have played poorly the past week, the Red Sox are 10 1/2 games back.

I know I read that article. I almost did the same thing I did with this article because it's just as stupid. The Yankees since then have played 1 game better than the Red Sox. This means the rivalry is over. I get it.

There was a time was when you could disregard numbers like those in July -- remember back to 2009, when the Yankees started out 0-8 against the Red Sox and wound up winning the World Series? -- but not this year.

Waiting for the Red Sox to hit that hot streak is like waiting for Alex Rodriguez to start hitting like it's 2007 again. Fanciful, unrealistic notions rooted in notstalgia, not reality.

Why not? Isn’t that exactly why you should disregard those numbers? Didn’t the Red Sox start off the season horribly and go on a hot streak just to get where they are? I don’t think we’ve waited all season for the Red Sox to go on a hot streak.

You really just had to somehow take a shot at Alex Rodriguez didn’t you? Just because you hate him doesn’t mean you have to insult the player all the time. You’re the one who wanted the Yankees to trade A-Rod before the 2007 season, so you’re not biased at all. He only won MVP that year but I would’ve much rather had some help in the bullpen.

The truth is, the Red Sox are doormats this year, and their only function this weekend at Yankee Stadium is to serve as slump-busters for the home team.

The difference between what the 2009 Yankees were able to do and what the Red Sox are unlikely to do is this: The 2009 Yankees were bad against Boston and good against virtually everyone else, and even after having lost those eight in a row, they were still just two games behind, waiting to strike like Forego stalking a leisurely pace.

The Red Sox are not doormats this year! You know who are doormats? The Kansas City Royals. Why do you keep saying this when you have to know it’s not true?

We know the Red Sox have talent. They very well could win the series this weekend. Certainly crazier things have happened. I also bet most of your readership remembers the racehorse Forego from 1973. Quite the spot on reference you’ve made there Mr. Matthews.

The 2012 Red Sox have been bad against just about everyone, and while they can hold out hope of at least one postseason game due to the new double wild-card format, any real optimism about making a postseason run has to fall into the realm of fantasy.

Incredible as it may seem, I am told Red Sox fans don't know which to hate more this season, their own team or its manager, Bobby Valentine. In that hatefest, the Yankees are a distant third.

The Red Sox are 1-5 against the Yankees this year. You know that means they’ve actually won more games against the rest of the league than they’ve lost. So apparently having a winning record against the rest of the league means they’ve been bad against just about everyone? This is just an untrue statement.

As for the second paragraph, you’re a freaking journalist. Who have you been talking to? Isn’t it kind of your job to tell us? Red Sox fans might not be overly optimistic about their team but I’m sure they hate the Yankees more.

And there's no reason to believe the Red Sox can reverse their fortunes this weekend in the Bronx. The pitching matchups -- Phil Hughes vs. Aaron Cook, CC Sabathia vs. Jon Lester and Hiroki Kuroda vs. Felix Doubront -- all favor the Yankees.

Cook has faced the Yankees once, two years ago as a Colorado Rockie, and got lit up for six runs in 5 2/3 innings. Lester, who has had a dreadful season (5-8, 5.46), couldn't get out of the fifth inning when he faced the Yankees in that final series before the break.

And while Doubront pitched well against the Yankees in their first meeting in April -- his six-inning, one-run performance turned out to be a footnote to the Yankees' 15-9 comeback win at Fenway, a game that turned out to be symbolic of Boston's entire season -- the Yankees showed signs of decoding his mysteries on July 7, getting home runs from Mark Teixeira and Andruw Jones.

So you would be totally shocked if Phil Hughes got bombed or gave up a big home run to David Ortiz? Or if Jon Lester came out and pitched a good game? God knows he’s due. Nothing is predetermined and while the Yankees do have a better team, you never know what’s going to happen. The Red Sox are not a terrible team like you think they are, they’re capable of winning a couple of games.

Only a poor performance out of the bullpen in that game by the since-departed Cory Wade stood between the Yankees and what would have been a backbreaking four-game sweep that weekend.

The Sox played without Jacoby Ellsbury, Dustin Pedroia and Carl Crawford that weekend, but they have returned to the lineup and it hasn't made any difference -- Boston is 6-7 since the break and comes to New York a last-place team with a record a game below mediocrity at 49-50.

At their worst the Red Sox are around a .500 team. Again, why does this make them so terrible? I don’t get it. They have a bunch of players who just came back into the line up so that’s looking good right? 13 games going 6-7 happens all the time in baseball. Remember how you said earlier the Yankees are also struggling right now? It happens.

The division race is largely over -- even if the Yankees were to play .500 ball the rest of the way and finish at 91-71, a highly unlikely outcome, the Red Sox would have to play .667 ball (42-21) just to tie -- and the only carrot left for them seems to be finishing as the fifth-best team in the AL, also known as the second wild card.

But to this point the Red Sox have not shown the character to overcome their considerable injuries the way the Yankees, equally hard-hit, have, nor has their starting pitching staff shown itself to be anything but highly overrated.

So what if the division race is almost over? You can’t go and say this team is a doormat and then say they have a shot at the playoffs. What in the world are you trying to tell us in this article? They’ve underperformed we get it. They’re still not a terrible team though. Why exactly is the historic rivalry not a rivalry this year? What if the Red Sox do grab that Wild Card spot, win the game and then play the Yankees in the playoffs? Would the rivalry still be dead?

The Yankees are far from healthy -- A-Rod's broken hand Tuesday night added to an injured list that includes Mariano Rivera, Andy Pettitte, Brett Gardner, Joba Chamberlain and Michael Pineda -- but they have demonstrated an indisputable ability to rise above adversity, plus a depth in both bench players and pitchers that has allowed them to thrive under conditions in which other teams -- hint, hint -- have folded up.

Exactly, the Yankees have a ton of injuries but they’re a deeper and better team than the Red Sox. Stating the same thing over and over again does not make your main thesis true when it doesn’t support your claim. I also hate these stupid character arguments. Like the Yankees players have more character and want to win more than the Red Sox players. Give me a break.

In past seasons, a Yankees-Red Sox series could transcend the woes of either or both of the teams involved, simply through pride, ability and the force of the rivalry itself.

But not this year.

In 2012, the Yankees and Red Sox are no longer rivals.

In fact, one of them is a doormat.

They should just rename the Red Sox the Doormats. They're terrible, the least characterful, near .500 team that's ever happened. How dare we even call this a rivalry anymore? 

Joking aside, Wallace Matthews actually believes this year that the Yankees and Red Sox are no longer rivals because in some perverted universe he thinks a very competitive, playoff contending Red Sox team, are doormats?  On what planet does that article make any logical sense to write? Why is it needed?

I’m sure Yankee Stadium will be close to sold out this weekend and I’d like to see you tell those near 50,000 fans that there’s no rivalry this year. This is a crazy article and you are a terrible and misinformed sports writer.

4 Absurdly Overrated Videogames

Often we confuse something being critically acclaimed as actually being good. Just because something gets decent reviews doesn't mean it's actually good, especially with videogames. Most of the time these reviews are based on only playing the game for a select amount of hours. Here are some of the most overrated videogames.

Grand Theft Auto 4 – GTA 4 is the highest rated game on metacritic (a site that compiles reviews from all over) and is one of the best-received games of all time. I remember going down to Gamestop with my college friends at midnight and purchasing it when it came out only for us to be like, “ehh…this is okay.” I’ve been absolutely puzzled by this games critical acclaim ever sense.

The main “beef” I have with GTA 4 is that it added “realism” to the franchise. Apparently realism means cars handling like big roller skates, being pulled over for driving drunk, and having to hang out with your virtual friends in the game. For a game that many critics called “perfect” I found myself annoyed at these things and I also found the story to be pretty mediocre.

I think in a game about being a maniac Russian immigrant set lose on a fictional New York City the last thing I’d want to happen is to be pulled over for drunk driving. Especially since the mechanic is the minute you drink and get even near a police car they immediately know you’re driving drunk and chase after you like you just beat an innocent bystander with a baseball bat. Did the New York County Sheriffs Sponsor this game or something? Drive drunk and they will know!

Even worse is when you progress through the game you start to make friends and those friends want you to pick them up and take them to do stupid things in the game. Seriously, the amount of time I wasted picking someone up, taking them to play pool, darts, get drinks, and then dropping them off is absurdly stupid. I’m playing a videogame if I wanted to be hanging out with my friends, I’d go hang out with my friends. It’d be one thing if this social mechanic isn’t an absolute bore to deal with but it’s just a total waste of time.

Google Images

"You want to hang out, again? We just played darts yesterday, asshole"

Also, the graphics were made out to be some of the most amazing graphics you’ll ever see. However, everything just kind of had a bland look to it with grey and brown overtones. If that’s what realistic graphics mean then I will take anything else. There were also tons of graphical glitches and people popping in and out of building and cars.

It’s not that GTA 4 is not a very good game, because it is. It’s just certainly not a masterpiece. It is very derivative of the previous GTA’s and really not much in the game made ever me think, “Wow, I’m playing the best game ever made.” It’s not the best game ever made and you’re a fool if you think that.

Diablo III – This is one of the most controversial videogames ever released and let me save you some time, it sucked. If Diablo III was not a Blizzard game, and was not called Diablo, it would’ve received atrocious reviews. It’s just a crappy game anyway you cut it.

The game is comprised of 4 Acts and only the 1^st of these Acts isn’t a completely rushed disaster. The story of the game not only ruins pretty much every character they established in the 1^st and 2^nd Diablo, but is painfully stupid and short. If you are someone who plays through games quickly you’ll beat Diablo in about 12 hours. This is a game that’s been talked about for over 10 years and you just beat it in 12 hours, way to go Blizzard.

“That’s how the game’s designed though, you’re supposed to play through it on all the difficultly levels to get better loot,” cry all the blind Blizzard supporters. That’s just painfully stupid and there is simply no excuse whatsoever for a game to have a really crappy story. If they wanted the player to play through the game a bunch of times they should’ve made the story tolerable or at least made the player be able to automatically skip the cut scenes.

I managed to play through three of the four difficulty levels in the game with my Barbarian named Dolph Lundgren. At the end of the “Hell” difficulty Dolph was level 60 and ready to face the toughest difficulty level, Inferno. Only Blizzard designed the game so that right around this time good loot just stops dropping. I couldn’t even get half way through Act I on the toughest difficulty because I didn’t have good enough gear to do so.

They did this in order to make more money off a rushed completely crappy game to begin with. They wanted me to grind gold for hours off monsters in order to buy good gear at the Auction House. Who the hell finds that fun? What a freaking waste of time. I could opt to use my real money to buy items at the Auction House as well, but that’s just disgusting.

This is not to mention that the Diablo III servers are pieces of freaking crap. The game seemed to never work when I wanted it to work and I felt like I was back on my Packard Bell in the 90’s when it was a serious challenge to get games to work. They knew how many people were going to try to play this game and completely failed to provide enough server space for people to play it. Again, they were thinking about profits and not actually providing a great game for people to play.

Google Images

Sorry, you cant play because we didn't spend enough money for servers

A cash grab is the only way to describe Diablo III. It’s a stripped down and rushed version of the previous game that Blizzard wants you to pump more money into than you’ve already paid. Diablo III not only doesn’t deserve the praise it’s received, it deserves to have some sort of lawsuit pressed against the company who created it.

The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword – Calling this game overrated will probably cause some Nintendo fan to sneak into my apartment and attempt to murder me. Unfortunately, despite getting fantastic reviews across the board, Skyward Sword is just kind of a crappy game. It’s the same Zelda formula you’ve played for 10 years; meaning the story is painfully stupid, the characters are painfully annoying, and it doesn’t have voice acting. Oh, and motion controls are still a really bad idea.

Seriously, someone has to explain how anyone could call this game a “masterpiece.” Even when it’s evaluated in some sort of Zelda only vacuum it’s easily the worst one. I happened to play this game a few weeks before it came out because of a magic power I possess called the Internet, and when the perfect score reviews started rolling out my jaw dropped. Really, what game were they playing?

The motion controls are certainly the best in any Wii game I’ve played but that doesn’t mean they don’t completely suck and add nothing to the game at all. Pretty much every single thing you fight in the game requires you to swing the Wii-Mote in a certain direction and that almost never seems to work correctly. You travel to each of the three worlds (only three, I know right?) by flying on this big stupid bird thing that requires you to flap the Wii-Mote like an idiot. It not only is completely unnecessary but it also hurts your arm to do.

Google Images

Seriously, what the fuck is that thing?

I don’t think I really need to describe much of this game to you because you’ve probably played it before if you’ve played any Zelda ever. There’s still no voice acting for no apparent reason and the story basically consists of Link following Zelda around and proving he can fight this stupid guy that’s kidnapped her. At least this one set up some kind of relationship between Link and Zelda and didn’t just make you assume you have to save her because that’s just what you do in these games.

Like I said, even for a Zelda game this is a pretty crappy game. If you are absolutely in love with Zelda games you will probably love this game to. It doesn’t take away from the fact that by all the standards that we should be using to judge videogames at this point in time, it sucks.

Gears of War – One of my good friends convinced me to buy this along with my Xbox 360 after my freshman year of college. When I turned it on I didn’t understand the appeal of it and I still don’t understand the appeal of it. I have to talk about this one because after being so appalled by it I didn’t bother to buy the sequels assuming they’re more of the same. (I’d be totally shocked if they weren’t)

The best way to describe this critically acclaimed game is “grey.” Everything in this game is grey with brown smeared in it. Somehow these are perceived as some of the best graphics ever known to man but to me, they were dreadfully depressing. Who wants to run around in this grey world? I’m from upstate New York, most of my existence has been living in a grey world.

IGN

Is there anything in this picture that's not a combination of grey and brown?

This is another game with super “realistic” graphics that didn’t impress me at all. I get that it’s post apocalyptic game but really this style of graphics just caused everything to look the same. I didn’t even know whom I was supposed to be shooting at half the time, unless I was playing it online.

Gears of War also has to be blamed for every single game becoming a cover shooter. Hell, even Mass Effect became a cover shooter instead of an RPG. At least Mass Effect did it well as opposed to Gears of War where your back is like magnet just seeking out the next half sized wall. Seriously, in what world are there just perfect cover sized walls just sitting everywhere? If the zombie apocalypse occurs does that also mean that all our walls are going to suddenly crumble in half so we can take appropriate cover?

My friends insisted that the multiplayer is the reason to buy Gears of War though. It had to be because it couldn’t be the testosterone infused story that I played for about 3 hours before I realized I needed to slam down 8 Bud Lights to get in the right mental state to play it. I’m typically pretty good at games like this but not only was I terrible at Gears of War there was this stupid mechanic that made everyone who wasn’t the host of the game lag. This caused 1 person on the 4v4 matches to basically just have super powers because of his greater Internet connection. This was not my idea of fun and while I don’t really love shooter games, Halo and Call of Duty blow this out of the water.

This is one of the games people buy Xbox 360’s for and I can’t imagine them not being disappointed. Gears of War and both its sequels received great reviews and if they all sucked as bad as the first one, this is completely unwarranted. I haven’t heard very good things and that’s from people who really enjoy the series.

What are the 76ers doing?

The Philadelphia 76ers have had an absolutely atrocious offseason. I cannot for the life of me figure out exactly their plan is. They decided to use their amnesty clause on the last year of Elton Brand’s stupidly huge contract they gave him to save themselves 18 million towards building their team this year. They then proceeded to sign Kwame Brown (2 years, 6 million) and Nick Young, (1 year, 6 million) and resign Lavoy Allen (2 years, 6 million) Spencer Hawes (2 years, 13 million) and Thaddeus Young (5 years, 42 million). They also acquired Dorrell Wright from Golden State via a trade as well as drafting wingman Moe Harkless and power forward Arnett Moultrie in the 1st round. What exactly is the plan here Philadelphia?

Why amnesty Brand in the last year of his stupid contract? Why not amnesty him immediately last year if they were going to amnesty him at all? They basically just ate his 18 million dollars remaining on his deal when surely they could’ve used his expiring contract to bring back a package more valuable than Kwame Brown and Nick Young combined right? Hell, isn’t he better than Kwame Brown and Nick Young even in his current dilapidated state?

I just can’t wrap my head around what exactly this team is doing. Are they trying to save cap space or are they trying to compete for a title? Right now it seems like they’re doing a combination of both and that just doesn’t work in the NBA. They signed Nick Young and just let Lou Williams walk for a 3 year 15 million dollar deal, when Williams’ was probably their most productive player last year. Nick Young is terrible, have you watched him play? (Lou Williams had a 20.22 PER compared to Nick Young’s 12.93)

Google Images

Nick Young has swag...too bad he sucks at playing basketball

Right now they have Andre Iguodala, Moe Harkless, Thaddeus Young, Nick Young, and Dorrell Wright as their wingmen. They all fill the same role on a team and you can even make a case that Evan Turner belongs in this group too. The only way any of this possibly makes sense is if they plan on unloading Andre Iguodala for some expiring contracts and really blowing the whole thing up. Iguodala while a productive player is signed through next year for around 15 million this year and 16 million next year, so that’s not exactly going to be an easy thing to do.

Their starting 5 right now looks like Jrue Holiday, Evan Turner, Andre Iguodala, Spencer Hawes, and Kwame Brown. They’d have Thaddeus Young, Moe Harkless, Dorrell Wright, Lavoy Allen and Nick Young as their primary bench contributors. Does this sound like a team even remotely close to contending to you? This reminds me of some of the Isiah Thomas Knicks teams when every player he acquired seemed to play the same position.

Unless the goal is to send Iguodala out of town, which 76ers management consistently denies, this is a team that took a clear step backwards. They were an 8^th seed in the Eastern Conference and actually showed up and played quite well in the Eastern Conference Playoffs last year. I don’t see this team being any better than that team and it has the potential to be a lot worse.