The Losers In The Manning Sweepstake? The Broncos

But wait, how can that be? They signed Manning.

Sure, but at what gain versus what cost?

The gain? A 4 time MVP/Pro Bowl quarterback who has been on a steady decline (look up the stats, they back this up) and is coming off of 4 neck surgeries. His old team let him go because they weren't sure he'd be able to play at the level he had before, play a full season or even play at all.

Sure, an 85% Manning is better then Tebow or Brady Quinn (who is no longer with the team). So would think it would end up being a gain right?

No. And this is the same thing that affected the other teams in the Manning hunt.

They get Manning, it's all in and have to hope he plays at 85% and manages to stay healthy. They lose Manning, they've undermined their organization. They even get Manning and they have to trade/cut some valuable players. Well, it depends on if you think Tebow is valuable.

I'll get to the Titans (who would have made out the best by getting Manning but also make out the best out of the losers), 49ers and Miami later. For now let's look at the Broncos.

If you have Manning as your starter, you can't have Tebow as your backup. It just doesn't work. Two wildly different styles. For Tebow to be effective, you have to scheme around his strengths. And those aren't the same as Manning.

The Broncos would have been better with Brady Quinn as the back-up, but he's gone now. And they'll have to trade Tebow (I wouldn't expect Tebow to go somewhere as the back-up. He'll either be the starter, Miami, or a pure situational player, Patriots).

Manning goes down, for all we know it could be just one hit that knocks him out of the game for good, and who do you have behind him? No one.

Even if the Broncos draft a 1st round QB, which they absolutely should no matter what, would you really want to throw the QB into the deep end if Manning goes down?

The Broncos have to pray that Manning stays healthy and plays at an 85% level.

I don't think it'll be worth the 90 million they'll have to pay. I think the results for the Broncos will be the same as if they still had Tebow under center.

By the way, I hope the Patriots pick up Tebow and use him as Belichek originally wanted: situational player. How dangerous would the offense be with Brady at the helm, Gronkowski/Hernandez/Welker receiving and Woodhead/Tebow in the backfield?

Will Tebow go out and catch? Run like a fullback? Take the snap and pass? Will he pass short or will he pass deep? Play him as a Tight End sometimes, as a fullback other times (like they did with Hernandez some last year) and a wildcat QB. And unlike most wildcats, can have him line-up as running back, Brady take the snap and hand off.

That's not a scary offense that will give defenses nightmares?

Real Steel

Watched this over the weekend and it was because of the word-of-mouth reviews.

When first saw the previews I had no interest in it. A movie about robots boxing just didn't work for me. And I was surprised that Hugh Jackman was "slumming" for it. Even having Evangeline Lilly wasn't enough to tempt me.

Then I heard the line "It's Rocky with Robots" and that got me interested enough to learn more. And I'm glad I did.

It's not a great movie, but it is damn good. The boxing robots is actually the subplot really, the background. Instead of Rocky think of another Stallone movie: Over The Top, and you have what Real Steel is.

It's the story of a down-on-his-luck loser of a father trying for redemption with the son he barely knows. There's even the rich family that will care for the boy when Dad passes him on. It's been years since seen Over The Top, so not sure how many story beats are the same, but there's enough.

That's not to say that Real Steel is a total carbon copy. It's just similar. And similar movies can exist on their own as their own entities.

The strength of Real Steel is in Jackman's work, but especially in the actor that plays his son, Dakota Goyo. Both carry the story and lift it beyond the confines of a "robot boxing movie" and make it heartwarming and emotional.

My girlfriend had tears.

The only thing I didn't like was the ending. It ends with them in their "victory" (I won't spoil it, but the "victory" was perfect for this movie and ending it the other way would just have ruined the whole thing) and I really wanted to know what happens to Charlie and Max after this. What is their relationship like?

This movie, unlike so many others in the same vein (parent finding an unknown/forgotten child), actually made you buy the growing relationship between the two. After all, all Max wanted was for Charlie to fight for him, and all Charlie needed was something to fight for.

4 out of 5

Designing an MMORPG or Why Skyrim Got Boring

Not that long ago I was singing Skyrim's praises. And deservedly so. It's nearly a perfect game, at least for me. But nearly isn't close enough. It's reached the wall now where it's just repeat, repeat and repeat. The same quests over and over. I haven't even finished the main quests because I got bored with everything else.

My favorite kind of game to play is an MMORPG. I started with Ultima Online, went to Final Fantasy XI, onto World of Warcraft and dabbled in Lord of the Rings, City of Heroes, Tabula Rasa and lots of others.

I love the community aspects of them. I love all that there is to do. I love being able to level up to a new zone and have a new look, new quests, etc...

What I don't like is the grinding aspects of it and the repeating of the questing.

I solo a lot in those games. But I still love the community aspects. I just hit a wall when I run out of solo stuff to do and have to group. It's a grind to find the groups and get the goals accomplished. Same with reputation quests. Repeating the same quest every single day is obnoxious.

WoW has made some strides in this, giving their raid dungeons (which can be fun, don't get me wrong) different group sizes and levels, which yield different loot.

Why can't we take this to it's end?

Make all dungeons soloable. Obviously there would be vastly different loot. The solo stuff wouldn't be anywhere near as good as the raid stuff, but it would be able to stand on it's own.

Also make every experience different. I'll make a new race character to explore the starting zones but when gotta get into the same areas as before, it gets boring and I give up.

Keep all the community aspects, the raid dungeons for those that like to do it, but make everyone soloable and get rid of the problem of doing the same quests over and over for reputation. Make sure there are some repeatable but make more standard quests.

It can be done.

The first MMMORPG that has those things will get me back into online gaming again.

Superbowl Fallout: Jackass fans and media

I'm a Patriots fan. I bleed Pats red, white & blue. I love my Pats, even during the Pete Carroll/Drew Bledsoe years.

I was disappointed they didn't win the Superbowl. Just like everyone else. But the amount of hate I've seen from fans and non-fans alike is just ridiculous. Even the media is in on it, looking for any story they can get.

I don't remember ever seeing this much hate against the losing team. EVER.

It's pathetic in a way.

The Giants won. Congrats to them. Replay the game 10 times, they probably would only win 2 or 3 of those times. Any real fan of football will realize how much luck had to do with that game. Luck plays a part in every win, to some degree, usually pretty minor. But this game? Luck was huge.

They lucked out with Welker dropping the ball. They lucked out on the Manningham catch (out of 10 times, he drops that ball 8 out of the 10 times). And they definately lucked out on the fumble recovery.

But what really has me going is the stuff that's been happening since. Let's list it out:

1) That guy that dropped the butterfingers, with a note for Welker, in Copley Square?

You are a jackass.

There is no other word to describe you. I am ashamed that you are a Patriots fan. To do that is unbelievably pathetic.

I hereby kick you out of Patriots Nation. We have no need for morons (and that's an insult to morons, including you with them) like you.

2) Saying Brady's legacy is tarnished?

What are you people smoking? So he lost 2 superbowls. In a couple years when he's a first ballot hall of famer, no one will really care. Jim Kelly lost 4 superbowls, in a row, and it's just a footnote in his legacy.

Brett Favre won one superbowl his entire career and played for awhile after that (1995 to 2010 or 2009 whenever he finally called it quits). He never made it to the big game again. Does that tarnish his legacy?

I know it's a slow time now for football news, but seriously?

3) Mrs. Tom Brady's comments. Gisele was heckled by Giants fans leaving her suite and she yelled out that "my husband can't f-ing throw the ball and catch it at the same time".

And this is a big deal why?

First off, those Giants fans are jackasses for bothering her. Want to heckle other fans? Go for it. The players? Go for it? The players wives and kids?

GROW UP!!

As for Gisele? Doesn't bother me in the slightest. She was frustrated. Tom Brady didn't play his best game, throws could have been better, but there were balls that should have been caught and if so, the Patriots would have won. There really is no denying that.

Should she have made the comments? No. Because of the media reacting how they did. If the media weren't such jackasses, this would have just blown over.

Ridiculous.

4) Matt Light and Rob Gronkowski partying it up the night after the loss. These video/photos, which were shot from a private Patriots party (what jackass decided to send this out, not a real fan huh?), show the two having a good time after the game.

People are complaining that they shouldn't have been that happy, or having a good time.

Why?

How do you blow off steam after a big loss or bad day? Do you wallow in it? No. Everyone says that you have to put it behind you.

So guess what they did.

And it's wrong why?


I'm just glad that in another day or two this will all blow over.

Bring on the draft!

Super Bowl 46 Analysis

I'm a Patriots fan through and through. I watch them religiously (when first started dating Kat I told her that on Sundays I watch football, but other things can come up or take place, but that I will not miss the Pats).

But don't expect this to be a "Giants shouldn't have won" review.

The best team, of the night, did win. The Giants receivers made the catches when they had to and the Patriots receivers didn't (Welker, I love watching you play was even more excited you joined the team than Randy Moss and I know you're killing yourself over it, but you had to make that catch).

It's one of those "out of 10 games" kind of things. I think the Patriots would have won 8 out of the 10 games. This just happened to be the Giants night.

Both teams played tough. This was a nail biter up until the final minute. Which a good Super Bowl game should be. It needs the tension and excitement to get the fans fully into the game, especially if your team isn't playing.

Tough game. Nail biter.

The Giants made the plays when they had to. The Patriots didn't.

Of course, recovering those fumbles really helped out too. That was the lucky part of the Giants night. If even one of those had been recovered by the Patriots, the outcome would have been different.

But that's the fun of sports. There's always a little bit of luck involved.

Congrats Giants from this Patriots fan. It was a great Super Bowl.

Dragonrim: The Perfect Game

I've been playing Skyrim alot lately and loving it. I absolutely loved all three Dragon Age (Dragon Age: Origins, DA: Awakenings, DA2), as well as the DLCs. But neither game is perfect.

First things first, I don't like FPS. Not a fan. I like RPGs. I like the immersivness of them, the epic feel of the stories. Combat is way down on my list of things a great game has to have. Well it has to have combat, but I'm fine with fairly simple set up like Skyrim (although playing a rogue in DA2 was AWESOME!!).

Like I said, neither game is perfect. But combine the two? Now we're talking.

Dragon Age has the immersive story and character interaction that I love. You grow to depend/feel for the followers in DA. Their stories develop as yours does. Your decisions affect them, even to the point that you may lose them as a followers. Walking around town, they interact with eachother.

But Dragon Age was linear in it's zones. You couldn't just wander the countryside. Even though there were choices in how to play, it was still fairly rigid.

Skyrim on the other hand is HUGE and open. I've been playing for 100 hours and I'm not even 1/2 way through the main quest. There is just so much to do. Almost too much to do. But the interaction with the NPCs is pretty thin, even the ones that you can have as companions. Skyrim is lacking in that regards.

But Dragon Age isn't. Dragon Age is lacking in the size/openness of the world.

But Skyrim isn't.

So take the two games, mash 'em together and you have my perfect game.

Amalur: Reckoning And The Gold Demo

So they recently released the demo for Kingdoms Of Amalur: Reckoning. I went on XBox Live to download it. Wanted to check it out, see if the game would be worth picking up.

Turns out that the demo is Xbox Live Gold memberships only.

Seriously?

That's the stupidest thing I've heard.

Reckoning is not a multiplayer game. There is no online component (beyond potential DLC similar to Skyrim and Dragon Age).

So why the hell is the demo exclusive to Gold members only?

I have 0 need to pay for Xbox Live. I don't go online with my Xbox.

This just pisses me off.

Stupid.

I can't think of any reason to make a non-multiplayer game's demo exclusive to Xbox Live Gold members only.