Kree, you fleshed out the idea of luck in sports vs lottery perfectly in terms of expectations. I couldn't have said it better myself, and indeed I didn't. I think I said something about masters and victims or something.. 0_o Hey at least I sounded smart ahahahah

Well, the expectation to win Super Bowls is one thing, but expectations for football players are quite another. I think this is where people get confused about how "luck" fits into the victory equation. After all, Eli and Tyree exceeded many people's expectations, and certainly the Giants did. It's almost not surprising that they couldn't make sense of it.

Now if only people were as reasonable as you, Kree, I would have been spared from spending time on this post, fun as it was. Hell, all they would have to do is a little independent thinking... too much to ask, it seems.

Still, I wouldn't go as far as to say the Giants "did not get lucky," but rather that they earned the luck. Steve observes that "just about nobody ever wins the Super Bowl without some help from luck," and I agree with him. It's all a matter of being READY to capitalize when luck comes knocking, which you expertly conveyed with your comment.

I guess what we're missing is a definitive exposition on just what the heck "luck" really is....

Hmm interesting, I hadn't thought of God and sports in that way before. I just thought that crediting God is common parlance in sports, that it is less an affirmation of personal faith than it is an implicit acknowledgment of good fortune, or even luck. This is how this post came into being, anyway; I thought that whether Tyree is a devout Christian, or if God exists, was beside the point.

Of course, as a non-religious man, I didn't even consider God as a motivational factor. Duh, what a rookie oversight.. thanks for calling me out on this, Leo!

Hahaha unfortunately I have pledged to zealously guard God's contact information, failing which He might smite me or cast me out or something 0_0

Steve, you are beyond the people I target with this post. Usually, when people say "just got lucky," that's really all they mean. To them, luck is an end, not a means.

Cases in point: the Giants were good at winning close games? They just got lucky. They had a good D line? They just got lucky. They beat the 18-0 Patriots? They just got lucky.

No credit whatsoever. You know this.

I agree with you though: everyone needs luck to win the Super Bowl. My point is that you better be good enough to capitalize on that luck when it comes knocking, as the Giants did.

Thanks Megan, you're a peach!

Sadly, the reason Obama needs more voices like mine is because people do not think for themselves. They can, but they just don't.

Like sheep, they get mindlessly herded back and forth between partisan stables at the herder's whim. Tired of being dragged about, the more strong-willed sheep decide to stay in a pen of its choosing, even when it's burning down. Meanwhile, the cynical sheep rejects all herding and stands on its own pasture, directionless, left behind by the herd and eventually starves to death.

A democracy like ours deserves better than the present picture.

Frankly, I'm less concerned about Obama as a person, and more with his policies, rhetoric, and calculations. Maybe I really should worry more if he is a Muslim, a smoker, an illegal alien, or if he pals around with terrorists. But I don't.

I just want to get on with governing the country.

With the notion of "civic nationalism," Steve pretty much hits Obama's lofty aspirations dead on. Yet I have little faith that people can even understand its significance. After all, Obama courageously sat in with Jay Leno in an attempt to reach average Americans in a venue suitable to their taste. In response, he was mostly met with ridicule and dismissive smirks.

I, for one, listened to what the president had to say, how he said it, and WHY.

Beyond encouraging a "civilized public sphere," I believe Obama has also laid out how he thinks decisions should be made. This is a critical part of the promised "change" in Washington, namely that of post-partisan politics.

Because the mainstream uses the term mindlessly and often in ignorant slander, I have attempted a few expositions on Obama's vague notion of post-partisanship, as can be found in this blog here and here, however incomplete. And here, I also applied the tenets of post-partisanship to his appearance on Jay Leno.

In this, perhaps Obama hopes on in vain, but his ideas will carry on in spite of reality. If Americans cannot find value in them, then others may one day to their great advantage.

Thanks for commenting!

In politics, the "best interests of the US" are always in the eye of the beholder. It is difficult, if not impossible for anyone to formulate a "real solution" for anything, as only history can tell.

In the present, the only thing to do is try different options through the painful process of elimination, all the while balancing pragmatism with conviction.

I do not take issue with conservative values, but that is all Republicans care to display these days. Nothing else seems to factor into their policy calculations, namely sensible reflection or pragmatism with regard to war-making.

That worries me, as it should more people.

I am not opposed to fighting. Liberals who think war is pointless are kidding themselves. In fact many of them don't know what they're talking about either. That caller on the Mark Levin show was very well-rehearsed with Obama's talking points, yet that got him nowhere because he obviously did not think it through.

That drove me NUTS. NUTSSSSSSSSSSS

Anyway, I highly recommend the links throughout my post detailing the neoconservatives and their ilk, along with this superb primer. The coalitions they build are powerful and influential, including the phantom "Israel lobby." They are the wellspring of right-wing rhetoric regarding our entire Middle East enterprise, providing the intellectual basis for the Bush Doctrine and our immense military postures.

Again, I only ask that we pick reasonable fights, those which stand a chance beyond fighting. At present, we fight an endless army of hardened militants, a war that cannot be won by force alone. I think this fact should be self-evident by now. Osama bin Laden knew this damn well from the very beginning, which is precisely the reason he lured us over there.

Finally, I do not share your confidence in discrediting conservative talk radio. Nor do I think their ability to think critically is lacking, and yet their grasp of reality is questionable. The Democrats weren't kidding that Rush Limbaugh has become the de facto leader of the GOP.. I hear both, loud and clear, and it's true.

Maybe the influence of talk radio is a dirty little secret among peers, but in society, it's there and very, very palpable in the mainstream.

Steve comments, and the world listens!!! Thank you, and DAMN WELL SAID. Russia knew damn well we couldn't do jack about Georgia, as Iran similarly knows about the election.

The only people who don't know are these right-wing idiots. Actually maybe they DO know better, but they know the PEOPLE don't know better. This is how dirty political points are scored.

The GOP using the media is one thing.. what really PISSES ME OFF is Iran using the GOP as its unwitting mouthpiece......

After all, if the neocons can't have Activist Obama gallivanting about the globe, reelecting Ahmadinejad is probably the next best thing for their agenda:

[Daniel Pipes of the Heritage Foundation said,] “I’m sometimes asked who I would vote for if I were enfranchised in this election, and I think that, with due hesitance, I would vote for Ahmadinejad,” Pipes said. The reason, Pipes went on, is that he would “prefer to have an enemy who’s forthright and obvious, who wakes people up with his outlandish statements.”

YES, YES and YES, absolutely right. Thanks for your expert contribution.

So, would it be a stretch to say that Apple has an interest in keeping things this way? Namely, limit hardware and software choices, limit its target audience, and generally being as un-Windows as computerly possible?

I say yes. The easiest way to achieve this, of course, is to hike up the price of its machines. Limiting market adoption directly achieves all the above goals. Nevermind improving its OS to compete on the same level as Windows; just price above the storm.

Price meriting the product indeed.... just brilliant.

As it turns out, charging outrageous premiums is the jackpot strategy for Apple. Enough consumers are more than willing to pay any price to get their lusty, "PC" frustrated hands on those sexy, exclusive Macs.

For the record.

This post made a small blogsphere splash on June 2nd, with 1275 pageviews firing off a 59 comment discussion over at Bleacher Report. Here is the link.

That morning, a patrolling ESPN blogger gave my story a shot in the arm. The guy even copped my headline: Did Giants get caught in Plax trap?

It was a fun ride ^_^

Hey everyone, try out the Facebook Connect feature I just installed here! Instead of commenting anonymously, you can login with your FB credentials and be known.

I think your comments will show up on your FB news feed too. Great way to show off all your hard work here ^_~

Oh and FYI, I also just reversed the comment sorting such that the latest comments go on top.