Quick Rant: Glee Season 4

OK, this may not be that 'quick'.

I said in my Friday Night Lights post from Friday that there would be another post about the show, and I was technically telling the truth.

The whole truth, however, is that I have been searching/hoping for a chance to write something about another show that I enjoy - and while watching FNL it dawned on me how I could explain my point.

If you are a follower of my blog (and I believe it may just be my wife) you know that a little while back I decided to jump into watching a show I hated for no reason in Glee - see my review here.

Anyway, as I stated in that review Glee garnered a lot of hate from me for no true reason - and after my wife and son became fans of the show, I thought I should give it a try.

Well, I caught up on the first three seasons in order to be ready for the brand new fourth season that started in the fall.

First, I loved the first three seasons. Although I am not a huge fan of all of the characters, together everything worked and the musical numbers have been wonderful - some are way better than others though.

But, this isn't a review of Glee. I had already stated in my first review (even if it was just for the first season) that I enjoyed it. No, this is a post about what Glee did wrong - and, honestly, the problem occurred from day one.

When Glee began in 2009 the school had signups for the glee club and only had five signup. After the first few episodes they were able to get up to the 12 that they needed - and in those 12 all of them were sophomores and freshmen. Makes sense, right?

At the time, yes. But, as the seasons went on the sophomores became juniors, and then seniors. Those freshmen, well they are now seniors. In those three years - the 12 students never really changed, so no other characters (read younger students) were introduced in those three seasons.

Which brings us to season four and my issues.

In season four the glee club, after losing eight members to graduation, finally had to introduce some new characters - and I am fine with that. The main issue - going to New York.

This show is called Glee, not NYADA.

It's supposed to be about a high school glee club. In fact, when the show was pitched it was about a teacher (Will Schuester), but as the seasons went on Rachel became the star of the show and the powers that be felt it best to follow her to NY.

During season four, the my least favorite parts of the show have been the NY portions. Rachel is no longer the high-strung annoying girl from high school - no she is much worse now.

Which leads me to my comparison to Friday Night Lights - a show that seemed to have it together from the start. Like all high schools, kids grow up and eventually graduate - you need to have a plan in place so that when a loved character leaves, another one is right behind them.

From the start we are introduced to characters in all four grade levels - the quarterback Jason Street is a senior. The running back 'Smash' Williams is a junior. The cheerleader Lyla Garrity, the backup quarterback Matt Saracen, the fullback Tim Riggins and Tyra Collette are all sophomores, with the coach's daughter, Julie Taylor and Saracen's best friend, Landry Clarke each freshmen.

Sounds smart doesn't it? Already we are given a year of Street, two of Williams, three of the sophomores and a fourth season with the freshmen. But, because Julie is part of the Taylor family, we actually get her for all five.

But, that isn't it. As the seasons went on more characters are introduced - so for season four when we only had Julie and Landry left - we already had a bunch of new characters we knew. By season five - the entire football team was gone, and even though some of them were missed, the show moved forward and it was still enjoyable.

Don't get me wrong - keep lovable characters around, but find a reason for them to stick around. Whether it was Riggins dropping out of college and coming back to help Coach Taylor out and his brother, or Saracen sticking around to take care of his sick grandmother and be with his girlfriend, Julie.

This was actually used brilliantly in Glee with Finn's character. He washed out in the Army and eventually made his way back home - and took over the glee club when Schuester was gone. Perfect - keep a former character around longer with an actual reason to stick around.

Other characters have been back as well from the original cast, but in small doses - which is perfectly fine. Coming back to support the glee club, coming home for holiday - it can all be done.

Going to NY, though, not needed. Sometimes, its best to just say goodbye.

My complaint, however, will go on deaf ears - the comment posters out there continue to say they'd rather the show just be in NY and forget about the high school (which again would be fine in a spinoff called NYADA). But, this is about the high school and the glee club. I am still getting to know most of the new characters - but it would have been nice to have been introduced to a few of them as the seasons progressed.

And since NY is going to be sticking around, when is this Rachel Berry coming back? Because she is missed.

Also, off topic, where the heck do Sugar, Joe and sometimes Unique go? This is a school, right? But they tend to be missing a lot (I know reading too much into it, but it is annoying). Finally, I miss Rory!

Quick Rant: Netflix

By looking at the title of this blog post you may think that I am not a fan of the movie distribution service known as Netflix. But, that couldn't be further from the truth. I love Netflix, in fact most of my movie watching is capable to this amazing company.


So, what is my beef?

Well, as many of you may have noticed over the course of this blog - and hell, even by the title of the blog itself - that I do not have the capabilities to see each and every movie I would want to see in the movie theater - it is just impossible. I might get the chance to see a handful in the theater each and every year - which is why my selections to see those movies must be the absolute best films.

So, like I said above, the rest of the films I want to see come to me like magic through the mail and land in my mailbox - four at a time each and every week. Which is absolutely amazing.

Again, what is my beef?

Well, over the course of the past few years (my facts on this are not accurate, so please don't punish me for that) Netflix has apparently made a deal with some companies to hold off on sending customers such as myself newly released movies until about a month after they have already been released.

I have heard a few different reasons for this - to help with DVD sales and/or help with purchasing rentals through your television box. Either way, this is starting to piss me off.

I already have to wait through the movies entire run at the box office to not see, while everyone else is ranting and raving about it. Then, I have to wait for it to finally become available on DVD. Now, for a number of movies I now have to wait even longer.

Sure, it's only a month - but another month for some films can be an eternity. I had to wait for Inception and now it looks like I will be waiting for The Social Network. I have heard great things about these movies and I have put in my time waiting - why must I wait longer?

I hope there is eventually an end in sight where I, like almost everyone else, is able to get one of the new releases during the month it i actually released. Is that too much to ask?

Quick Rant: Steroids

Well, it has happened again. Another high-profile athlete has admitted to using steroids. And, yet again, it is the story of the week.

There is only one problem: I DON'T CARE!!!

Mark McGwire, former Oakland Athletic and St. Louis Cardinal, admitted using steroids during his playing career. The only real reason McGwire finally came clean is because he is coming back to baseball as St. Louis' hitting coach this season. Instead of this being an ongoing distraction, McGwire came clean and hopes the story would go away.

So do I.

It appears that every month now another athlete (mostly baseball players) are coming clean or getting caught using steroids. The glamor of these stories, however, has just plain wore off.

When the first stories came out, sure I was interested, it had never happened before and the athletes that we have been watching were proven to be cheaters.

Now, there is just no real story. It doesn't surprise me anymore. I just don't care. I watch sports to be entertained, just like I watch movies and television. Actors and actresses continually have plastic surgery or modify their looks so they can be in the game longer or get certain parts. Are steroids any different?

I don't plan on having any plastic surgery soon, nor do I plan on shooting up steroids in my bathroom tonight. But, some people choose to live that way - more power to them.

As far as sports, I watch because I enjoy the game. Most of these athletes, if not all, are professional athletes anyway, without the drugs. There are just some that look for a little more edge. They look to get back into the game from an injury, or perhaps prolong a career.

The problem is the media. Any time anyone of any importance is even mentioned in the same breath as steroids it is the news for a month. I can't take it anymore. This is not news to me, I want to hear about next weekends playoffs. I want to hear about the basketball games from last night and if Kobe Bryant's injury is significant - I don't care about a baseball player who used steroids but hasn't been in baseball for over seven years. It is not a story.

I will never get my wish. Especially because 103 players tested positive for steroids back in 2003 and ever so slowly, like nails to a chalk board, the names will get released and we will back here talking about it for another month.

Quick Rant: Sox/Yanks

This will be a quick little rant since I have yet again been neglecting this blog. I have been hoping for my friend to finish my new banner so that I may begin my transition to a new name and site, and officially (I keep saying this, but it is going to happen) join the LAMBs. Then, hopefully, be much more diligent in my blog postings.

Anyway, I currently live in upstate New York - I am talking way upstate. I am pretty much in Canada, or as close to Canada as possible while still paying American taxes. There is no technical rooting franchise in sports in this neck of the woods. We are pretty far from anything that would be considered a pro sports team.

So, we have assembled a rather mixed bowl if you will of rooting interests in this area. I, of course, being born in Pittsburgh and also attending college there have most of my rooting interests in the pros sports team from there. I am, however, more of an Atlanta Braves fan than a Pittsburgh Pirates fan - but I do root for them to win (even if they never do).

That being said, the area in which I live is split pretty well down the middle in terms of Boston Red Sox fans and New York Yankee fans. There are also the occasional New York Mets' fans sprinkled into the bunch as well.

I have stated before that baseball to me is pretty painful to watch. It is probably my least favorite sport of the four majors, although it is just behind hockey - I may rank hockey a little higher due to the fact that Pittsburgh just won the Stanly Cup though.

The baseball season is just so painstakingly long. It was once called the Summer Classic - but it ends in November. How is that possible? And, just when it finishes and other sports can take the stage - pitchers and catchers are reporting for Spring Training.

Look, I am a sports fan, and probably talk about my Steelers or the NBA far too much for some people. But, if you have to go from February through November hearing as much as I do about the Yankees or the Red Sox, you would be going crazy as well.

And, unfortanately, it isn't just where I live. It's also on my television. The Boston/New York rivalry in baseball is totally amped up thanks to its play on all of the major sports shows, radio shows, etc.

So, this past weekend drove me absolutely crazy.

The Red Sox had pretty much owned the Yankees this season, wining all eight of their contests up until this point. But, they were slowly falling in the standings, and the Yankees had actually overtaken them to lead the AL East.

So, everyone in my area and on television, was drooling at the fact that the Yankees could bury the Red Sox after this four-game series. How many games did each team have to win to stay in the race?, etc.

Well, New York ended up sweeping Boston and went up to a 6.5 game lead in the division. So, the Red Sox were done. Pack up their bags and wait until spring training (don't worry, it's way closer than it should be).

Then, the Red Sox win the first game after their Yankees series, and New York loses. So, Boston is now only 5.5 games behind.

This is the problem - the season is not over. But, to dig up drama every game has to matter - especially when they play each other. This is not over in the least, however, there are far too many games left to throw dirt on Boston's grave.

This just drives me crazy. Each loss we have to mourn and each win it's a celebration. For 162 games.

My only glimpse of fresh air? Preseason football started on Sunday.

That noise you hear - those are tears of joy.

Quick Rant: Survivor 4/30/09

I have been a huge Survivor fan pretty much since the end of the very first season. I wasn't able to start watching it from the beginning, but as the season came to a close I got into it - and have been with it ever since.

I don't usually write about the episodes because Fletch at Blog Cabins does a bang up job every week with a (usually) live blog. I do usually write up something at the conclusion of the season to show my thoughts on the winner and the season as a whole.

Every so often, however, an episode really gets to me that I am forced to voice my opinion.

This doesn't happen every season, but sometimes I sort of gravitate towards a contestant (last season it was Sugar) because they are sort of the underdog that could (meaning sort of on the outs, but still seem to be plugging away).

This season I gravitated towards Sierra. Sierra is pretty interesting because she was the very first person voted off of her tribe, technically. When the tribes were first merged each tribe voted for who they thought would be the first people voted out - and Sierra was selected. Little did the tribe know that they in fact had given Sierra a free ride to camp while they had to hike over four miles.

Ever since then she has sort of been on the outs from the tribe, but here she was in the final seven - Amazing. And, I am not saying it was all her doing, because even I got upset with her odd game plan last week of simply whining to Coach and Tyson instead of talking to the other tribe members, trying to get in on another alliance.

Last week, with no help from herself, she was saved as the other members of the tribe took out Tyson (which was an excellent move by the way). So she had new life - and this week actually decided to do something with it.

She flat out caught Coach and Debbie in a lie in front of the entire tribe - even though Coach has said he would never lie in this game.

This was all setup perfectly to get rid of Coach - except he won immunity. But, Debbie (who seems to be losing it by the way) could have easily been substituted for Coach this time around. But, after an absolutely daring and smart move to get rid of Tyson last week - the other tribe members (JT, Stephen, Taj and Erinn) fell flat on their face with this vote.

Trying to apparently get rid of the 'drama' they voted out Sierra. But, I have a feeling the 'drama' would have been gone if they got rid of Debbie as well - because that is who Sierra seemed to be feuding with.

Oh, well. Another stupid move in a game that has ton of them. Sierra had a great run seeing as she was technically voted out already anyway.

In my opinion, JT seems to have control of the game - but I would watch out for Stephen, who seems to be calling a lot more shots than anyone is realizing. He is a sneaky player and also hiding behind JT a little.

Quick Rant: ABC

If you remember, awhile ago I praised ABC for picking up one of my all-time favorite television shows, Scrubs, off of the scrap heap that NBC tossed it upon.

Well, as much as I appreciated that (and the awesome promo I saw a few days ago for the new season) ABC has now given me a reason to be upset with them.

Today, Brooke Smith who plays Dr. Erica Hahn on Grey's Anatomy was let go from the show. The only explanation was that ABC was no longer thrilled with having a lesbian storyline on the show, and Smith's character was abruptly removed to remove the storyline.

Also, Grey's Anatomy is introducing a new character on the show in the coming weeks played by Mary McDonnell, who was supposed to be a bisexual - is now no longer one.

This comes on the heals of Rebecca Romijn's departure from Ugly Betty because her character was a transgendered. Now I do not watch this particular show - but I read about it.

Are we returning to the dark ages?

I thought we had come so far in today's standards where homosexuals are now even getting married - but it isn't ok to have a relationship that is homosexual on television?

What is ABC going to do next? Write Matthew Rhys' Kevin walker on Brothers & Sisters into a straight man? What will happen to his husband, Scotty? One day Kevin will walk into his apartment to his wife Sophie - and nothing will ever be explained.

This is pretty sad, and as much as I am not really into the guy-on-guy kissing that happens each week on Brothers & Sisters I am happy that it's there.

I am not gay, nor do I think anyone in my family is gay. But, I am a supporter of equal rights. And from what I had seen happening on ABC, I believed that they were fully supporting it as well.

Hell, Isaiah Washington was fired due to his ignorance on homosexuality and fellow c0-star T.R. Knight. Does anyone remember this? ABC?

I was never a true fan of Hahn's character, but at least this season she was somewhat interesting. And with both her and Callie experimenting and freaking out about this undisovered journey they were about to go on - it made for good television.

ABC just totally screwed up. And I hope someone calls them on it.

Quick Rant: Survivor (10/16/08)

WARNING: Contains Spoilers!

I have been an avid Survivor watcher since the end of the first season. Occasionally, with a bad cast I might lose interest - but out of the 17(?) Survivor seasons I think I have only lost interest twice.

So, as I may not be a complete expert on the subject - I think I might be pretty informed.

Which is why the end of last night's episode truly had me steaming.

After merging last week, the Fang Tribe finally looked to be heading in the right direction. And I believe actually made two brilliant moves during last week's episode. They obviously threw the immunity challenge and - even though the editors did a nice job thinking it might be Kelly - made the right move in voting off Jacquie.

This gave the original Fang Tribe the power. No matter what happened they could still pick off the members of the Koto Tribe.

With the loss of Jacquie, however, Sugar was added to the Fang Tribe. Sugar, is also Ace's ace-in-the-hole (pun intended).

In this episode, GC began to flake out. He didn't want to be there anymore, and flat out told everyone after they lost the immunity challenge to vote for him.

Crystal, Ken, Kelly and Matty then proceeded to go through Sugar's bag as her and Ace were taking a dip in the oh-so-refreshing water. And what do they find? That's right, the hidden immunity idol.

So, they begin talking about possibly voting Sugar out - because with the immunity idol she holds a bit of the power.

BRILLIANT!

But, as Jeff Probst reads off the votes, it's GC who gets all but a single vote - and is the fifth person voted out of Survivor: Gabon.

Have these people not watched the show before?

This was set up perfect for all of them.

The only logical vote was to be made for Sugar. And no matter the outcome - the tribe still wins.

If Sugar doesn't play the immunity idol not only is she voted out - but the immunity idol is gone (perhaps replanted at 'Exile Island', but still out for now).

If she plays the immunity idol - the no harm done either. The idol is out, and GC goes home anyway.

I can't stand when the people playing this game do so many stupid things. The only thing that would have hurt any of that - is if GC flat out quit, but he didn't. So, his only way out was by the vote.

Now, Sugar still holds the power.

Stupid move. But, what can you expect from a tribe that seems to have been cursed from the start?

Quick Rant: Heroes

I know when seeing the headline you may think that I am mad at the television series Heroes when in fact I couldn't be happier.

This rant is tossed out to those who are constantly complaining about the television show - and actually I could open it up even more and say television shows in general.

I am an avid television watcher, I have stated that many times before. But I don't just watch the shows, I also take a look at recaps and read some of the comments that readers/watchers out there are constantly writing.

I write this blog more about Heroes, but like I said it can be for any other show as well.

I am a huge fan of the show Heroes and even I know that the show dipped a bit during it's sophomore season. Most shows that come out of the gates the way Heroes did usually do. That being said, however, the show was still watchable and I still thoroughly enjoyed it.

The series is now in its third season, and from the few episodes I have seen it appears to be way ahead of what was given to us in season two.

But, as I continue to peruse the comments and forums, Heroes is still getting slammed by some of these so called 'fans'. Is this show ever going to live up to its magical season one? I seriously doubt it. Why? Because it was original, it was new - and that newness has worn off.

But, the show is still a lot better than a lot of the other television shows that are being offered.

Why am I upset? Do I not think that people have the right to complain about a show they used to love? No, of course I believe they have the right. My issue is this: the constant threat to stop watching the show after not enjoying a particular episode. If you don't like the show, then you don't like the show - just leave and get it over with. Some of us - and it still seems to be a lot - actually enjoy the show and want to read conspiracies/clear thoughts about the show - not your crying.

My belief on movies are a little bit different. I feel you do have the right to complain about a terrible movie. Why? Because a movie is a one time thing. If you see it, you wasted your time and money if you don't like it. And perhaps someone out there may not want to do the same, and actually wants to view your opinion.

I am usually not one of those people, however. I have found that I actually enjoy a lot of the movies that critics despise - so I am not a fan of hating on a movie even before I see it.

But, when it comes to television, the show is on every week - so those who enjoy it are still coming back. If you didn't enjoy a movie, would you watch it over and over again? Then why continue to watch the show - just leave and let us that do enjoy it continue to in all of its aspects - including comments and forums.

Quick Rant: Charles in Charge

OK, this is going to sound weird because Charles in Charge hasn't been in production in almost two decades, but I have been catching up on episodes in my down time, and I am near the completion of season one.

Charles in Charge is like any other situation comedy out there. Each and every week a story is told, and in the end of the 24 minute episode, a lesson is learned. Things were a little different with Charles in Charge, however, as most of the lessons weren't taught by a family member, but the live-in babysitter.

Charles was played by Scott Baio, he was a college student who needed a place to stay and in return for room and board, offered to help a family out with their children. His best friend Buddy Lembeck was played by Willie Aames. Buddy was the girl-crazed bubble-head, who played so well next to Charles' smart and mature persona.

During the first season which ran from 1984-85, Charles was the live-in caretaker of the Pembroke family. The Pembroke's were a lovely family led by father Stan (played by James Widdoes, or Hoover in Animal House). Jill (Julie Cobb) played the mother, while the three children were Lila (April Lerman), Douglas (Jonathan Ward) and Jason (Michael Pearlman).

Lila was a teenager in junior high, who was confused about her status in life. She was a smart girl, who was interested in student government, but was also trying to be popular and play a sport. Douglas was 12 years old and a science fiction nerd, who loved to learn - he was often found wearing rubber masks or science fiction-themed costumes. Michael was 10 years old, but small for his age, and loved to play sports - despite his size.

The reason for this rant, however, is that I was not used to the Pembroke family when I think of Charles in Charge. When I think of the show, I think of the Powell family - because that is who the family was when I watched.

The problem is, when I watch the original season now - I actually think I enjoy the Pembroke family better than the Powell family.

According to wikipedia, the original season which had the Pembroke family in it aired from 1984-85. The show was then on hiatus for nearly two years until it was picked up for syndication in 1987 and ran until 1990.

When the show returned, Charles still remained in the house (they played it off as if there wasn't a 2-year gap in the lives of those on the show), however, the Pembroke family sold their house to the Powell family and moved to Seattle. But, of course, the Powell family allowed Charles to remain living in the house, but this time would take care of their three children.

The Powell's consisted of a grandfather, Walter (James T. Callahan), mother, Ellen (Sandra Kerns) and her three children, Jamie (Nicole Eggert), Sarah (Josie Davis) and Adam (Alexander Polinsky). Buddy also returned as the faithful sidekick to Charles.

The premise remained the same, although Jamie was more into fashion and popularity than Lila was. Sarah was the brain of the family (and middle child), much like Douglas. And Andy was a lot like the Jason character.

I could find no real reason for the change in families. I enjoyed Charles in Charge during its original run, but now that I have seen the original season, I have to admit I think I would have liked the show a lot more had the Pembroke family remained.

Perhaps they changed the family to add Eggert, who was much easier playing the popular high school girl than Lerman could have. Eggert is nice to look at (see example), but Lerman was by no means unattractive.

Another reason is, perhaps they had a difficult time corralling the entire Pembroke family after a 2-year hiatus. Lerman was a highly regarded Broadway singer, and Widdoes, despite not appearing on camera in awhile, has spent a good amount of time behind it directing. So, without a handful of family members, perhaps the producers decided best to just start over with a new family.

Either way - I would have liked to have seen how the Pembroke family played out. Maybe it's time for a Charles in Charge reunion.

Quick Rant: Brett Favre

I have never really understood the strangle hold that Brett Favre has held over the NFL.

For years I have heard dozens-upon-dozens of reporters/commentators slurp up to this guy like he was the second coming of Jesus.

Has he really been the best quarterback ever? Or even in the top 10? Probably not.

He led the Green Bay Packers to just one - count it: one - Super Bowl victory in his tenure under center. But for some reason, he continues to get praise.

Perhaps it' s because he appears human. He developed a dependency to vicodin, his wife developed breast cancer, his brother-in-law was killed in a ATV accident, his family in Mississippi were victims of Hurricane Katrina. Instead of driving a fancy car, Favre shows up to football games in a pickup truck. Yes, he is an every man's man, so people identify with him a little more.

It seems like the past few years has always been Favre's last season. He continually has offseasons wavering back and forth whether he will retire or not. The Packers drafted future quarterback Aaron Rodgers in the first round to learn under Favre, and to take over the duties at quarterback when Favre retires.

Finally, the 2007 season appeared to be Favre's last under center. He officially announced his retirement at an early enough time that the Packers could give him his well deserved farewell, and also plan for the upcoming season. The Packers appeared to have moved on, they had handed things over to Rodgers and drafted Brian Brohm in the second round to backup Rodgers.

But, here comes Brett again. It appears to me that he is of the Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan-ilk. He craves attention. If his name isn't in the news, he has to do something to get it there.

Why do you think he played the back-and-forth for so many years about retirement? It was the offseason, and no one was talking about him. Now, he is retired, so people are no longer talking about him. So why not mention that you have that 'itch' to get back out onto the field.

Well, duh. For the past 17 years you have been heading to training camp around this time. It's no wonder you have the 'itch' because you are an NFL football player. Mike Golic said on Mike & Mike that he still gets the 'itch' every year around this time, and he's been retired for 13 years. It's engraved into your brains - this time of year is time to start football.

I have had it with Favre and those who slurp him. And I have for a long time now. Yes, he is a wonderful quarterback - yes, he is one of the 25 best to ever play the position. His longevity, however, is the main reason he is leading in almost every passing category. You play for so long and never miss a game, you're bound to break a few records.

Here is a quick list - tell me who of these 10 that Favre is better than:

• Tom Brady
• Peyton Manning
• Steve Young
• Joe Montana
• Terry Bradshaw
• John Elway
• Troy Aikman
• Dan Marino
• Johnny Unitas
• Fran Tarkenton

It's time to stay retired Brett. Do yourself, your family, the Green Bay Packers and the Packer fans a favor. You are going out on a pretty good season, that isn't guaranteed again. The Packers and most of their fans have moved onto the Rodgers era. It's time to stop holding the franchise hostage: you are an all-time great, they can't move on until you retire for good. And finally, spend some quality time with your family. Football takes up a lot of a person's time - they have supported you for this long, it's time to repay the favor.

Quick Rant: Olympics

The 2008 U.S. Olympic Basketball Team will be announced later today (I will have my thoughts on the team when it is announced).

The reason for this rant, however, is the recent news of WNBA basketball player Becky Hammon deciding to play basketball for the Russian Olympic Team.

I have tried to look up information on this, but I could not find any in time, so I will have to use just what I can remember. But, I remember a few years ago that Shawn Bradley - a United States citizen - played (or tried to play) for the German squad in the Olympics and there was no uproar about this.

Hammon, who plays professionally in Russia during the WNBA offseason, however has been getting some serious flack about her decision. Anne Donovan, a former basketball player and coach, has basically called Hammon a 'traitor' or 'unpatriotic' due to her decision.

My only question is this: Where was the outrage to all of the other athletes who have participated for other countries?

Hammon has stated that she only decided to tryout for the Russian squad after she had been repeatedly passed over by the U.S. Olympic team.

The main reason, in my opinion, for the outrage now is that Hammon is an outstanding player. She was one of the finalists for last season's WNBA MVP award. But, for some reason, she wasn't given a fair shake at representing her own country. So, who's at fault?

Where was the outrage when Hakeem Olajuwan - a native of Nigera - became a U.S. citizen so he could participate in the 1996 Olympics. Olajuwan earns his keep, and lives, mostly in the United States, so he should be able to become a citizen and represent his new country. But, Hammon also makes a good living in Russia - and spends a good part of her year living there. Why the hypocrisy?

The Cold War is over people. Russia is an ally of ours. Give it a rest.

If the powers that be wanted Hammon to be a part of the U.S. team, or at least would have given her a fair shot, this wouldn't even be an issue. But they didn't, and Hammon wants to be an Olympian. So she will try with another country. Will she be upset if the U.S. wins? I highly doubt that - unless of course it's against her.

So lay off the girl. She has the opportunity to take part in something magical in her life - something each one of us would love to partake in. Would she rather be waving the American flag? No doubt - but she wasn't given the chance.

Quick Rant: Starting Times

The major sporting events are getting missed by many people in the United States, and it all has to do with the time zones.

For the most part, in order for the West Coast to view a sporting event during the week, the game must start after 6 p.m. Pacific Time. Unfortunately, for those on the East Coast this means all games (without going into overtime, or extra innings) are finishing around or after midnight.
This is hurting not only the working class, who must in fact get up for work in the morning and cannot stay up to finish a game that late, but it is also hurting the sport itself, because millions of children are not watching your product.

There is an easy fix for this, but for some reason it has not been looked into. The reason for the later starts is so that all those wishing to watch the game on the West Coast can get home after work before the start of the game. Well, my main question is, are you more inclined to watch a sporting event you know you can't see the end of? Or, are you more inclined to join a game in progress, that you know you will be able to finish?

I think the answer is pretty obvious.

But, this is not what is being done. Last night's NBA Finals Game against the storied Boston Celtics and Los Angeles Lakers didn't even get started until after 9 p.m. Eastern Time, and was just heading into halftime just after 10:30 p.m.

The NBA isn't the only sport that is making it difficult for East Coast fans to watch major sporting events, or for children to catch something that might stay with them forever. Major League Baseball is possibly the worst at it. Because of their starting times, and the excruciating length of their games, there isn't many on the East Coast who are able watch the World Series. Let alone seven games if the series goes that long.

The NHL appeared to have gotten it somewhat right. But, that may be because both teams in the Stanley Cup Finals were relatively close to the East Coast. With Detroit and Pittsburgh in the Finals, most games started around 8 p.m. Eastern Time - so for a three hour contest, it's getting over at a more reasonable 11 p.m. instead of pushing well past midnight.

I doubt anyone with any real influence is reading this, but if there is any chance there is please take this into consideration. I am an NBA fan, and my son will probably be an NBA fan (if I am lucky) - I, in the future, would like to watch at least one NBA Finals game to it's conclusion without having to slug through the next day at work thanks to being overly tired.

In the days of DVRs, I am sure if a West Coaster wants to see the beginning of the game they will record the game and easily be able to catch up. What with all of the television commercials (but that is another story).

Quick Rant: Tim Duncan

I have been an NBA fan for a long time, basically since the end of the Pistons dynasty and the beginning of the Bulls.

In my opinion, Tim Duncan is the greatest power forward of all-time. Now, if you put Bill Russell in today's game - he would most likely be considered a power forward, but in his day he was a center, so that is where he should be. Also, Duncan has the size to be considered a center as well, but for most of his career he has always played next to a center, whether that be David Robinson, Rasho Nesterovic or Frabricio Oberto.

Duncan is probably the most fundamentally sound player in the NBA, even earning the nickname "The Big Fundamental" from Shaquille O'Neal. He has led the Spurs to four NBA championships in 1999, 2003, 2005 and 2007.

I have been watching the playoffs, on and off, and two things that have really been bugging me about Tim Duncan is this: he shows absolutely no emotion and he complains on every play.

Basketball to Duncan appears to be a job. I would love for a reporter to ask him if he actually enjoys playing the game. It's obvious he is excellent at it, so of course he does it - and makes a ton of money doing it. But on a few occasions last night, when his teammates made a strong play or whatever, they showed emotion (screaming, chest bumps, etc.) - Duncan did not.

And the most annoying thing, Duncan complains on every play. For as good as he is, he thinks he must be even better. If he misses a shot - he must have gotten fouled. If he commits a foul - he didn't even touch him. It's disgusting really - and in my opinion truly tarnishes his legacy. Sure, star players complain about calls - but not every single one.

You've been in the league forever, Tim. You have four championships, plus I am sure a couple more in your future. You can go down as arguably the best power forward in NBA history. Stop complaining - or at least put a smile on your face.