The Universal Cynic

The most popular post in TUC history owes everything to our dear friend Colin, who tipped us off to this story. How two TiCats cheerleaders go from discussing fitness to riding a Sybian (website NSFW) is beyond comprehension, but hey, it was the Howard Stern show.

Four years later, readers are still Googling this story. Check it out here (SFW).

Jim Lampley nails a troika of whiskey, vodka and pot, then chases (and manhandles) a former Miss California around his couch while his 14-year-old son watches. Welcome to one of the most popular posts in TUC history.

P.S.: The first comment? DAMN. And you guys thought I was harsh...

No, I didn't write this. But I do love it.

Again, this is a cluster of posts from the period when the Senators thought they should (or rather, could get away with) charging their fans for games on pay-per-view. I got into a fair amount of trouble for these posts, both with the Ottawa Senators and Sun Media. In hindsight it doesn't seem like such a big deal, but at the time it surely wasn't pleasant. I didn't have to come down on them as hard as I did, but I was vehemently against their decision and took serious issue with the product. Of course, the blog is a looser format, and so I took advantage of that fact. Me and my mouth...err...fingers.

I'd like to think that I helped make a difference during this period - the Sens and media are constantly lurking around here for some bloody reason or other - but c'mon...I'm just a dumb girl blogger. [Insert picture of Malibu Stacy hunched over a laptop] Special acknowledgment goes to Rob Brodie, who stuck by me the whole time. He's good people.

Here are the most controversial posts from the Senators' short and sour PPV era:

Give me my Bloody HD

Soupe du Jour

The Vicious Revolt

Question The Answers

Pass the Buck

Ah, "Dress Up Jake." The madness, the mayhem, the use of R-rated accessories.

Dress Up Jake came to me one night as I was sitting in my office, staring in total contempt at my Jake Plummer inaction figure after another brutal Denver loss. Plummer, the No. 1 QB of the Broncos at the time, could best be described as a mercurial, inconsistent fusspot. Basically the kid got on my nerves more than Brian Lee and Wade Redden combined.

(Ed. Note: I know that's a lot of hatred, but this is football we're talking about.)

I needed a way to convey my feelings on Plummer and the games in a quick-fire manner, but I also didn't want to a) pretend I was an NFL expert and b) piss off my hockey readers. I figured the best (and most amusing way) to do this, was to pose the doll in a manner fitting his performance. If he played well, I'd reward the action figure with pork tenderloin and porn. If he played poorly, I'd make him drink cosmopolitans with Daniel Alfredsson (see above).

I never would have guessed that DUJ would take off the way it did. Deadspin linked to every week I featured it, and Stefan Fatsis (a noted Bronco honk) of the New York Times also picked it up, and included it in a piece for Slate.

Looking back on it, I probably wouldn't have been so ribald, but the readers were eating it up, so I felt I had no reason to take my foot off the gas. It was all meant in fun, regardless.

For the entire DUJ archive, click here.

The premise is a simple one: TUC is counting down 10 of the most (occasionally) memorable posts from the blog's history. Choices will be based on popularity, controversy and maybe a couple of my personal favourites, with a little write-up on each on my current feelings towards the posts (possible regrets, changes in opinion etc.). Please enjoy it --hopefully it helps to fill the time while we wait for Kovalchuk to see his shadow.

Stay tuned for No. 10, after the break.

'Cause it's not what you've done/It's what you've been
If you fuck up/I'm telling Tim

-- I'm Telling Tim (NOFX)

Regarding the "anti-Spezza" posts on Tim Baines's new blog:

1) Don Brennan and Bruce Garrioch are big boys - one would hope they could defend themselves;

2) Don't you wish this blog was around in 2008? It would have been interesting to see Baines take up for his writers when this was going on.

More later.

Semin. Brodeur. Spezza. Huselius. Brassard. The fourth-round pick.

Stop spreading it. Why are you giving him the publicity he obviously craves? And don't start with the, "We need to expose him as the fraud he is!" How long has he been doing this - at least five years now? Nearly everyone knows that he shouldn't be taken seriously. This is no longer about him. It's about the people who insist they despise him, but are content to spew his garbage all over the Internet, regardless of whether it comes with a warning.

And what's with the new-school preamble of, "I heard this on the Internet/this is online everywhere"? We know where it's coming from. Your vague cover-up is doing nothing to help the matter.

Don't feed the machine. It doesn't matter if it's in jest, to point out his ridiculousness, or to just "put it out there." Very few of us - both bloggers and media - are truly in the business of legitimately chasing rumours. There's no need to broadcast these foolish ideas as quickly as possible, even in a casual fashion (such as Twitter).

Media, stop. Bloggers, stop. Hockey fans, stop. Stop talking about him, and stop spreading his [expletive] around.

Why are hockey fans getting so upset at Jay Mohr? I know he's recently unemployed, but I'm sure he didn't ask the NHL if he could host their awards. If the guy doesn't like the sport, that's his prerogative. Is it hypocritical for him to take the gig? Probably, but someone's got to keep Nikki Cox in Rystylane (seriously - Google some recent photos of her).

If anything, it's the NHL that's coming out of this with egg on their faces for not doing their research on the guy. The irony is, now that I know Mohr's hosting, I will make an effort to catch the broadcast, because he actually amuses me. It'll just be icing on the cake if he can goof on Ron MacLean while being forced to introduce Trooper, April Wine or similar.

More later.

P.S.: Jay Mohr once claimed on radio that he would like to wear Maria Sharapova as a hat, hence the title. See? I do my research.

You know this is the type of thing I live for.

You may have heard that a pocket of Senators fans are planning to have a rally in support of Jason Spezza. According to their Facebook page, the gathering is to take place this Saturday at Parliament Hill (as of the writing of this post, there were 131 confirmed guests).

The Ottawa Citizen was tipped off on the gathering, and Allen Panzeri wrote an article about it. Guess what ensued? High comedy, of course. From the Panzeri piece:

"The aim of the rally will be to convince the Ottawa Senators to keep the mercurial centre instead of trading him before his no-trade clause kicks in on July 1."

"Mercurial"? Spezza? Jason would laugh like a lunatic if I waved a Twizzler in front of his face. You know the gold thread on the Ottawa sweaters? They added that so Giggles would have something shiny to hold his attention when he attempted his passes. If Spezza's mercurial, then Chris Pronger is due to appear on an episode of 'The First 48' any day now.

"The participants will come from two Facebook groups that have overlapping memberships: the “Let’s Keep Jason Spezza in Ottawa” group, which has more than 900 members, and the Red Scarf Union, which largely occupies a Section 319 at Scotiabank Place and claims 1,190 members."

Wow, and they're expecting such a turnout already? I guess everyone's going to the cottage that weekend.

Waiting for the icing on the cake? Here it comes:

"(Rally organizer Louise) Tremblay admits to being one of Spezza’s biggest critics initially, but said that with the arrival of coach Cory Clouston, Spezza’s work ethic has improved.

'He’s not floating as much as he used to,' she said."

Bloody hell, if that's not a selling point for a gathering, I don't know what is.

Now, before Senators fans jump down my throat, know this: I'm not anti-rally or anti-Spezza. I'm anti-ridiculousness, which unfortunately for Jason, his fans and Mr. Panzeri, this piece seems to have in spades.

More later.

Please note the poll on the right-hand side, and vote accordingly. Nothing huge -- just short videos of yours truly opining on whatever might be going on (that's sports-related, of course). Thanks for your input.

P.S.: I refuse to include nudity or use the word "vlog." Sorry about that.

If you ask some women, the answer is "yes." My answer is "no."

I created a bit of a stir last night on Twitter when I wrote that I wasn't upset by yesterday's photo from the Chicago Tribune. Some women have viewed the photo as sexist, and one of the loudest voices on the subject was from Christine Brennan of USA Today. To paraphrase, Brennan is tired of seeing feminine traits/characteristics being applied to male athletes for the purpose of comedy. In short, women are used to portray the idea of being less than equal in the area of sport.

Brennan even went so far as to include comments on the photo from Angela Ruggiero, a former member of the U.S. Olympic women's hockey team.

"I'd like to see that editor out on skates," Ruggiero told the Associated Press. "I'll take them one-on-one on the ice any day."

Notice how Ruggiero challenged the editor, Jane Hirt, and not Chris Pronger? Funny that. If the issue here pertains to equality among the sexes, why am I finding it difficult to believe that Angela wouldn't be able to skate as fast as Pronger, shoot as hard or steal pucks with an equal amount of malice? (Sorry, a bit of levity was overdue.)

Does that validate Hirt's decision? Of course not. But I felt like this story needed a dose of reality. Furthermore, when you consider the bounty of negative material that Chris Pronger provides, it drives home how stupid, unnecessary and uninspired this dig actually was.

As for my tweet, I stand by it. I believe as a woman in this business, you have to pick your spots if you want to be heard. If I let every perceived slight get to me, I'd be a) in a mental institution or b) Jason Whitlock. I'm not fond of either choice. For me, it wasn't offensive enough to warrant a feminist retort. For me.

Jesus tapdancing Christ. I don't need this (expletive).

Jason Spezza? Seriously? Woman, please. It's pretty much common knowledge that a few years ago, I allegedly went to Bryan Murray and asked him to lock up Jason Spezza and Dany Heatley to deals, because I wanted to be sure that I had someone to play with long-term. We know how the latter part of that bargain turned out. I dealt with Heatley and before that, I dealt with Alexel Yashin. Remind me why I should put up with this stupidity again?

Jason's unhappy that he was booed at home at the end of the post-season? Tell to come here -- I'll give him a shoulder to cry on...then I'll bust him square in his toothsome cakehole.** No one in the league gets booed at home more than I do, and I handle it just fine. Well actually, when it happens, I play like hell, but that's not the point...

Sorry, I lost track of what I was saying. I also just impregnated Bibi again. That guys's going to be a blueliner. God knows the club could use a decent one.

I'd really like to know where Jason thinks he can go with that albatross of a contract. He's signed through 2014-15 at $7-million a pop. Maybe he still thinks he has a chance of morphing into Steve Yzerman, v. 2.0. That crap makes me laugh harder than Don Brennan's wardrobe.

And I really don't know what's worse: The fact that the Senators will get jack for him in return if they did trade him, or that this drama is being played out in the media again. Same nonsense, different player. It's so bush-league. I guess I won't have to wait long for a resolution, because the little jackass's no-movement clause kicks in on July 1.

I'm getting too old for this. I'm turning 38 this year, I'm banged up, I've slowed down considerably, and I have snowball's chance in hell of winning a Cup in this town. I should be the one asking for a trade -- to a contender. I might as well, seeing as I've already begun to tell friends that I'm planning on retiring at the end of next season.

Whoops, did I think that last part out loud?

___________________

* Not really, but the post does include some information from my lovely and trusted sources. Deal with it.

** Don't you think he could get away with this phrase? Come on now.

Since 1994, only eight NHL teams have failed to make it to their respective conference finals. Would you like to guess the teams? Go ahead and put in your call to Liam Maguire. I'll wait.

Give in? Here they are:

Boston, Columbus, L.A., Nashville, Phoenix, Atlanta, the New York Islanders and...

Montreal.

Of course, the statistic becomes even harsher when you realize that Phoenix was awarded a team in 1996, Nashville joined in 1998, Atlanta arrived in 1999 and Columbus rounded out the group in 2000.

Now, how many Stanley Cups has Montreal won since 1982? Easy answer, right? Two. But how many times have the Canadiens won the conference finals in the same period? Three. Three times in 28 years. A team like Carolina, however, has been three times (and won twice) in just over a third of the time -- only eight years. Of course, Montreal fans would be quick to point out that they have but one Cup to show for it.

So what's the moral of this mathematical tale? Perhaps it's that Montreal might be effective if they get far enough into the playoffs -- but they can't seem to do it very often. Why don't we hear more about this? Just something to chew on, when you hear the national media bagging on other Canadian teams for their lack of postseason stamina.

More later.

Random question of the day: Who's less deserving of a job in media? Those who resent the protection that keeps them employed in the first place, or those who can't do their own jobs without resorting to outside assistance? (i.e. "Hey readers, I'm interviewing ____________ in an hour. What should I ask him/her?")

As for the Senators, please view the following photo:



I'm not doing this again, goddammit. Fix your goaltending. Bolster your blueline. "Best players have got to be your best players." Just read the freaking archives, OK? Oh, but they made the playoffs? Success! I guess I'll just sit back and wait for You Know Who to insist that he's "schtaying the coursh." (Sorry.)


More later.

Seeing as TUC has had a lot of dictionary-related discussion over the past 24 hours, I figured it was fitting that I pass this on. From urbandictionary.com, it's the "Spezza Pass".

When a hockey player swings the puck with their stick behind their back in the hopes of making some incredible passing play to their team-mate, and it instead goes tape-to-tape on the stick of the opposing player who is heading the other way. Usually results in a goal against or at the very least a strong scoring opportunity where the goalie has to save the day.

Note: A fancy attempt of tilting your wrist in the wrong direction can only be referred to as a 'Spezza Pass' if it results in the other team getting some kind of scoring opportunity.

Announcer: "And here comes Spezza across the line looking for the pass . . . what . . . the . . . *BLEEP* Did you see that Spezza Pass! AND THERE GOES OVECHKIN THE OTHER WAY! IN ON GOAL..."

Congrats, Jason. You must be so proud. And despite all of his own current drama, Jacques Martin is surely rubbing his ears together with glee while shrieking, "See! I told ya! 'S all you need to know!"

(Rack bump to Steve Lloyd for the find.)

Ottawa head coach Cory Clouston in the post-practice scrum on the difficulty of shadowing players: "You used to be able to almost rape a guy."

How is this appropriate? Sens PR, we await your response. I hope it comes with an apology.

Credit to Dan Seguin's Twitter for this.

P.S.: And before anyone makes an "oversensitive" remark, you might want to take a look at your daughter, wife, sister or mother before you get back to me. Much obliged.

We also refer to them as the "taxi squad", but I prefer the old-school term. From the 2006 TUC archives: Enjoy. (Thanks again to Liam Maguire for his help with this.)

...because I have Steel Panther's Community Property stuck in my head. Don't. Trust me. Just...don't.


From the Twitter account of the Senators' PR rep, Phil Legault : "Young series is 2-1, yet pendulum of media desperation has swung again in the other direction."

Oh, dear.

First off, I'd like to meet the media who were initially ensconced on the other side of the fence, and I'd like to know how firm their convictions were. (Damn, I just made myself laugh.) I think everyone reserves the right to question many of the players on this club -- from the guy in the net, to the defence, to the ones on the top line. Have there been exceptions? Yes, of course. But not enough to convince me that this series will swing back into Ottawa's favour.

A couple of issues that have been irking me:

Have you ever noticed how the Senators are nearly incapable of setting the pace for the game? This stretches back to the days of Jacques Martin, which is frightening to consider. We saw some bright points after Bryan Murray began his initial coaching stint with the team, and his push for offensive aggression made it seem as if firewagon hockey had arrived in the capital. But this notion of chasing the game perpetually smacks Ottawa in the mouth when it matters most -- the playoffs. The opposition always seems to set the tone, be it physical, a trap game, speed-driven and so on. Even when the Sens have the lead, you often get the sense that they have trouble in the driver's seat.

My other quibble involves the rare and elusive Ottawa odd-man rush. Is it just me, or can you almost see the wheels turning in the players' heads when this happens? The reaction should be instinctive, but it appears to be anything but. I can almost hear Daniel Alfredsson calling out, "OK, boys: Now just like we do it in practice." News flash: If I can see them thinking about it from the perch on my couch, the opposing defence, and particularly the goaltender can view it from a mile away (hence the reason why nearly all of these rushes are easily stifled).

***

More Twitter bitching (twitching?) from yours truly. How hard is it for some media to get the hang of in-game tweeting? Case in point: I follow the Senators press box list, and unfortunately, the majority of it is a write-off. (Ed. note: Bite my tongue, bite my tongue...) I'm looking for quirky observations, injury updates, things happening in the building/box that I can't see otherwise, etc. I don't need to know the score at the end of the period, and who has the goals/assists. We already have services for that. (Sincerely, Marcus Allen - CBS Sports.) Oh, but you want to save your quirky observations for your column? Yeah, that's nice. Work more, watch more, talk to your co-workers about the hotel bar a lot less. I know, what a concept.

More later.

Let me preface all of this by saying, yes, Alyssa Milano is still attractive. However, the 2010 offerings for her sports clothing line, Touch, still leave a lot to be desired. Case in point: I'm pretty sure 99% of female sports fans have never thought the following...

"I'm a woman. I'm a sports fan. And I have a monumental urge to wear two 'P''s on my asscheeks, because dammit, I'm that big of a Phillies fan."

(Ed. note: Is it just me, or do they kind of look like eyes? Is this some sort of "don't stare at the ass, it'll just stare right back" trick?)

Want more? Go here. She almost had me with the Dodgers hoodie, and then I saw that gruesome sundress, circa 1985. Ack.

More later.

What are my arms doing on a blog from the Minneapolis Star Tribune? Come find out.

(Rack bump to Michael Rand for his generosity with textiles, Lifter Puller wisdom and for kicking so much ass.)

Here's RandBall backstage at the Bad Religion show in Vegas on the 26th of March. Bonus points for my crazed expression and looking like I'm missing a front tooth. Blame it on too much action in the pit...



More later.