First, the game. Dallas 37, Green Bay 27. Here's my private prediction to Doug:
The Packer D is dinged (though not as badly as the Colts). Favre will probably pick on the Cowboys' secondary. I'm inclined to agree with the predictions of the Cowboys by at least a TD, but on the other hand, I never expected 10-1. The key variable is turnovers. I *think* we're past the time when Favre would get rattled in Dallas -- it was a third of a lifetime ago!What actually happened was that Favre tried some long passes which were slightly off -- probably could have done short slants, made the downs, and got a rhythm, dammit -- and then got his elbow hurt by a face mask during a pass, which was intercepted.
And then Aaron Rodgers stepped in. Who knew? Dallas won, of course, because they exploited the holes and mental weaknesses in the Packers defense, and it goes without saying that Romo and Owens are very good. Like I said, I expected Dallas to win, pretty much by the amount they did, and pretty much in the way they did.
But Rodgers? That was shocking. Hope Brett is OK, though.
Other stuff: I am sure in the past month HDTD's patient readership has learned much more about Wisconsin than it ever wanted to know. Also the inner recesses of my id. There is some overlap.
And I hope it was amusing! But honestly, most of the time I don't have much to write about. I know some of you have a taste for my long expositional rants. I like writing them too. But they're necessarily infrequent.
- Will Baird, I owe you a piece on unusual biochemistries. What angle do you want?
- There's also a recent working paper on ancient income inequality that I've promised to comment on. That's coming too.
- I do have a request for a post on the earliest documented authentic Brazilian. Let me think about it.
- Bernard, I am amazed that ETFC managed to get rid of its albatross, let alone get 27 cents on the dollar for it. They sure have cheerful TV ads though!
Anything else? Powering down.
Aww. Don't stop!
Doug M.
Posted by: Doug M. | November 30, 2007 at 11:17 AM
a. yes, there is. b. that is not what I meant to say, exactly, when I talked about methadone, you see. c. why can't I write in my own weblog for once? xoox
Posted by: lala | November 30, 2007 at 08:12 PM
biochem. Once upon a time you talked about talking Mesozoic biochems since cycads are poisonous to mammals and...you dropped hints that it was something very interesting. You intrigued me about Mesozoic biochems. Fire away.
Posted by: Will Baird | November 30, 2007 at 10:28 PM